Peer review

General Responsibilities of Reviewers

Papers are selected for publication in the BRICS Journal of Economics only after passing the peer review procedure.

An incoming manuscript is registered and subjected to primary evaluation according to the criteria listed in the Author’s Guidelines. Manuscripts failing to meet these requirements will not be accepted for review. The author(s) will be prompted, usually within two weeks.

Papers that passed the initial evaluation will undergo peer review. A paper accepted for review will be assigned to an expert recognized in the corresponding subject field in the science community. The manuscripts are generally reviewed by two or three experts aiming to reach a clear decision in short terms. In disputable cases, a paper may be sent to more than two experts as well as external experts and Editorial Board members.

All reviews are double blind, i.e. the authors’ and reviewers’ names are not disclosed to each other. The reviewers are encouraged to finish their assessment within a month or some more.

Reviewers should evaluate the essence of the paper and its chances of being published. The review process is completed by selecting a recommendation from five options: (1) Accept without revision; (2) Accept with minor revision (without second round review); (3) Accept with major revision (second round review); (4) Reject (Inappropriate level of scientific contribution); (5) Reject (recommended for publication in а scientific journal of different profile).

Reviewers are not expected to provide a thorough linguistic editing of a manuscript, but rather focus on its scientific quality and overall style. If Reviewers recognize that a manuscript requires linguistic edits, Editorial Staff will be grateful for them to inform about the specific errors and suggested corrections.

Reviewers are asked to declare any conflicts of interests.

Reviewers are asked to evaluate the submitted paper according to the following criteria:


Very high levelInappropriate level

Topic relevance 7 6 5 4 / 3 2 1
Originality 7 6 5 4 / 3 2 1
Methodology 7 6 5 4 / 3 2 1
Paper structure / logic 7 6 5 4 / 3 2 1
Argumentation quality 7 6 5 4 / 3 2 1
Empirical study 7 6 5 4 / 3 2 1
Theoretical contribution 7 6 5 4 / 3 2 1
Practical implication 7 6 5 4 / 3 2 1
Sources relevance and quality 7 6 5 4 / 3 2 1

Reviewers are highly recommended to give brief comments to explain their evaluation.

If major revision is necessary, the author(s) will be expected to resubmit the paper revised within four weeks. During a second review round, reviewers are asked to evaluate the revised version.

If minor revision is necessary before proceeding with publication, the author(s) will be expected to resubmit the paper revised within four weeks. Receiving a revised paper, the Editorial Staff will make its final decision making sure the modifications of the paper according to the reviewers' comments were done.

The decision on the publication of the paper is made on the basis of the peer reviews. In cases of disagreement the Editor can obtain advice from a member of the journal's Editorial Board or during an extra session of the Editorial Board. The responsibility for the adequacy of the editorial decisions lies personally on the Subject Editor and as a whole on the Editor-in-Chief. 


Peer Review Steps

The Reviewers can insert corrections and comments in the manuscript review version (PDF) and/or in the manuscript text file (MS Word, Open/Libre Office or Pages file). Please use Comments & Markup in the Acrobat Reader or the Track Changes / Comments in MS Word.

Please be aware that your identity might be revealed in the comments of the MS Word file you correct. Therefore, please make sure that you delete your name and initials in the options section of your Word to remain anonymous.

Reasons for rejection can also be non-conformance to the journal’s Authors’ Guidelines and/or grammatically poor English language.
Once a Reviewer submits a review of a manuscript, he/she receives an acknowledgement from the journal. Reviewers are also notified when the revised version of a paper reviewed is submitted by the author. 

The submission of the review is also automatically reported to Publons.

When the Reviewers have submitted their reviews, the Subject Editor makes a decision to either accept, reject or request further minor/major revision. After Subject Editor's decision, the manuscript is sent back to the author for comments and further revision. The author needs to submit a revised version in due time. 

Editorial Obligations

Reviews are kept on file in the office of BRICS Journal of Economics for 5 years. The editorial staff sends copies of reviews and/or reasonable refusal to the author(s). It is obliged to send copies of reviews to the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation on request.