Sustainable Production and Consumption

The second SPC, which was submitted at the end of November last year, may have been delayed during the Chinese New Year period. It took about two and a half months to receive feedback. There were major revisions, and the editor-in-chief and four reviewers provided their opinions. Due to other commitments, I didn't have time to make timely revisions. I had one month to make the revisions and only submitted the revised manuscript two days before the deadline. Since the revisions were quite thorough, the editor raised three minor issues for further revisions, and after resubmission, it was accepted.

Finally, I would like to add that SPC is the only journal where the editor directly provides feedback, and the feedback was very helpful. Therefore, I have high expectations for this journal, and its impact factor should increase. Highly recommended.

The second SPC

The possible methods are relatively niche, and it took the editor over two months to find reviewers. The review and revision process took over a month. After the revision, the editor directly confirmed acceptance within a week.

From two similar submission experiences, a pattern was found: as long as the first revision does not have major issues (even if it is a major revision), the reviewers provide positive and constructive feedback. After making serious revisions, the editor does not send it back to the reviewers again (although it only shows "With Editor" in the system, perhaps it was quietly sent back?). Overall, the efficiency of the editor is very high.

This year, the Impact Factor of SPC has significantly increased, although the influence of IF will gradually decrease in the future...