Global Governance Systems Review (GGSR) follows a structured editorial and publication process designed to support rigorous scholarly assessment, independent peer review, transparent editorial decision-making, accurate production, and the integrity of the published scholarly record.

The process begins when a manuscript is submitted through the journal's online submission system and continues through technical screening, editorial assessment, peer review where applicable, revision, editorial decision, production, author proofing, and final publication.

Submission of a manuscript does not guarantee external peer review or publication. At each stage, manuscripts must satisfy the journal's scholarly, methodological, ethical, and technical requirements before proceeding.

Publication Workflow

Submission → Technical Screening → Editorial Assessment → External Peer Review → Revision → Editorial Decision → Copyediting and Production → Author Proof → Final Publication → Post-Publication Record Maintenance

The precise pathway may vary according to article type, editorial assessment, reviewer recommendations, ethical considerations, and the nature of revisions required.

1. Manuscript Submission

Authors submit manuscripts through the GGSR online submission system.

The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that the submission is complete and that all listed authors have approved the submitted manuscript, authorship order, declarations, and submission to the journal.

Submission information should normally include the manuscript file, article title, abstract, keywords, author information, institutional affiliations, corresponding-author details, and any supporting or supplementary files required by the journal.

Authors are expected to review the journal's Aims & Scope, Author Guidelines, Article Types, Manuscript Preparation instructions, Submission Checklist, and applicable editorial policies before completing submission.

2. Technical Screening

Following submission, the manuscript may undergo an initial technical screening by the Global Governance Systems Review Editorial Office.

This stage is administrative and does not constitute academic acceptance or peer review.

The technical screening may examine whether the submission is complete, whether required metadata have been provided, whether the manuscript has been appropriately anonymized, whether required declarations are present, whether uploaded files can be opened, and whether the submission substantially follows the journal's basic preparation requirements.

The Editorial Office may return a submission to the corresponding author for technical correction before it is forwarded for substantive editorial assessment.

A request for technical correction does not indicate that the manuscript has passed editorial screening or will necessarily proceed to external peer review.

3. Initial Editorial Assessment

After technical requirements have been satisfied, the manuscript is considered by the Editor-in-Chief or an appropriately designated editor.

The purpose of initial editorial assessment is to determine whether the manuscript is sufficiently suitable for further scholarly evaluation.

Editorial assessment may consider the manuscript's relevance to the journal's Aims & Scope, originality, theoretical or conceptual contribution, methodological quality, analytical rigour, quality of evidence, international or broader scholarly relevance, research integrity, ethical compliance, and overall suitability for the journal.

Editors may also consider whether the manuscript makes a sufficiently clear contribution beyond description of a particular country, institution, policy, administrative system, or governance problem.

4. Editorial Decision Before Peer Review

A manuscript may be declined without external peer review where the editor determines that it is clearly outside the journal's scope, lacks sufficient scholarly contribution, does not meet basic methodological or academic standards, contains substantial technical or ethical deficiencies, or is otherwise unsuitable for further consideration by GGSR.

This form of editorial decision is intended to avoid unnecessary delay for authors and reviewers where a manuscript is unlikely to meet the journal's publication requirements.

Where appropriate, an editor may instead request limited preliminary revisions before deciding whether the manuscript should proceed to external peer review.

5. Assignment to a Handling Editor

Where a manuscript is considered suitable for further evaluation, it may be assigned to an Editor-in-Chief, Associate Editor, Section Editor, or other appropriately qualified handling editor within the journal's editorial governance structure.

The handling editor is responsible for overseeing the scholarly evaluation of the manuscript and for ensuring that the review process is conducted in accordance with journal policies.

Where an editor has a relevant competing interest, the manuscript should be reassigned to another suitably qualified editor.

6. Selection of Peer Reviewers

Research manuscripts proceeding to external review are normally evaluated by at least two independent reviewers with relevant academic or professional expertise.

Reviewers are selected on the basis of their knowledge of the manuscript's subject matter, methods, theoretical framework, geographical or institutional context, or other relevant scholarly expertise.

