About the Journal
The scope of journal covers both natural and social sciences, issues of sustainable mountain development, governance and policy, as well as practice-oriented research related to mountain territories.
The journal serves as an interdisciplinary international platform dedicated to comprehensive research on mountain regions, encompassing their natural, socio-economic, and institutional dimensions.
Founder
International Mountain Institute
Aims & Scope
The journal serves as an interdisciplinary international platform dedicated to comprehensive research on mountain regions, encompassing their natural, socioeconomic, and institutional aspects. Its topics include both natural and social sciences, sustainable mountain development, management and policy, and practical research related to mountain areas.
International Montology Studies is published with the institutional support of the International Mining Institute and operates as a non-profit, open-access journal. All submitted manuscripts undergo double-blind peer review in accordance with internationally recognized publishing ethics standards.
Scientific Publication Ethics
The editorial board of the scientific journal International Montology Studies adheres to the principles of publication ethics accepted by the international community, as reflected, in particular, in the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
In order to avoid unfair practices in publishing activities (plagiarism, presentation of false information, etc.), in order to ensure high quality of scientific publications, public recognition of the scientific results obtained by the author, each member of the editorial board, author, reviewer, publisher, as well as institutions participating in the publishing process, are obliged to comply with ethical standards, norms and rules and take all reasonable measures to prevent their violation. Compliance with the rules of ethical scientific publication by all participants in this process helps to ensure the intellectual property rights of authors, improve the quality of the publication, and eliminate the possibility of unauthorized use of copyrighted materials for the benefit of individuals.
The author(s) of an article in which a demonstrable fact of violation of the principles, standards and norms of scientific ethics has been discovered are not allowed to submit articles to the journal International Montology Studies for the next 3 calendar years from the date of discovery of the fact(s) of violation of the principles, standards and norms of scientific ethics.
Peer Review
All manuscripts submitted to the journal undergo mandatory (double-blind) peer review: the author is not provided with the reviewer(s), nor is the reviewer provided with the author(s). The author receives a review without a signature or indication of the reviewer's name, position, or affiliation.
Manuscripts are reviewed by members of the editorial board, as well as invited reviewers—leading experts in the relevant field. The decision to select a reviewer for the article is made by the editor-in-chief or the editor-in-chief. The standard review period is one month.
The reviewers' responsibilities include assessing: 1) the novelty and scientific significance of the work; 2) the reliability of the research results; 3) the extent to which the problem under consideration is covered; 4) the nature of the presentation (including logic and language); 5) the correspondence of the manuscript title and abstract to its content; 6) the correspondence to the research topic and the completeness of the list of published works mentioned in the article; 7) the quality and adequacy of illustrative and tabular material to the content of the article.
The decision to select a reviewer to review an article is made by the journal's editor-in-chief. Each reviewer has the right to decline to review, including in the event of a conflict of interest that affects the perception and interpretation of the manuscript.
Following review of the manuscript, the reviewer makes recommendations regarding the article's future fate (each reviewer's decision must be justified):
• accept the manuscript for publication in its current form;
• accept the manuscript for publication after correcting any deficiencies noted by the reviewer;
• reject the manuscript;
• recommend submitting the manuscript to a journal with a different focus.
The journal's editorial board sends the review text to the author. If the editors make recommendations for improving the manuscript, they suggest taking them into account when preparing a new version of the manuscript.
If the author disagrees with any recommendations (comments), they must clearly explain in their response to the reviewers why they are not making the relevant corrections (additions).
The author's revised manuscript is resubmitted for review.
If the author and reviewer have irreconcilable disagreements regarding the manuscript, the editorial board reserves the right to send the manuscript to another reviewer.
If the authors refuse to revise their materials, they must notify the editors in writing or orally of their refusal to publish the article. If the authors do not return the revised version within three months of submitting the review, even if they have not yet received any information regarding their refusal to revise the article, the editors will remove it from the manuscript's registration. In such situations, the authors are sent a corresponding notice of the manuscript's deregistration due to the expiration of the revision period.
A positive review is not sufficient grounds for publication of an article. The final decision on publication is made by the editorial board. In case of conflict, the editor-in-chief makes the decision.
After the journal's editorial board has decided to accept a manuscript for publication, the editorial board informs the author and specifies the publication timeline.
The decision to reject a manuscript for publication is made at a meeting of the editorial board in accordance with the reviewers' recommendations. Notification of rejection is sent to the author by email, including the reviews and the reasons for rejection. A manuscript rejected by the editorial board for publication will not be accepted for re-review.
If the formal requirements for materials for publication are not met, then the article is not accepted for publication “on formal grounds” and the author is informed of this by means of an automatic notification.
The following are not accepted for publication in a scientific journal:
• Articles containing previously published material;
• Articles formatted without following article formatting guidelines;
• Articles whose authors fail to comply with the editorial board's technical revision requirements;
• Articles whose authors fail to address the reviewer's constructive comments or provide a reasoned rebuttal;
• Series of articles representing individual stages of unfinished research.
Original reviews are kept by the journal's editorial staff for at least five years.
Manuscript reviews are not published publicly and are used only for internal editorial workflows and in communications with authors.
The editors do not engage in substantive discussions of articles with authors, correspondence on the methodology of writing and formatting scientific articles, and are not involved in bringing articles up to the required scientific and methodological level.
