Reviews for "Landscape and Urban Planning"

Journal title Average duration Review reports
(1st review rnd.)
(click to go to journal page) 1st rev. rnd Tot. handling Im. rejection Number Quality Overall rating Outcome
Landscape and Urban Planning 11.7
weeks
19.0
weeks
n/a 3 4
(very good)
4
(very good)
Accepted
Motivation: The review reports we have received were great: detailed, useful, polite, and encouraging acceptance after the reasonable revisions. The communication with the editor was pretty good as well. However, we also feel that the process should have been shorter: receiving the reviews took the time (e.g. more than a month after revising the paper appropriately and agreeing to nearly all the comments of the reviewers), and on a few occasions the editor's turnaround was not very quick (e.g. it took a few weeks to send the paper for review).
Landscape and Urban Planning 23.6
weeks
31.0
weeks
n/a 3 4
(very good)
4
(very good)
Accepted
Motivation: Most of the review reports were of high quality and supportive. They have helped to improve the paper. However, the first round took long (more than 5 months), but that's not necessarily the fault of the editor or the journal. The communication with the editor was perfect.
Landscape and Urban Planning n/a n/a 21.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Motivation: The paper was rejected by the editor arguing that it was out of the scope of the journal. That is fair, the decision was well-argued and polite, but it would be better if a desk rejection did not take that much time.
Landscape and Urban Planning 15.4
weeks
40.0
weeks
n/a 3 4
(very good)
2
(moderate)
Accepted
Motivation: After submitting the revised version in November 2013, we got contacted by the journal on 15-01-2014. The editor had noted that a large portion of reviewer 1's comments were excluded from the decicision letter of 31-08-2013. He attached the full comments of reviewer 1 and asked for a detailed response to these comments, as soon as possible.
We submitted the second revised version of the paper on 27-01-2014.
As such, due to the journal's mismanagement the whole proces lasted at least a few months more.

I couldn't specify this particular process in the questions above.
Landscape and Urban Planning 27.0
weeks
57.6
weeks
n/a 3 4
(very good)
3
(good)
Accepted
Landscape and Urban Planning n/a n/a 7.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Landscape and Urban Planning 17.4
weeks
17.4
weeks
n/a 3 2
(moderate)
0
(very bad)
Rejected
Landscape and Urban Planning 9.7
weeks
40.0
weeks
n/a 3 3
(good)
0
(very bad)
Accepted