Editors should avoid selecting reviewers where a financial, personal, professional, institutional, supervisory, collaborative, or other relationship could reasonably compromise independent assessment.

Reviewer invitations are confidential and participation is voluntary.

7. Double-Anonymous Peer Review

GGSR operates a double-anonymous peer-review process for scholarly manuscripts subject to external review.

Under this model, the identities of authors are normally withheld from reviewers, while the identities of reviewers are normally withheld from authors.

Authors are therefore required to prepare an appropriately anonymized review manuscript. Reviewers are expected to respect the confidentiality of the manuscript and should not attempt to identify or contact the authors during the review process.

Further requirements concerning anonymity, confidentiality, reviewer conduct, conflicts of interest, and editorial oversight are set out in the journal's Peer Review Policy.

8. Reviewer Assessment

Reviewers are asked to provide an independent scholarly assessment of the manuscript.

Depending on the article type and research design, reviewers may consider the significance and originality of the research question, engagement with relevant literature, theoretical or conceptual contribution, suitability of the methodology, transparency of the research design, reliability of evidence, validity of analysis, interpretation of findings, quality of presentation, relevance to GGSR, and compliance with applicable ethical standards.

Reviewers may recommend acceptance, revision, or rejection, but reviewer recommendations are advisory rather than determinative.

Final editorial responsibility remains with the journal's authorized editors.

9. Editorial Evaluation of Reviewer Reports

Following receipt of reviewer reports, the handling editor evaluates the reports together with the manuscript and their own scholarly assessment.

Editors are not required to follow a reviewer recommendation automatically. Reviewer reports may differ substantially, and an editor may seek clarification, invite an additional reviewer, conduct further editorial assessment, or determine that one recommendation is more persuasive than another.

The purpose of peer review is to inform editorial judgment rather than transfer editorial responsibility to reviewers.

10. First Editorial Decision

Following editorial and peer-review assessment, the journal may issue an editorial decision such as:

• Accept — the manuscript is suitable for publication, subject to any final editorial or production requirements;
• Minor Revision — limited changes are required before a final decision can be made;
• Major Revision — substantial scholarly, methodological, analytical, structural, or presentation changes are required;
• Reject and Resubmit — the manuscript requires fundamental redevelopment and any future submission will be treated according to the conditions stated in the editorial decision; or
• Reject — the manuscript will not proceed further in its current editorial process.

The terminology used in the online submission system may vary slightly, but the editorial decision communicated to the authors will indicate the status of the manuscript and any further action required.

11. Revision

Where revision is invited, authors should prepare a revised manuscript and a detailed response to the comments provided by editors and reviewers.

The response should address substantive points individually and explain clearly where changes have been made.

Authors are not required to accept every reviewer suggestion automatically. Where an author considers a requested change inappropriate, methodologically unsound, unsupported, or inconsistent with the objectives of the manuscript, the author may provide a reasoned scholarly explanation.

Revisions should preserve the integrity of the research and should not introduce unsupported claims simply to satisfy reviewer preferences.

12. Response to Reviewers

A revised submission should normally be accompanied by a point-by-point response indicating how each substantive editorial or reviewer comment has been addressed.

Where practical, authors should identify the relevant sections or changes in the revised manuscript.

The tone of the response should remain professional and scholarly, including where authors disagree with a reviewer.

Authors should not attempt to identify reviewers or contact them outside the journal's editorial system.

13. Subsequent Review

A revised manuscript may be evaluated by the handling editor, returned to one or more original reviewers, sent to additional reviewers, or assessed through another appropriate combination of editorial and external review.

The appropriate procedure depends on the nature and extent of the revisions and the unresolved scholarly questions identified during the previous review round.

Major revision does not guarantee eventual acceptance.

Additional rounds of revision may be requested where necessary to resolve substantive concerns.

14. Final Editorial Decision

Final responsibility for manuscript acceptance or rejection rests with the Editor-in-Chief or another editor formally authorized to make the relevant decision.

