Peer Review Process

When you submit a paper to the International Review of Public Policy and Administration, it is understood that the manuscript will undergo a structured and independent peer review process designed to ensure academic quality, integrity, and relevance.

Overview

The journal operates a double-blind peer review system. All submissions are assessed in a fair, objective, and consistent manner.

Initial Screening

All manuscripts are subject to an initial evaluation by the Journal Editor.

The assessment considers:

  • Relevance to the journal’s scope

  • Originality and scholarly contribution

  • Basic methodological soundness

  • Compliance with submission and ethical requirements

Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be rejected at this stage.

Peer Review System

The journal follows a double-blind peer review process in which the identities of authors and reviewers are not disclosed.

Manuscripts are assigned to independent reviewers with appropriate expertise.

The journal operates under a Single Editor Model. The Journal Editor oversees the review process and makes the final decision.

Reviewer Selection

Reviewers are selected based on:

  • Subject expertise

  • Academic qualifications and experience

  • Absence of conflicts of interest

Reviewers are expected to provide independent and unbiased evaluations.

Evaluation Criteria

Manuscripts are evaluated based on:

  • Relevance to the field

  • Originality and contribution

  • Theoretical and conceptual clarity

  • Methodological rigor

  • Quality of analysis

  • Organisation and clarity of presentation

  • Accuracy and adequacy of references

Reviews should be clear, reasoned, and constructive.

Ethical Standards

All participants in the review process are expected to maintain ethical standards.

Reviewers must:

  • Treat manuscripts as confidential

  • Not use unpublished material for personal advantage

  • Declare any conflicts of interest

  • Decline review where impartiality cannot be ensured

Any ethical concerns should be reported to the Journal Editor.

Editorial Decision

Based on the review process, the Journal Editor may issue one of the following decisions:

  • Accept

  • Minor revisions

  • Major revisions

  • Reject

Decisions are based on reviewer reports, editorial assessment, and compliance with ethical standards.

Revisions

Authors may be required to revise their manuscripts.

Revised submissions should include a clear response to reviewer comments.

Revised manuscripts may be subject to further review.

Review Timeline

The journal aims to maintain an efficient and reliable review process.

Typical timeframes are:

  • Initial screening: 1–2 weeks

  • Peer review: 4–6 weeks

  • Final decision: within 6–8 weeks

Timelines may vary depending on the nature of the submission.

Confidentiality

All manuscripts, reviewer comments, and editorial communications are treated as confidential.

Information is handled securely and is not disclosed to unauthorised parties.

Appeals and Complaints

Authors may submit appeals or complaints regarding editorial decisions.

Such requests are reviewed objectively and handled in a transparent manner.

Post-Publication Integrity

The journal maintains the integrity of the scholarly record.

Where necessary, actions may include:

  • Publication of corrections

  • Retractions

  • Expressions of concern

Contact

For queries related to the peer review process:

Editorial Office
International Review of Public Policy and Administration (IRPPA)
DScholar Press International
Email: md@dscholarpress.com

Declaration

By submitting a manuscript to IRPPA, authors confirm that they have read and agreed to this peer review process and accept its requirements.

Version: 1.0

Last Updated: 2026

Download Peer Review Process PDF