Journal of International Wildlife Law & Policy

Thank you for agreeing to conduct a manuscript review for the Journal. You are performing a critical service for the Journal and the discipline of international wildlife law and policy. In approaching this review, please remember the Golden Rule of reviewing: review the work of others as you would have them review your own work, i.e. carefully and with respect. At the same time, being a good reviewer does not mean you try to help everybody publish in the Journal. Do not stretch to make the case for salvaging an unpublishable manuscript.

1. General Guidelines

1.1

A member of the Journal's Board of Managing Editors will make an initial appraisal of the manuscript. If the topic and treatment seem potentially appropriate for the Journal, Journal board members or others will then review the manuscript with expertise in the subject. The Managing Editor will transmit a copy of the manuscript to you, with a cover sheet that contains a reference number and the title of the piece;

1.2

As soon as you receive a manuscript, please make sure it is something you can evaluate. If you are not qualified to do the job, perhaps because of a misleading title, please contact the Managing Editor as soon as possible;

1.3

CONFIDENTIALITY: Manuscripts submitted to the Journal constitute privileged communications. Please do not show a manuscript to anyone else or discuss it, except to solicit assistance with a particular point.

1.3.1		If you feel a colleague is more qualified than you to review the paper, do not pass the manuscript on to that person without first requesting permission from the Managing Editor to do so.
1.3.2		Your review and recommendation should also be considered confidential;

1.4

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: If you feel you might have difficulty writing an objective review, please contact the Managing Editor immediately.

1.5

A REVIEWER'S REPORT consists of two or three parts:

1.5.1		A cover letter with the manuscript number/title, your recommendation and rationale for said recommendation;
1.5.2		The REPORT FOR AUTHORS, which consists of the rating sheet and your written comments regarding the manuscript. A copy of the REPORT FOR AUTHORS will be sent to the author(s);
1.5.3		If appropriate, a copy of the manuscript with emendations. This will also be sent to the author(s);
1.5.4		Because the Journal utilizes double-blind reviewing, do not reveal your identity in any portion of the REPORT FOR AUTHORS. By contrast, the cover letter is purely for internal review purposes and will not be remitted to the author(s);

1.6

E-mail or fax-transmitted reports are preferable because they speed up the editorial process; however, please also send a written copy of your letter and report to the Managing Editor.

1.6.1

Because the Journal utilizes double-blind reviewing, do not reveal your identity in any portion of the REPORT FOR AUTHORS. By contrast, the cover letter is purely for internal review purposes and will not be remitted to the author(s);

1.7

DEADLINES: Nothing is more appreciated by the Managing Editor and the author(s) than a prompt reviewer report. Reviews should be completed within four weeks; if it becomes obvious that you cannot meet this deadline, please contact the Managing Editor.

2. The Cover Letter

2.1

The cover letter should include the following:

2.1.1		The reference number of the manuscript;
2.1.2		The manuscript's title;
2.1.3		Your postal address;
2.1.4		Your e-mail address;
2.1.5		Your summary opinion.

2.2

The summary opinion should make one of the following recommendations:

2.2.1		Accept in present form or with slight changes;
2.2.2		Accept for publication after minor revisions (in cases where the reviewer suggests re-submission with revisions, the re-submitted manuscript will be remitted again to the reviewer for a second review);
2.2.3		Reconsider for publication after extensive revision;
2.2.4		Reject, with suggestions for possible submission elsewhere if the reviewer wishes to do so;
2.2.5		Reject;
2.2.6		If you did not recommend one of the above, your letter is not complete.

2.3

The cover letter should also briefly outline the reasons why you recommend that the paper be accepted, rejected or revised;

2.4

Please sign the cover letter.

3. The Report for Authors

3.1

The REPORT FOR AUTHORS will consist of a completed RATING SHEET, which may be completed online, or printed out, and written comments for the author(s);

3.2

As a representative of the Journal, you can help to win the author(s) respect and appreciation for the work of the Journal. Comments directed to the author(s) should convince them that:

3.2.1		You have read the entire paper carefully;
3.2.2		Your criticisms are objective and accurate and are not merely differences of opinion or ideology;
3.2.3		Your comments are intended to help the author(s) improve his or her/their paper;
3.2.4		You are qualified to provide an expert opinion about the paper's content;
3.2.5		If there are important ideas in the paper, make constructive comments, e.g. how to streamline the arguments, what parts should be cut, suggestions for additional sections, with an eye to helping the author(s) publish the paper. If the paper is not publishable, say so frankly, but avoid being mean-spirited.

3.3

Some aspects of the paper that may be commented upon include:

3.3.1		Importance of the piece's subject matter to the Journal's readers;
3.3.2		Soundness of legal or policy arguments;
3.3.3		Originality;
3.3.4		Organization;
3.3.5		Tightness of the paper's reasoning;
3.3.6		Quality of the piece's writing, i.e. is it concise, clear and interesting?

4. Transmitting the Reviewer's Report to the Editor-in-Chief:

4.1		By e-mail: JIWLP@earthling.net;
4.2		By fax please use high resolution mode if available on your machine): 801.838.4710;
4.3		By mail: Wil Burns Editor-in-Chief Journal of International Wildlife Law & Policy 1702 Arlington Blvd. El Cerrito, CA 94530 USA;
4.4		Phone inquiries: 650.281.9126.

~Updated 29 Dec 2003