Peer Review Policy

Global Agricultural Innovations (GAI) uses a rigorous double-blind peer-review process. The identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from one another during review. Decisions are based on relevance to the journal, originality, methodological quality, ethical compliance, clarity and contribution to agricultural science.

Double-Blind Peer Review

Authors must remove identifying information from the review manuscript. Editors and reviewers must protect confidentiality and must not use unpublished material for personal advantage.

Initial Editorial Evaluation

Each submission is screened for scope, completeness, originality, reporting quality, plagiarism concerns and compliance with agricultural research ethics and biosafety. Manuscripts that are unsuitable, seriously incomplete or ethically deficient may be declined before external review.

Reviewer Assignment

Suitable manuscripts will normally be evaluated by at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise. Reviewers must disclose conflicts of interest and decline assignments that they cannot assess impartially.

Review Outcomes

• Accept
• Minor revision
• Major revision
• Resubmit for further review
• Reject

Authors should provide a point-by-point response and clearly identify revisions. A revision request does not guarantee acceptance.

Review Timeline

GAI aims to complete initial screening within approximately 3–5 working days and external review within approximately 2–4 weeks after reviewer acceptance. These are service targets, not guarantees; specialist availability, revisions and ethical queries may require additional time.

Confidentiality

Submitted manuscripts, reviewer reports and editorial communications are confidential. Information will be disclosed only as required for editorial processing, ethical investigation or law.

Conflict of Interest

Authors, reviewers and editors must disclose relationships or interests that could influence, or appear to influence, their work. Conflicted editors will not make decisions on the affected manuscript.

Ethical Standards

Research involving regulated organisms, field trials, personal information or traditional knowledge must include the appropriate ethics, biosafety or regulatory approval, or a justified statement of exemption, follow applicable environmental, biosafety and agricultural regulations and relevant reporting standards, and describe measures taken to minimize harm. Agrobiodiversity studies must include required permits. Clinical reports should document landholder, participant or community consent where applicable.

Final Decision

The Editor-in-Chief or delegated independent editor makes the final decision after considering reviewer reports, author responses, ethical requirements and editorial standards. Editorial decisions are not determined by commercial considerations.