Skip to main content
Asian-Australasian Journal of Food Safety and Security

Asian-Australasian Journal of Food Safety and Security

ISSN 2523-1073 (Print) 2523-2983 (Online)
facebook twitter linkedin

Review Policy

The Asian-Australasian Journal of Food Safety and Security (AAJFSS) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of scientific integrity, transparency, and academic excellence. All submitted manuscripts undergo a rigorous, structured, and unbiased peer-review process to ensure the publication of high-quality and ethically sound research. The review system is designed to evaluate the originality, methodological rigor, clarity, scientific contribution, and relevance of each submission within the journal’s scope.

Initial editorial assessment

Upon submission, each manuscript undergoes a preliminary evaluation by the editorial office to ensure,

  • Compliance with the journal’s aims and scope
  • Adherence to formatting and submission guidelines
  • Ethical approval statements (where applicable)
  • Disclosure of conflicts of interest
  • Completeness of required documents
  • Similarity/plagiarism screening

Manuscripts that do not meet these requirements may be returned to the authors for correction or rejected prior to peer review.

Peer-review model

AAJFSS follows a single-blind peer-review system, in which,

  • Reviewers are aware of the authors’ identities.
  • Authors do not know the identities of the reviewers.

All research manuscripts are evaluated by at least two independent experts with appropriate subject expertise. Reviewers are selected based on their academic qualifications, research experience, and publication record in the relevant field. The peer-review process focuses on,

  • Scientific originality and novelty
  • Methodological soundness and statistical validity
  • Clarity of objectives and research questions
  • Ethical compliance
  • Accuracy of data interpretation
  • Relevance and contribution to the discipline
  • Quality of writing and presentation

Reviewer reports are treated as strictly confidential and will not be disclosed without explicit permission.

Reviewer invitation and responsibilities

  • Invited reviewers are given 21 days to complete their evaluation.
  • If a review is not submitted within the specified period, it is considered overdue.
  • If a reviewer fails to respond to reminder communications, the invitation will be withdrawn and reassigned to another qualified reviewer to avoid unnecessary delays.

Reviewers are expected to provide constructive, unbiased, and evidence-based comments that assist both the editors in decision-making and the authors in improving their manuscripts.

Editorial decision and author revision

After receiving reviewer comments,

  • The Editor evaluates the reports for clarity, consistency, and relevance.
  • A decision (minor revision, major revision, acceptance, or rejection) is communicated to the corresponding author along with consolidated reviewer comments.

Authors are required to:

  • Submit a revised manuscript addressing all reviewer and editorial comments.
  • Provide a detailed response-to-reviewers document explaining how each comment has been addressed.
  • Complete the revision within three (3) weeks of receiving the decision letter.

Failure to submit the revised manuscript within the specified timeframe will result in the manuscript being considered rejected, and its submission record may be removed from the journal system.

Where necessary, revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation to ensure that concerns have been adequately addressed.

Final decision authority

The final decision regarding publication rests with the Editor-in-Chief or a designated member of the Editorial Board. Decisions are based on,

  • Reviewer recommendations
  • Scientific merit and originality
  • Relevance to the journal’s scope
  • Compliance with ethical and publication standards
  • The editorial decision is final.

Review timeline

Under normal circumstances, if the review and revision processes proceed smoothly, a final decision (acceptance or rejection) is typically reached within 6-8 weeks from the date of complete submission. However, the timeline may vary depending on reviewer availability, the extent of revisions required, and the responsiveness of authors.

Commitment to ethical standards

AAJFSS upholds strict ethical standards in accordance with internationally recognized publishing guidelines. The journal does not tolerate plagiarism, data fabrication, data falsification, duplicate submission, or unethical research practices. Any ethical concerns identified during review may result in rejection or further investigation.