Acceptance is based on the complete editorial record, which may include the manuscript, reviewer reports, author revisions, author responses, ethical documentation, methodological issues, research-integrity considerations, and the handling editor's scholarly judgment.

A manuscript is accepted only when the responsible editor determines that it is suitable for publication in GGSR and that any material concerns identified during editorial assessment and peer review have been adequately addressed.

15. Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions are based on scholarly and ethical considerations.

Decisions concerning whether a manuscript is sent for review, revised, accepted, or rejected are independent of an author's nationality, institutional affiliation, professional status, personal relationships, financial circumstances, or ability to pay any applicable publication charge.

Article processing charges, waivers, discounts, or other financial arrangements do not determine editorial outcomes.

16. Acceptance

Once a manuscript has been formally accepted, it enters the journal's production process.

Acceptance indicates that the manuscript has completed the required scholarly evaluation, but additional technical, editorial, metadata, rights, and production checks may still be necessary before publication.

Authors may be asked to provide final editable files, high-resolution figures, corrected references, complete declarations, permissions documentation, data statements, author information, ORCID identifiers, or other materials necessary to prepare the article for publication.

17. Authorship Verification After Acceptance

Author names, author order, institutional affiliations, corresponding-author information, and other authorship metadata are checked before publication.

Requests to add, remove, or reorder authors after acceptance require appropriate justification and may require written agreement from all affected authors.

Significant or unexplained authorship changes may be referred to the responsible editor for further consideration and may delay publication.

18. Publication Ethics and Integrity Checks

Acceptance does not prevent the journal from investigating concerns that arise subsequently concerning plagiarism, duplicate publication, authorship, competing interests, data integrity, citation manipulation, peer-review manipulation, research ethics, fabricated or falsified information, or other matters affecting the reliability of the scholarly record.

Where substantial concerns arise before publication, production may be paused while the matter is considered.

Where necessary, an acceptance decision may be reconsidered if material information relevant to research or publication integrity becomes available before publication.

19. Copyediting

Accepted manuscripts may undergo copyediting to improve clarity, consistency, accuracy, readability, and conformity with journal style.

Copyediting may address language, grammar, punctuation, capitalization, terminology, headings, citations, references, tables, figures, declarations, and presentation.

Copyediting is not intended to alter the authors' substantive scholarly conclusions.

Where a proposed editorial change could materially affect meaning, interpretation, or scholarly content, author clarification may be requested.

20. Reference and Metadata Verification

During production, bibliographic and article metadata may be checked for accuracy and consistency.

This may include verification of author names, affiliations, article title, abstract, keywords, references, DOIs, funding information, ORCID identifiers, article type, and other metadata relevant to scholarly discovery and citation.

Authors remain responsible for the accuracy of references and factual information contained in the article.

21. Figures, Tables, and Supplementary Materials

Tables, figures, appendices, and supplementary materials may be reviewed during production for technical suitability, consistency, rights information, and readability.

The Editorial Office may request replacement files where figures are of insufficient quality or where editable tables or source files are required.

Authors remain responsible for obtaining permission for third-party material where required.

22. Copyright and Licensing

GGSR operates under an open-access publishing model.

Unless otherwise clearly indicated, scholarly articles are published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence (CC BY 4.0).

Authors retain copyright in their work subject to any applicable legal or institutional arrangements and grant the rights necessary for publication, dissemination, preservation, and maintenance of the scholarly record.

Any third-party content not covered by the article's Creative Commons licence should be clearly identified.

23. Article Processing Charges

Where an article processing charge or another author-facing publication charge applies, it is governed by the journal's published Article Processing Charges policy.

Financial administration is separate from academic editorial assessment.

No payment constitutes a guarantee of acceptance, accelerated acceptance, favourable review, or publication.

Authors should consult the current Article Processing Charges policy for applicable charges, waivers, discounts, and payment arrangements.

24. Typesetting and Article Production

Following copyediting and technical preparation, the accepted manuscript is converted into the journal's publication format.

