Celebrating 25 years of IOAP and the launch of Land Systems:
be among the first 25 submissions & get your paper for free.
Land Systems
Land Systems
LS

Review criteria

Main criteria Excellent (1) Good (2) Fair (3) Poor (4)
Originality (novelty):
Within the scope of Land Systems, does the manuscript represent substantial progress beyond current scientific understanding (new insight, concepts, methods, tools, and/or data)?		        
Scientific quality (rigour):
  • Is the purpose of the work clearly articulated, reflected in an adequate methodology, and its achievement compellingly underpinned by the evidence presented?
  • Are the applied methods and techniques valid and suitable?
  • Are the results discussed in an appropriate and balanced way (consideration of related work, including appropriate references)?
        
Significance (impact):
Does the manuscript contribute to changing our scientific understanding of a subject substantially or to introducing new practical applications of broad relevance?		        
Presentation quality:
Is the manuscript presented in a clear, logical, concise, and well-structured way?		        

Access review, peer review, and interactive public discussion

Manuscripts submitted to LS at first undergo a rapid access review by the associate editor (initial manuscript evaluation), which is not meant to be a full scientific review but to identify and sort out manuscripts with obvious major deficiencies in view of the above principal evaluation criteria.

If they are not immediately rejected, they will be posted as preprints on Land Systems Discussions (LSD) where they are subject to full peer review and interactive public discussion.

In the full review and interactive discussion, the referees and other interested members of the scientific community are asked to consider the main criteria above as well as the following:

  1. Does the title clearly reflect the contents of the paper?
  2. Does the abstract provide a concise and complete summary?
  3. Do the authors give proper credit to related work and clearly indicate their own new/original contribution?
  4. Does the paper address relevant scientific questions within the scope of Land Systems?
  5. Are methods and assumptions valid and clearly outlined?
  6. Is the description of experiments and calculations sufficiently complete and precise to allow their reproduction?
  7. Are the results sufficient to support interpretations and conclusions?
  8. Are substantial conclusions reached?
  9. Are the references appropriate in terms of number and quality?
  10. Is the supplementary material appropriate in terms of amount and quality?
  11. Is the language fluent and precise?
  12. Are mathematical formulae, symbols, abbreviations, and units correctly defined and used?
  13. Should any parts of the paper (text, formulae, figures, tables) be clarified, reduced, combined, or eliminated?

Peer-review completion (LS)

At the end of the interactive public discussion, the authors may make their final response and submit a revised manuscript. Based on the referee comments, other relevant comments, and the authors' response in the public discussion, the revised manuscript is re-evaluated and rated by the associate editor. If rated excellent or good in all of the principal criteria and specific aspects listed above, the revised manuscript will normally be accepted for publication in LS. Additional advice from the referees in the evaluation and rating of the revised manuscript will be requested by the associate editor if the public discussion is not sufficiently conclusive.