The Call for Papers, first intake, for the 2020 Bratislava Conference on Earth System Governance closed 15 January 2020. The review process started soon after and was completed on 10 March 2020.
Due to the postponement of the Conference until 2021, holders of accepted papers were given an option on how to proceed – please read more about this in our Postponement FAQ . For questions about the review process, please contact email@example.com
The review process was managed by the Earth System Governance International Project Office. This office invited the International Review Panel in collaboration with the conference chair.
The International Review Panel consists of senior scholars in the international and interdisciplinary Earth System Governance network, including members of the Scientific Steering Committee, members of the Earth System Governance Lead Faculty, Senior Research Fellows and experienced Research Fellows. In addition, for each conference the International Review Panel is complemented with a number of senior researchers from the country or region where the conference is held, as well as senior researchers from around the world who hold particular expertise in the specific topic(s) of the conference. The names of the International Review Panel were published here after completion of the review process.
The review is double anonymous. This means that the authors of the abstracts of papers submitted in response to the call for papers do not know which reviewer will review their abstract; and that reviewers do not know the author(s) of an abstract.
All formally correct abstracts were anonymized and randomly allocated to at least four different reviewers for the double anonymous review. Reviewers graded the abstracts assigned to them on a scale from 5 (excellent/highly appropriate for the conference) to 1 (not appropriate at all), with the option (but not requirement) of adding qualitative comments. Reviewers were requested to aim at an average grade of about 3 for all abstracts assigned to them in order to further remove grader bias from the system.
Members of the International Review Panel could submit their own abstract to the conference. Due to the random allocation of abstracts to reviewers, it could happen that they were assigned their own abstract or abstracts of close colleagues. In those cases and all other cases of conflicting interests, reviewers were requested to refrain from grading and mark the abstract instead as “conflict of interest”
If an abstract received grades from different reviewers that differ more than 2 points, an additional review was sought (by randomly allocating the abstract to yet another member of the International Review Panel).
Based on the grades received for each abstract from the International Review Panel, an average grade for every abstract was calculated, and the abstracts are then ranked accordingly. The best abstracts were accepted for presentation, whereby the total number of abstracts to be accepted is determined by the capacity of the respective conference.