The peer-review process at GreenTech is designed to ensure the highest standards of academic integrity, scientific rigor, and quality in published research. The journal follows a double-blind peer-review system, where both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the review process. This ensures an objective, unbiased, and constructive evaluation of each submitted manuscript.

1. Submission and Initial Screening

• Authors submit their manuscripts through the journal's online submission system.
• The editorial office conducts an initial screening to assess:
  • Relevance to the journal’s focus and scope.
  • Compliance with author guidelines, formatting, and ethical standards.
  • Plagiarism check using reliable detection software to ensure originality.
• Manuscripts that fail to meet basic criteria are either returned to authors for revision or rejected outright without peer review.

2. Assignment of Reviewers

• Manuscripts passing the initial screening are assigned to the Editor-in-Chief or an Associate Editor, who selects at least two independent reviewers with expertise in the manuscript’s subject area.
• Reviewers are chosen based on:
  • Their scientific expertise and research experience in the relevant field.
  • Their absence of conflicts of interest with the authors or the research.

3. Double-Blind Peer Review

• Selected reviewers evaluate the manuscript without knowing the authors' identities, and authors remain unaware of the reviewers' identities.
• Reviewers assess the manuscript based on:
  • Originality and scientific contribution to agro-industrial engineering.
  • Clarity and methodological rigor of research design and analysis.
  • Validity and accuracy of data, results, and interpretations.
  • Relevance to sustainable agro-industrial engineering practices.
  • Adherence to ethical research standards.
• Reviewers provide detailed comments and recommendations, categorizing the manuscript as:
  • Accepted with minor or no revisions.
  • Accepted with major revisions (requiring substantial modifications).
  • Re-evaluation after revision (if extensive changes are required).
  • Rejected due to scientific or ethical concerns.

4. Editorial Decision and Author Revision

• The editorial team evaluates reviewer comments and makes a decision:
  • If accepted with revisions, the manuscript is returned to the authors for revision, with a specified deadline for resubmission.
  • Authors must submit a point-by-point response letter addressing each reviewer’s comments and revising the manuscript accordingly.
• If necessary, the revised manuscript is sent back to reviewers for further evaluation.

5. Final Decision and Publication

• Once the revised manuscript meets all quality and ethical standards, the Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision on acceptance.
• Accepted manuscripts undergo copyediting, formatting, and proofreading before publication.
• Authors receive final proofs for approval before online publication.
• The manuscript is published open access under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), ensuring global accessibility.

6. Post-Publication Review and Corrections

• GreenTech encourages post-publication discussions and corrections if errors or ethical concerns arise after publication.
• Authors can submit corrections, errata, or retraction requests, which are reviewed by the editorial board following COPE guidelines.