All submitted manuscripts are initially checked by the editorial office for the stability of the topic for JUR. Following the approval of the first step the manuscripts are sent to 3 appropriate reviewers from the editorial board or external experts, depending on the relevance of the topic. The reviewers are encouraged to submit review reports by 3 to 4 weeks. The final decision for publication is made by the editorial office based on the reviewer's comments and suggestions. 

The main criteria in considering a manuscript for publication are originality of the work, the utilisation of appropriate research techniques and methods, significance of the topic, and the quality of the findings, results and implications. 

Peer review

The practice of peer review is to ensure that only good science is published. It is an objective process at the heart of good scholarly publishing and is carried out by all reputable scientific journals. Our referees play a vital role in maintaining the high standards of JUR and all manuscripts are peer reviewed following the procedure outlined below.

Initial manuscript evaluation

The Editor first evaluates all manuscripts. Manuscripts rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, have poor grammar or English language, or are outside the aims and scope of the journal. Those that meet the minimum criteria are normally passed on to 3 experts for review.

Type of Peer Review

JUR employs double blind reviewing, where both the referee and author remain anonymous throughout the process.

How the referee is selected

Whenever possible, referees are matched to the paper according to their expertise and our database is constantly being updated.

Referee reports

Referees are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript: - Is original - Is methodologically sound - Follows appropriate ethical guidelines - Has results which are clearly presented and support the conclusions - Correctly references previous relevant work.

Language correction is not part of the peer review process, but referees may, if so wish, suggest corrections to the manuscript.

How long does the review process take?

The time required for the review process is dependent on the response of the referees. Should one referee's report contradicts the other two referees’ reports or a report is unnecessarily delayed, a further expert opinion will be sought. In cases for which it is extremely difficult to find a third referee to review the manuscript, or when the two referees' reports have thoroughly convinced the Editor, decisions at this stage to accept, reject or ask the author for a revision are made on the basis of only two referees' reports. The Editor's decision will be sent to the author with recommendations made by the referees, which usually includes verbatim comments by the referees. Revised manuscripts are returned to the initial referees who may then request another revision of a manuscript.

Final report A final decision to accept or reject the manuscript will be sent to the author along with any recommendations made by the referees, and may include verbatim comments by the referees.

Editors Decision is final Referees advise the editor, who is responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the article.

Proofs will be sent to authors if there is sufficient time to do so. They should be corrected and returned to the publisher within three days. Major alterations to the text cannot be accepted.

Free article access: online access to published articles through our website is free.

Copyright:   It is a condition of publication that authors assign copyright or license the publication rights in their articles, including abstracts, to Faculty of Urban and Regional Planning. This enables us to ensure full copyright protection and to disseminate the article, and of course the Journal, to the widest possible readership in print and electronic formats as appropriate. Authors are themselves responsible for obtaining permission to reproduce copyright material from other sources.

Becoming a referee for JUR 

If you are not currently a referee for JUR but would like to be considered as a referee, please contact the editors. The benefits of refereeing for JUR include the opportunity to read, see and evaluate the latest work in your research area at an early stage, and to contribute to the overall integrity of scientific research and its published documentation. You may also be able to cite your work for JUR as part of your professional development requirements for various Professional Societies and Organizations.