1 Stage 1 — Editorial Screening

The handling Editor assesses the manuscript against the Focus and Scope, confirms that the study reports an identifiable agricultural object of study, and verifies that the experimental design, sampling, and replication described are capable of supporting the claims made. Manuscripts failing this assessment are returned without external review, normally within two weeks of submission.

2 Stage 2 — External Review

Manuscripts passing screening are sent to a minimum of two reviewers with relevant competence in the agricultural sciences. Reviewers assess submissions against the following criteria:

• Methodological Rigor: Adequacy of experimental or survey design, treatment structure, replication, randomization, control conditions, sample size, and the statistical or analytical method applied, including whether the analysis matches the design actually used.
• Validity of Data and Interpretation: Whether the measurements reported are appropriate to the variables claimed, whether environmental, seasonal, and site conditions are documented sufficiently for the result to be interpreted, and whether conclusions remain within what the data support.
• Originality and Contribution: The extent to which the manuscript advances knowledge in its field, including the value of confirmatory work under new agroecological, varietal, or management conditions where that value is explicitly argued.
• Relevance to Agricultural Practice and Sustainability: Whether the finding can be connected to a production, protection, post-harvest, economic, or resource-management decision, and whether the authors have addressed resource efficiency, environmental effect, resilience, or livelihood implications where the study makes such a claim.
• Clarity and Structure: Adherence to standard scientific writing conventions, completeness of methods reporting sufficient for replication, quality of tables and figures, and conformity with the Author Guidelines set out below.

3 Stage 3 — Editorial Decision

The handling Editor synthesizes the reviewer reports and issues a decision — accept, minor revision, major revision, or reject — which is confirmed by the Editor-in-Chief before communication to the author. Where two reviewers disagree materially, a third reviewer is appointed before a decision is issued. The target timeline for a first decision is 6–8 weeks from submission.