Preparing your materials

Article Types

Research Questions

A Research Question is a question or challenge (i.e. a call to solve a scientific or technical problem) submitted by experts or interest groups. Authors can contribute towards answering Research Questions by submitting a series of experiments, novel theories, tools and/or techniques, or they can open a new field of experimentation or theoretical investigation.

If you are interested in suggesting a Research Question for Research Directions: Mine Closure & Transitions, please email the programme manager here. The journal’s Executive Editorial Board and the Advisory Council will vote on it as soon as possible and may suggest changes.

How are Research Questions published?

Anyone can submit a Question to the journal. The Executive Editorial Board and the Advisory Council collectively decide whether to publish a Research Question according to the following criteria:

1. A Question shouldn’t be excessively broad.

2. A Question shouldn’t be so narrowly focused that it will be answered by fewer than 5 papers.

3. A Question can have some (but not extensive) overlap with another open Question. It can extend or update on the theme of a closed Question.

4. A Question should inspire researchers from different disciplines to contribute, and ideally, to collaborate.

5. A Question must be relevant to the journal’s scope.

6. A Question must be able to be answered by original research and review papers. Community content is very welcome but should be complementary rather than forming the majority of the content.

How are Questions closed?

Some Questions are more open-ended than others and so the Executive Editorial Board and Advisory Council may decide to update them, rather than close them.

The Executive Editorial Board and the Advisory Council will deem a Question to be closed if any of the following apply:

The content published in response to the Research Question is enough that the Question or challenge is considered to have been answered.
The field has evolved to the extent that the Research Question needs to be updated with a new version or is no longer relevant to the field.
The Research Question has been open for a considerable period of time with few submissions received.

When a decision has been made to close a Research Question, new content can only be submitted for a further 6 months.

Can a Question be sponsored?

Yes. Any Question can be sponsored, even after it has been published. Note that the decision rests solely with Cambridge University Press & Assessment ('the Press') who may decline sponsorship if the sponsor’s mission and values could be perceived as not aligning with the values of the Press and the journal. More information can be found here. Sponsors must declare any conflicts of interest, e.g. a relationship between the journal’s editorial team and the sponsor.

A sponsor can also submit their own Research Question for consideration. Such Questions will be considered on their own merit before any sponsorship agreement is made. The Executive Editors and Advisory Council will not be informed of the offer of sponsorship when evaluating the Question. The decision on sponsorship is made by a committee of stakeholders at the Press and the Executive Editors and Advisory Council will be blinded from this process. If a Question is accepted but sponsorship is declined, the authors of the Question can still proceed with publication or can withdraw their submission.

If you would like to become a sponsor, please click here.

Research Articles

Results

Results papers are detailed descriptions of novel research results in their various forms that contribute to answering the Question posed. Results papers can include small contributions, such as a single case study, to more extensive papers describing multiple experiments or lines of enquiry; we also encourage replication/validation studies as well as null/negative results. The typical article word count is 2000 - 5000 words, however shorter and longer papers are welcome if the content is justified.

Papers should be organised into the following sections:

Abstract
Introduction
Methods
Results
Discussion and Conclusions (brief interpretation of how the results help answer the Question in the context of the broader literature)
Acknowledgements
Author contribution statement (CRediT)
Funding statement
Conflicts of interest statement
Ethics statement
Data availability statement
Connections References (Please reference all papers and Community content published in Research Directions: Mine Closure and Transitions that are connected to this one, such as methods paper(s), other results paper(s) or supplementary material. If there are none, please reference the original Question. This will help us build the connections map.)
References

Methods Paper

Methods papers should be submitted as Results. Methods papers are detailed descriptions of a method, including all the technical details necessary for its reproducibility. The typical article word count is 2000 - 4000 words, however shorter and longer papers are welcome as long as the content is justified.

