Peer Review Policy

Civil Engineering Science and Technology (CEST) is committed to ensuring the quality, originality, and scientific integrity of every published article through a rigorous, fair, and transparent peer review process. The journal adopts a double-blind peer review system, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the review process.

Each submitted manuscript is evaluated solely on its scientific merit, methodological rigor, originality, significance, clarity of presentation, and relevance to the journal's aims and scope.

Initial editorial Assessment

Upon submission, every manuscript undergoes an initial editorial screening conducted by the Handling Editor in collaboration with members of the Editorial Board.

During this stage, the manuscript is evaluated for:

• Compliance with the journal's aims and scope;
• Originality and potential scholarly contribution;
• Scientific quality and methodological soundness;
• Ethical compliance and publication integrity;
• Completeness of submission files and required declarations.

Manuscripts that do not meet the minimum editorial standards may be rejected without external review (desk rejection). The initial editorial assessment is generally completed within three (3) days after submission.

Double-Blind Peer Review

Manuscripts that pass the editorial screening are assigned to two to four independent expert reviewers with appropriate expertise in the manuscript's subject area. CEST employs a double-blind peer review process to ensure impartiality and minimize potential bias. Reviewers are requested to evaluate manuscripts based on:

• Originality and novelty;
• Scientific significance;
• Methodological quality;
• Validity of data and analysis;
• Interpretation of results;
• Relevance of references;
• Quality of presentation;
• Contribution to civil engineering knowledge and practice.

Reviewers provide constructive comments and one of the following recommendations:

• Accept
• Minor Revision
• Major Revision
• Reject

The first round of peer review is generally completed within 2–4 weeks.

Author Revision

Reviewer comments are communicated anonymously to the corresponding author. Authors are normally given up to four (4) weeks to prepare a revised manuscript together with a detailed response to reviewers. The revised manuscript should clearly address every reviewer comment. Failure to provide an adequate response may delay editorial decisions or result in rejection.

Second and Subsequent Review rounds

Where necessary, revised manuscripts are returned to the original reviewers or additional reviewers for further evaluation. Subsequent review rounds generally require 2–3 weeks, depending on the complexity of the revisions. The editorial office aims to complete each post-revision editorial decision within approximately two (2) weeks after receiving the revised manuscript. Additional review rounds may be conducted whenever substantial revisions are required.

Editorial Decision

The final publication decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief, based on recommendations from the Handling Editor, Editorial Board, and reviewers.

Possible editorial decisions include:

• Accept
• Minor Revision
• Major Revision
• Reject

Editorial decisions are based exclusively on the manuscript's scientific quality and are made independently of the authors' nationality, institutional affiliation, gender, race, religion, or funding source.

Production Process

Once a manuscript is accepted:

1. The corresponding author receives the official Acceptance Notification.
2. Article Processing Charge (APC), where applicable, is processed.
3. An official Letter of Acceptance (LoA) is issued.
4. The manuscript enters professional copyediting, layout editing, and proofreading.
5. A final galley proof is sent to the corresponding author for approval.
6. Authors are requested to carefully review and approve the final proof before publication.

Only minor typographical or formatting corrections are permitted at the proof stage.

Continuous Publication

CEST adopts a Continuous Publication model. Accepted articles are published online individually as soon as the production process is complete, and the corresponding author has approved the final galley proof. Articles are generally published within two (2) weeks after the final proof has been confirmed. This publication model enables the rapid dissemination of high-quality research without waiting for the complete issue to be finalized.

DOI Registration

Each published article receives a unique Digital Object Identifier (DOI) registered through Crossref. The DOI is normally activated within three (3) days after online publication, ensuring permanent accessibility and citation of the published work.

Peer Review Timeline

The average editorial timeline is as follows:

The complete editorial process from initial submission to acceptance is typically completed within approximately three months (12 weeks), although the actual duration may vary depending on the complexity of the manuscript and the responsiveness of authors and reviewers.