Russian (CIS)English (United Kingdom)

Latest Issue №4, 2017

obl 3-2017 big

In the Next Issue


What Package Plan up to 2025 does Russia need?


Child Benefits and Poverty: The Case of Russia


National Schools of Economic Thought in Germany and the Theory of Social Market Economy

Peer review

All papers are published in Economic Policy only after passing through the peer review procedure which includes the following steps.

1. The author(s) submits the paper by sending it to the editorial address: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it . The paper should match all the formal and stylistic requirements listed in the Rules for Submission of Articles.

2. The editorial staff implements the initial screening in about ten days. At this stage, submissions will be judged for their matching of formal and stylistic requirements, quality, originality, importance, and thematic fit within the journal's purview. If these criteria are not matched the paper is rejected with due notice to the author.

3. Submission that pass the initial screening will undergo peer review. Authors are informed if their submission is being sent further for peer review. All reviewers are reputed experts in the field of the submitted paper; they will have published articles in the corresponding research area for at least three years.

4. Peer review is done by double-blind method. The anonymous referees (reviewers) are expected to provide their reviews within approximately threetofive weeks.

Reviewers are asked to suggest one of the following three options: (a) the manuscript should be definitely accepted in the submitted version, with only insignificant changes; (b) the manuscript should be definitely rejected; (c) the manuscript can be accepted only with significant revision.

Reviewers come to one of three possible conclusions:

a) the paper is worth publishing with editorial corrections;
b) the paper is absolutely not ready for publication;
c) the paper may be published in revised and updated form.

Reviewers are asked to address the following criteria:

  • the broad and/or theoretical significance of the contribution made by the manuscript to the scholarship in the field;
  • the empirical contribution, in terms of introducing new primary sources;
  • the relevance of the sources used for questions treated in the paper. (Are there other important sources that have been omitted or ignored?);
  • the quality of the research: its design, methodology, analysis, and interpretation;
  • the logic and clarity of the paper's organization;
  • the author's ability to adequately situate the study within the scholarly field.

All reviews are sent to the author in anonymized form.

5. If the reviewers strongly diverge in opinion, another review may solicited, or the editors may use their own judgment. The author(s) is informed about the delay immediately.

6. The final decision about publication is made on the basis of the Reviewers' opinions (in the case of additional reviewing — during an extra session of the Editorial staff).

In the case of two positive conclusions (two A's) the paper proceeds to the editorial portfolio for publication.

In the case if two negative (two B's) or one positive, one negative reviewers' conclusions and negative editorial staff's conclusion the paper is dismissed, and the author(s) is informed about the decision immediately.

If significant revisions are necessary before proceeding with publication, the author(s) will be expected to resubmit his or her revised manuscripts within four weeks. Upon receipt of a revised manuscript, the editorial staff will make its final decision within two weeks having considered whether the author(s) have modified the paper according to the reviewers' comments.

7. Reviews are kept on file in the office of Economic Policy for 5 years. The editorial staff sends copies of reviews and/or reasonable refusal to the author(s). It is obliged to send copies of reviews to the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation on request.