Publication ethics and peer review

The Yearbook on the Law of the Sea (YLOS) is committed to maintaining high standards throughout its publication process by adhering to ethical guidelines and best practices. Authors, editors, and peer reviewers are expected to uphold these standards, in accordance with the YLOS Publication Ethics and Malpractice Guidelines.

YLOS acknowledges that peer review is fundamental to preserving the integrity of scholarly records. The journal asserts that maintaining transparent peer review policies is crucial, ensuring these policies are clearly accessible to both subscribers and readers. By doing so, YLOS aims to uphold the highest standards of academic rigor and integrity, fostering trust and accountability within the academic community.

All manuscripts submitted to YLOS undergo a rigorous double-blind peer review process, evaluated by at least two reviewers—both internal and external—based on YLOS standards. This process ensures impartiality and maintains the highest level of scholarly integrity. Reviewers meticulously assess the manuscripts on several key criteria:

1. Research Question and Methodology: The clarity, relevance, and rigor of the research question, along with the appropriateness and robustness of the methodology employed.
2. Originality and Academic Contribution: The manuscript’s contribution to existing knowledge, its originality, and its potential impact on the field of study.
3. Structure and Logic of the Argument: The coherence, logical flow, and structure of the argument presented in the manuscript.
4. Appropriateness of Related Sources and Materials: The relevance and adequacy of the sources and materials referenced, ensuring they support the research question and findings.
5. Completeness of the Manuscript: The thoroughness of the manuscript, including the depth of analysis, discussion, and conclusions drawn.

Based on these criteria, the outcomes of the YLOS peer review process are categorized into three decisions:

1. Publish: The manuscript meets all five review standards and requires only minor rewording or revisions. Such manuscripts are deemed ready for publication with minimal adjustments.
2. Revise: The manuscript fails to fully meet one of the five standards and requires partial or comprehensive revisions. If the author adequately addresses these shortcomings through revisions, the manuscript can then be considered for publication.
3. Reject: The manuscript does not meet most of the journal’s publication standards, with fundamental issues that cannot be addressed without a complete rewrite. Such manuscripts are not suitable for publication in their current form.

Reviewers are expected to provide their scholarly opinions and detailed feedback on the manuscript by completing the YLOS peer review form, which outlines these guidelines. This feedback is crucial for authors to understand the strengths and weaknesses of their work and to make necessary improvements.

The review process typically takes between 4 weeks and 2 months, depending on the complexity of the manuscript and the availability of reviewers. Throughout this process, YLOS is committed to adhering to COPE’s best practices for peer review, ensuring integrity, transparency, and fairness in its double-blind peer review process.

By following these rigorous standards, YLOS aims to uphold the quality and reliability of the research it publishes, contributing to the advancement of knowledge in the field of the Law of the Sea.