Methods papers should be organised into the following sections:

Abstract
Introduction (brief background of the rationale and prior research for the study, highlighting how the study addresses the specific Question paper)
Methods
Discussion and Conclusions (brief interpretation of how the methodology can help answer the Question in the context of the broader literature)
Funding statement
Conflicts of interest statement
Authorship contribution statement (CRediT)
Connections References (Please reference all papers and Community content published in Research Directions: Mine Closure and Transitions that are connected to this one, such as methods paper(s), other results paper(s) or supplementary material. If there are none, please reference the original Question. This will help us build the connections map.)
References

Analysis

These papers can be:

An analysis of published data (in this journal or elsewhere) focusing on new aspects or using a new methodology.
A meta-analyses study
An evaluation of the soundness of a published methodology that highlights innovative examples of data reuse or presents compelling new findings.

Analysis papers should be organised into the following sections:

Abstract
Introduction
Methods
Analysis (Clearly cite the paper or papers which present the original data you are analysing)
Discussion and Conclusions
Acknowledgements
Author contribution statement (CRediT)
Funding statement
Conflicts of interest statement
Ethics statement
Data availability statement
Connections References (Please reference all papers and Community content published in Research Directions: Mine Closure and Transitions that are connected to this one, such as methods paper(s), other results paper(s) or supplementary material. If there are none, please reference the original Question. This will help us build the connections map.)
References

The typical article word count is 2000 - 5000 words, however shorter and longer papers are welcome if the content is justified.

Impact

There are three types of Impact papers:

A perspective paper that contributes to the Question; for example, a challenging view on the topic or a highlight of missing research.If you would prefer your perspective piece does not undergo peer review, please submit it to the Community site.
A review of existing literature that addresses the Question.
An invited review commissioned by the Executive Editorial board that provides a comprehensive assessment of all relevant results and analyses published in response to an active Research Directions: Mine Closure and Transitions Question. The Advisory Council will determine the publishing frequency, with the goal of releasing these reviews during the lifetime of the Question and when the Question is about to be closed. These reviews should offer the most up-to-date scientific knowledge on the topic, making them valuable for practitioners, policy makers, and researchers.

Impact papers should be organised into the following sections:

Abstract
Impact statement: a short summary on the wider beneficial use of the research presented in your article. This statement should give a broader perspective on the contribution this research is making to the field. The reported impact can be local, regional, or international in its reach. Impact statements should not exceed 300 words and be comprehensible to a broad, potentially non-academic audience.
Introduction
Main text with section headings as needed
Conclusion
Acknowledgements
Author contribution statement (CRediT)
Funding statement
Conflicts of interest statement
Ethics statement
Data availability statement
Connections References (Please reference all papers and Community content published in Research Directions: Mine Closure and Transitions that are connected to this one, such as methods paper(s), other results paper(s) or supplementary material. If there are none, please reference the original Question. This will help us build the connections map.)
References

The typical word count is 5000, but this limit can be exceeded if the content is justified.

Community Content

Alongside formally published outputs, Research Directions: Mine Closure and Transitions has a Community site where additional content can be shared. The Community site is used for hosting non-peer-reviewed supplementary content that is complementary to the formally published content in the journal, as well as standalone content that contributes to one of the journal’s open Questions.

We strongly recommend that all supplementary material like datasets, code, software tools, and other research materials are submitted to the community site to ensure these materials are easily discoverable and citable.

The list below gives examples of other types of content and file types that can be submitted for consideration to the Research Directions: Mine Closure & Transitions Community site. Please contact mines@cambridge.org if there are other content types or file formats you would like to submit as additional materials.

The following content types are currently accepted:

dataset: data collected through scholarly research
poster: a poster presented at a conference
presentation: scholarly presentations of various kinds, including those used in teaching
protocol/methodology: a description of an experiment or other research method
videos, images and audio: these could include animations, figures or infographics to explain your research
working paper/preprint: a full-length paper, typically designed to be submitted for peer review and formal publication by a journal or as part of a book.

If you are submitting a dataset, poster, presentation, video, image or audio file, we strongly advise that you provide detailed metadata that allows any reader to understand the content. We advise following these suggestions.