Production may include typesetting, layout preparation, formatting of tables and figures, normalization of references, preparation of article metadata, application of publication identifiers where applicable, and generation of the final article files.

The layout of the published article is determined by the journal's production standards rather than by the formatting used in the author's initial submission.

25. Author Proof

The corresponding author will normally receive a proof of the article before final publication.

The proof stage is intended primarily to identify production errors, metadata inaccuracies, formatting problems, incorrect author information, reference problems, or minor textual errors introduced or overlooked during production.

Authors should review proofs carefully, particularly:

author names and order; affiliations; article title; abstract; tables and figures; equations; references; funding information; declarations; acknowledgements; licensing information; and other bibliographic metadata.

26. Changes at Proof Stage

The proof stage is not normally an opportunity for substantial rewriting of an accepted manuscript.

Major changes to the research design, data, analysis, interpretation, conclusions, authorship, or other substantive scholarly content require editorial approval and may require renewed scholarly assessment.

The journal may decline substantial changes that cannot be justified after acceptance.

27. Final Quality Control

Following author proofing, the article may undergo final quality-control checks before publication.

These checks may include confirmation of corrected proofs, article metadata, file integrity, citation information, licensing information, author details, digital identifiers where applicable, and publication placement.

Where a material problem is identified, publication may be delayed until the issue has been resolved.

28. Publication

Once production and final quality-control requirements have been completed, the article is formally published by Global Governance Systems Review.

The version published on the journal website constitutes the journal's Version of Record.

Published articles are made openly accessible in accordance with the journal's Open Access and Copyright & Licensing policies.

29. Article Metadata and Discoverability

Following publication, article metadata may be distributed through appropriate scholarly communication and discovery infrastructures.

Depending on the services applicable to the journal, this may include bibliographic metadata, persistent identifiers, repository interfaces, library discovery systems, metadata aggregators, indexing services, and other scholarly information systems.

GGSR only represents the journal or its articles as indexed in services in which formal inclusion has actually been confirmed.

30. Version of Record

The published version maintained by GGSR is the authoritative Version of Record for the journal's scholarly publication.

Authors depositing copies of their article in repositories or other scholarly platforms are encouraged to provide a complete citation and link to the Version of Record.

This helps readers identify any subsequent corrections, retractions, expressions of concern, or other updates affecting the article.

31. Post-Publication Corrections

If an error is identified after publication, authors should notify the Global Governance Systems Review Editorial Office promptly.

Minor issues that do not affect interpretation may be managed according to the journal's production and correction procedures.

Errors materially affecting the accuracy, interpretation, attribution, or integrity of the scholarly record may require a formal correction or another appropriate editorial notice.

32. Retractions and Expressions of Concern

Where serious concerns arise regarding the reliability or integrity of a published article, GGSR may undertake an editorial investigation in accordance with its publication-ethics and post-publication policies.

Depending on the circumstances, appropriate action may include a correction, expression of concern, retraction, or another transparent update to the scholarly record.

Post-publication action is intended to preserve the integrity and accuracy of the scholarly record rather than to punish authors.

33. Complaints and Appeals

Authors may submit an editorial appeal where they believe a material error occurred in the assessment of their manuscript.

Appeals should be scholarly, specific, and supported by relevant evidence or reasoning.

Disagreement with an editorial decision alone does not constitute grounds for reversal.

Complaints concerning editorial conduct, peer review, publication ethics, or journal administration are handled according to the journal's Complaints & Appeals policy.

34. Special Issues and Thematic Collections

Manuscripts submitted to Special Issues and Thematic Collections follow the same fundamental standards of scholarly quality, research integrity, editorial independence, and appropriate peer review as comparable manuscripts submitted to regular issues.

Guest Editors, where appointed, work within the journal's editorial governance framework.

A Guest Editor must not independently determine the outcome of a manuscript where a relevant conflict of interest exists.

Invited participation in a Special Issue does not guarantee acceptance or publication.

