Research Directions: Mine Closure & Transitions operates transparent peer review for full transparency about decision-making, to mitigate issues that contribute to editorial bias, and to enable reviewers to collect their contributions as part of their academic record. We understand that there are valid reasons why a reviewer may not want to sign their report so we provide that option. Accepted manuscripts are published with their review reports, which are assigned an individual DOI; these reports may include the reviewer name and their ORCID ID.

Transparent peer review does not mean that reviewers should contact authors directly, or that authors should contact reviewers. All queries should be directed through the editorial office.

Appeals Process Guidance

Appeals will only be considered if they refer to a specific manuscript and must be based on evidence that either (1) an editor or reviewer made a significant factual error/a major misunderstanding of a manuscript, or (2) the integrity of the editorial decision making process was compromised. In general, only one appeal per manuscript per decision stage will be considered. 

To appeal an editorial decision, contact mines@cambridge.org and specify the manuscript in question and the reason for your appeal. Your appeal will be reviewed by the Editor in Chief or another Executive editor that has not been responsible for the peer review of your manuscript. The final decision regarding your appeal will rest with the Editor in Chief or the Executive Editor that reviewed this appeal.

New submissions take priority over appeals, so it may take a substantial period of time for the journal to reach a conclusion about your appeal. If you have submitted an appeal and are awaiting an outcome, you should not submit your manuscript for publication elsewhere until you have notified this journal that you wish to withdraw your manuscript from consideration.