We encourage you to read the submission instructions and policies before submitting to the Community site, but also take into consideration the following specific guidelines for Research Directions: Mine Closure & Transitions:

All posted content must be directly related to a published active question.
The Editors reserve the right to reject content they do not deem relevant to the Question posed.
The content posted on the Community site is not peer reviewed but is moderated according to our policies. We aim to make a moderation decision on submissions within 3 to 5 business days, but this process may take up to 10 business days if the submission requires editorial escalation.
We encourage all authors to provide their ORCID ID during submission to the Community site. This will mean that, with your permission, we will be able to automatically update your ORCID record with details of your content, and readers will be able to access your profile easily from your content page.
If you submit a preprint to the Community site and it is posted, this does not guarantee acceptance for publication in the journal if you submit it for peer review.

For further information about posting on the Community site, please see our:

Article Requirements

Authors should note the following:

Articles should be submitted in a Word document (email monica.moniz@cambridge.org if you would like a template) or in a LaTeX file (see below for template).
Articles can be submitted in either American or British English.
All articles submitted must contain line numbers. Up to three levels of headings are allowed. Please indicate what level each heading should be.
S.I. units should be used throughout in text, figures and tables.
Authors should spell out in full any abbreviations used in their manuscripts the first time that they use it. Foreign quotations and phrases should be followed by a translation.
Authors should provide 3 to 5 keywords for their manuscripts, except for Questions, where keywords are optional.
Footnotes are not accepted in the manuscripts. Endnotes should be used instead. Note markers in body text are superscript numerals. Each note should end in a period.
Dashes: En dashes should be used, with one letter space on each side.
The order of parentheses should be ([ ]).

Title Page

The title page should include:

The title of the article, which should be short but informative and accurately reflect the content.
Authors’ names and contact details: authors should list their first name and last name in full, plus any other initials. You should indicate the corresponding author with an asterisk and in this case provide an email address. Please also list a brief affiliation for each author (assigned with superscript numbers) below the author names. For affiliations, the country is required and there should be no street addresses. For US-based authors, states must be 2 letter postal codes not spelled out, and there should be no zip codes. Please refer to Author Affiliations for more information.
Word count, including all text but excluding tables, figures and references.

Abstract

Abstracts (200 words max for a Results or Analysis paper, it can be longer for an Impact paper) should summarise the background, findings, and implications of the work.

Second-language abstracts

In full acknowledgement and celebration of the diversity of the field, we welcome inclusion of a translation of the original abstract into any second language.

Please note:

The translated abstract should be included in the main abstract field on the submission system, underneath the English text. This is how the abstracts will appear in the published article.
Authors are responsible for the content of their article, including any second-language abstracts, but we encourage appropriate transparency and crediting of any non-author contributions to the translation in the Acknowledgements of the article.
Reviewer and editor assessment during peer review of second-language abstracts is not expected. Language translation software may be used at Cambridge’s discretion.
No typesetting or post-acceptance editing will be conducted on the second-language abstract. The translated abstract must be updated by the authors to always reflect any changes to the English language abstract.
Further non-English abstracts (beyond one) may be provided as supplementary material, but will not be included in the text of the article.

Figures and Tables

Tables should be supplied as separate, editable files, with the exception of authors using LaTeX (in which case tables can be embedded with the usual 'table' and 'tabular' environments). Resolution: halftone images must be saved at 300 dpi at approximately the final size. Line drawings should be saved at 1000 dpi, or 1200 dpi if very fine line weights have been used. Combination figures must be saved at a minimum of 600 dpi. Cambridge recommends that only TIFF, EPS, or PDF formats are used for electronic artwork. For more detailed guidance on the preparation of illustrations, pictures and graphs in electronic format please see the Cambridge Journals Artwork Guide.

Supplementary Material

We strongly recommend that all datasets, code, software tools, and other research materials are submitted to the Community site to ensure these materials are easily discoverable and citable. See community content for more information. If you wish to use another repository more appropriate for your research materials, please ensure that it follows repository best practices, in particular that it provides a DOI and that this is correctly referenced in your paper. We do not recommend sharing research materials as supplementary material to a paper.

Acknowledgements

You may acknowledge individuals or organisations that provided advice and/or support (non-financial). Formal financial support and funding should be listed in the Financial Support section (see below).