35. Invited Manuscripts

An invitation to submit to GGSR does not constitute an acceptance decision.

Invited scholarly manuscripts remain subject to appropriate editorial evaluation and, where the relevant article type ordinarily requires external review, to the journal's applicable peer-review process.

The scholarly standards applicable to invited contributions should remain consistent with those applied to comparable unsolicited manuscripts.

36. Editorial Confidentiality

Submitted manuscripts and associated editorial records are treated as confidential scholarly materials.

Editors and reviewers should not disclose, distribute, exploit, or use unpublished manuscript content for inappropriate personal, professional, academic, or commercial advantage.

Confidentiality requirements continue to apply where a manuscript is rejected or withdrawn.

37. Withdrawal of a Manuscript

Authors wishing to withdraw a manuscript should contact the Editorial Office and provide the manuscript identification number and an appropriate explanation.

The corresponding author should normally confirm that all authors are aware of and agree with the withdrawal request.

A manuscript should not be submitted simultaneously to another journal while it remains active within the GGSR editorial process.

38. Communication with Authors

Official communication concerning a manuscript is normally conducted through the OJS submission system and the journal's designated editorial communication channels.

The corresponding author is responsible for monitoring communications relating to technical corrections, editorial decisions, revision requests, production queries, proofs, and other matters concerning the submission.

Authors should include the manuscript identification number in correspondence relating to an active submission wherever available.

39. Publication Timing

The time required to process a manuscript varies according to factors including article type, manuscript quality, reviewer availability, the number and complexity of revision rounds, ethical or technical issues, author response times, and production requirements.

GGSR does not guarantee acceptance or publication within a fixed period.

The journal seeks to conduct editorial assessment and peer review efficiently without compromising the quality, independence, or integrity of scholarly evaluation.

40. Process Transparency

Authors can normally follow the status of their submission through the journal's online manuscript-management system.

Workflow labels displayed by the system indicate the administrative stage of a submission but should not necessarily be interpreted as an editorial decision unless a formal decision has been communicated by the journal.

Authors who believe that a submission has remained at a particular stage for an unusually extended period may contact the Editorial Office for clarification.

41. Responsibility for Editorial Decisions

The Global Governance Systems Review Editorial Office administers and coordinates the publication workflow but does not replace the scholarly authority of the journal's editors.

Academic decisions remain within the editorial governance structure of GGSR.

Panorama Scholarly Group provides the publishing, technical, administrative, dissemination, and preservation infrastructure required to support the journal's publication process.

The designated place of publication of Global Governance Systems Review is Berlin, Germany.

42. Summary of Responsibilities

Stage	Principal Responsibility	Primary Function
Submission	Authors	Submit complete and accurate manuscript and metadata.
Technical Screening	Editorial Office	Check files, metadata, anonymization, and basic submission requirements.
Editorial Assessment	Editor	Assess scope, scholarly quality, contribution, methodology, and suitability.
Peer Review	Independent Reviewers and Handling Editor	Provide independent scholarly evaluation and editorial oversight.
Revision	Authors	Respond to scholarly concerns and revise the manuscript.
Final Decision	Authorized Editor	Determine whether the manuscript meets publication standards.
Production	Editorial Office / Production Team	Copyediting, metadata verification, typesetting, and publication preparation.
Proof Review	Authors and Production Team	Identify production errors and verify final article information.
Publication	GGSR / Panorama Scholarly Group	Publish and maintain the Version of Record.
Post-Publication	Editors and Editorial Office	Maintain the integrity and accuracy of the scholarly record.

43. Related Policies

Authors should consult the journal's Author Guidelines, Manuscript Preparation, Submission Checklist, Peer Review Policy, Publication Ethics, Research Data Policy, Authorship & Contributorship Policy, Competing Interests Policy, AI & AI-Assisted Technologies Policy, Corrections & Retractions Policy, Complaints & Appeals Policy, Open Access Policy, Copyright & Licensing Policy, and Article Processing Charges Policy for detailed requirements governing individual stages of the publication process.