Author Contribution Statement

Authorship should be based on the following principles, as outlined in the Cambridge University Publishing Ethics Guidelines:

Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work;
Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content;
Final approval of the version to be published;
Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

In the process of submitting the article through the ScholarOne system, the corresponding author is prompted to provide further details about contributions to the article using the CRediT taxonomy. People who have contributed to the article but do not meet the full criteria for authorship should be recognised in the acknowledgements section; their contribution can be described in terms of the CRediT taxonomy.

Our default position is that the corresponding author has the authority to act on behalf of all co-authors, and we expect the corresponding author to confirm this at the beginning of the submission process.

Funding Statement

Please provide details of the sources of financial support for all authors, including grant numbers. For example, "This work was supported by the National Science Foundation (grant number XXXXXXX)". Multiple grant numbers should be separated by a comma and space, and where research was funded by more than one agency the different agencies should be separated by a semi-colon, with 'and' before the final funder. Grants held by different authors should be identified as belonging to individual authors by the authors' initials. For example, "This work was supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (A.B., grant numbers XXXX, YYYY), (C.D., grant number ZZZZ); the Natural Environment Research Council (E.F., grant number FFFF); and the Australian Research Council (A.B., grant number GGGG), (E.F., grant number HHHH)".

Where no specific funding has been provided for research, please provide the following statement: "This research received no specific grant from any funding agency, commercial or not-for-profit sectors."

Conflicts of Interest Statement

Authors should include a Conflicts of Interest declaration in their manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest are situations that could be perceived to exert an undue influence on an author’s presentation of their work. They may include, but are not limited to, financial, professional, contractual or personal relationships or situations.
Conflicts of Interest do not necessarily mean that an author’s work has been compromised. Authors should declare any real or perceived Conflicts of Interest in order to be transparent about the context of their work.
If the manuscript has multiple authors, the author submitting the manuscript must include Conflicts of Interest declarations relevant to all contributing authors.
Example wording for a Conflicts of Interest declaration is as follows: “Conflicts of Interest: Author A is employed at company B. Author C owns shares in company D, is on the Board of company E and is a member of organisation F. Author G has received grants from company H.” If no Conflicts of Interest exist, the declaration should state “Conflicts of Interest: None”.

Ethics Statements

This journal follows the COPE guidelines regarding ethics and as such requires that you include an Ethics Statement detailing relevant approvals such as IRB, the ethical treatment of human and animal research participants and informed consent as appropriate to the study. Further details can be found on our Publishing Ethics Page.

Data Availability Statement

In this journal we only accept a variation of one of the data availability statements from the table below:

Status of data and materials	Example Statement
Data openly available in a public repository, with a permanent identifier (such as a DOI)	The data that support the findings of this study are openly available in [repository name] at http://doi.org/[doi], reference number [reference number].
Data embargoed due to commercial restrictions	The data that support the findings of this study will be available in [repository name] at [URL / DOI link] following a [6 month] embargo from the date of publication, to allow for commercialisation of research findings.
Data subject to third party restrictions	The data that support the findings of this study are available from [third party]. Restrictions apply to the availability of these data, which were used under licence for this study. Data are available [from the authors / at URL] with the permission of [third party].
Data available within the article or its supplementary materials	The authors confirm that the data supporting the findings of this study are available within the article [and/or its supplementary materials].
Data sharing not applicable – no new data generated	Data availability is not applicable to this article as no new data were created or analysed in this study.

Further information about data availability statements can be found here.

We strongly recommend that all datasets, code, software tools, and other research materials are submitted to the community site to ensure these materials are easily discoverable and citable. See Community Content for more information.

References

References in text should follow the Cambridge A citation style. Find here Endnote style and find here Zotero style.

Accuracy of references is the responsibility of the author(s). References must be checked against the text to ensure (a) that the spelling of authors' names and the dates given are consistent and (b) that all authors quoted in the text (in date order if more than one) are given in the reference list and vice versa.

Please note that the DOI of the cited article must be included in the reference, the correct format being: https://doi.org/10.1017/btd.2022.7

Exceptions exist for cited material that does not currently have a DOI.

See ‘Connections References’ below for an example of article citation.

Connections References

The connections references section should include all the papers you would like to have your paper linked to in the connections map. Note that you should only refer to papers published in response to the question you are addressing or the question itself. All papers need at least one connection which can be the question paper you are responding to or for example a results paper you are focusing on in an analysis or impact paper.

See below for an example of how the references should be written:

Scott, J. (2023). Living textiles. Research Directions: Biotechnology Design, 1, e6, 1-3. https://doi.org/10.1017/btd.2022.7

Policy on prior publication

When authors submit manuscripts to this journal, these manuscripts should not be under consideration, accepted for publication or in press within a different journal, book or similar entity, unless explicit permission or agreement has been sought from all entities involved. However, deposition of a preprint on the author’s personal website, in an institutional repository, or in a preprint archive shall not be viewed as prior or duplicate publication. Authors should follow the Cambridge University Press Preprint Policy regarding preprint archives and maintaining the version of record.

Overleaf

Overleaf is a free online tool for writing and submitting scholarly manuscripts. An Overleaf template is available for this journal, which allows authors to easily comply with the journal’s guidelines.

Benefits of using Overleaf include:

An intuitive interface, in which authors can write in LaTeX or rich text and see a preview of their article typeset in the journal’s style
Features enabling collaboration with co-authors (the ability to share, highlight and comment on versions of articles)
Sophisticated version control
Clean PDF conversion and submission into the journal’s online manuscripts system (supporting materials can also be added during this process)

Overleaf is based on LaTeX but includes a rich text mode. An author writing in Overleaf would need to have some knowledge of LaTeX, but could collaborate through the tool with an author who is not a LaTeX expert. Overleaf’s tutorial pages include a two minute video and an introduction to LaTeX course, and Overleaf also provides support for authors using the tool.

You can access the Research Directions: Mine Closure & Transitions Overleaf template here. There is a direct link to submit your manuscript from within the Overleaf authoring environment. Once you have completed writing your article, please use the "Submit to Journal" button and select the link for Research Directions: Mine Closure & Transitions to be directed to the journal's submission system.

English language editing services

Authors, particularly those whose first language is not English, may wish to have their English-language manuscripts checked by a native speaker before submission. This step is optional, but may help to ensure that the academic content of the paper is fully understood by the Editor and any reviewers.

In order to help prospective authors to prepare for submission and to reach their publication goals, Cambridge University Press offers a range of high-quality manuscript preparation services, including language editing. You can find out more on our language services page.

Please note that the use of any of these services is voluntary, and at the author's own expense. Use of these services does not guarantee that the manuscript will be accepted for publication, nor does it restrict the author to submitting to a Cambridge-published journal.

Seeking permissions for copyrighted material

Please see further guidance here.

Author affiliations

Author affiliations should represent the institution(s) at which the research presented was conducted and/or supported and/or approved. For non-research content, any affiliations should represent the institution(s) with which each author is currently affiliated.

For more information, please see our author affiliation policy and author affiliation FAQs.

Use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools

We acknowledge the increasing use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools in the research and writing processes. To ensure transparency, we expect any such use to be declared and described fully to readers, and to comply with our plagiarism policy and best practices regarding citation and acknowledgements. We do not consider artificial intelligence (AI) tools to meet the accountability requirements of authorship, and therefore generative AI tools such as ChatGPT and similar should not be listed as an author on any submitted content.

In particular, any use of an AI tool:

to generate images within the manuscript should be accompanied by a full description of the process used, and declared clearly in the image caption(s)
to generate text within the manuscript should be accompanied by a full description of the process used, include appropriate and valid references and citations, and be declared in the manuscript’s Acknowledgements.
to analyse or extract insights from data or other materials, for example through the use of text and data mining, should be accompanied by a full description of the process used, including details and appropriate citation of any dataset(s) or other material analysed in all relevant and appropriate areas of the manuscript
must not present ideas, words, data, or other material produced by third parties without appropriate acknowledgement or permission

Descriptions of AI processes used should include at minimum the version of the tool/algorithm used, where it can be accessed, any proprietary information relevant to the use of the tool/algorithm, any modifications of the tool made by the researchers (such as the addition of data to a tool’s public corpus), and the date(s) it was used for the purpose(s) described. Any relevant competing interests or potential bias arising as a consequence of the tool/algorithm’s use should be transparently declared and may be discussed in the article.