AQCCM (Air Quality and Climate Change Management) is a periodical journal published by Department of Environmental Engineering, Diponegoro University. All article that is published in Jurnal AQCCM are written in English. Jurnal AQCCM was purposed to accommodates articles publications covering:
1. General Overview of Peer Review Process
All manuscripts submitted to this journal (AQC2M Journal) must adhere to the journal's Focus, Scope. Manuscripts must demonstrate scientific merit or novelty that is relevant to the journal's focus and scope. Before being published, articles in AQC2M Journal are reviewed by at least two or more reviewers. The review method used by default is blind peer-review, which allows reviewers to learn the author's identity. However, if the author requests a double-blind peer-review process, we will do so. We value reviewer participation because it allows us to keep the article's quality high because reviewers work voluntarily.
The Chief Editor makes the decision to accept or reject an article through the Editor's Board based on the reviewers' recommendations or comments. Texts submitted to this journal are checked for plagiarism using the Google Scholar or Turnitin apps. The more plagiarism there is, the sooner the article will be rejected (if more than 20 percent does not include a bibliography). All articles in AQC2M Journal will be published in both English and Indonesian.
All submissions to this journal must be written in either English or Indonesian. All authors are encouraged to have their papers proofread for grammar and clarity before submitting them. The final decision on manuscript acceptance is made solely by the Editor in Chief and Associate Editor based on the critical comments of the reviewers. The final decision on the manuscript is solely based on the Editor's final review, which takes into account the comments of the peer-reviewers (but not solely by Reviewer).
2. Spesific Overview of Peer-Review Process
Reviewers will be asked to provide detailed and constructive comments, which will be used as the basis for editors to decide whether to reject or accept submitted articles. The following items require the reviewer's attention:
a. Originality and significance
Reviewers are asked to discuss the originality of the findings submitted in an article. In addition, reviewers should consider whether the findings have the potential to significantly influence the scientific community. If the reviewer discovers the same work as the article being reviewed, the reviewer can offer suggestions or criticism to improve the way the research results are presented.
b. The novelness of the theoretical approach and how to discuss the issues
Reviewers are asked to discuss the novelty of the theoretical approach as well as how the authors discuss research findings to solve problems. This novelty element is usually found in the introduction section as an introduction to the importance of the research.
c. The method's advantages and disadvantages
Reviewers must be able to evaluate the method used. In order to improve the quality of the article under review, statistical analysis or other analytical methods that affect the interpretation of results should be criticized.
d. The dependability of the appearance of research findings and conclusions
Reviewers must be able to assess the dependability of the research findings and conclusions. The completeness of the analysis and the data obtained can be used to assess the reliability.
e. Alignment of the layout with the guidelinesAlignment with the guidelines will make the editing and layout process easier for editors. Many writers disregard this and only format their writing partially and perfectly according to the guidelines provided. This can be evaluated by reviewers, but the main focus is on the content and some previous points.
f. Suggestions and comments
When several errors or shortcomings are discovered in an article, the reviewer is expected to be able to clearly show which parts should be improved and what needs to be done to improve the article's quality.
3. Maintaining Confidentiality
We ask that no articles or research results be disseminated while under review. If you are unwilling to maintain this policy, we would appreciate it if you would refer other prospective reviewers to the editorial board who are more suitable in terms of interest or expertise.
4. Additional Technical IssuesReviewers are expected to return articles on which they have commented before the deadline. If you require additional time to complete the review, the reviewer is expected to contact the editorial board right away. The review results can be submitted online through our OJS. However, if you have difficulty returning the results of the review, the results can be sent via email:
AQCCM (Air Quality and Climate Change Management) will periodically publish two issues in a year, Issue 1 (June) and Issue 2 (December). With 25 maximum article per issue.
AQCCM (Air Quality and Climate Change Management) provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.
This journal is a peer reviewed, subsidized open access journal where Environmental Sustainability Research Grup, Diponegoro University pays the OA fee. Authors do not have to pay any open access publication fee until volume 1,2,3, and 4 issue. After this volume, author must pay IDR 2,000,000 . Peer review is under the responsibility of Environmental Sustainability Research Grup, Diponegoro University.
The following statement outlines the ethical standards that all parties participating in publishing articles for the journal, including Authors, Editor-in-Chief, Editors, Editorial Board, Reviewers, and Publishers, must adhere to. The statement follows COPE's Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.
Guidelines for Journal Publication
Publication of articles in a peer-reviewed Air Quality and Climate Change Management is an important part in the development of science based on coherence and mutual respect. It reflects the high caliber of work produced by both the authors and the institutions behind them. As peer-reviewed articles embody scientific practices, it is crucial that ethical standards are established and agreed upon by all parties involved in the publication process, which includes Authors, Editor-in-Chief, Editors, Editorial Board, Reviewers, Publishers, and the general public.
As the publisher of Air Quality and Climate Change Management, Environmental Sustainability Research Group acknowledges its significant responsibility in upholding ethical standards throughout the publishing process. We pledge to ensure that any advertising, printing, or other revenue-generating activities do not influence editorial decisions in any way. Additionally, our organization and the Editorial Board are dedicated to facilitating communication with other publishers and journals when necessary.
Decision of Issuance
The Editor in Chief of Air Quality and Climate Change Management holds the responsibility of selecting which articles to publish from the submissions received by the journal. While making this decision, the Editor in Chief may receive assistance from Associate Editors and must adhere to legal restrictions related to defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The Associate Editors may also participate in discussions and consultations with other editors to aid in this decision-making process.
Fair Play
Regardless of an Author's race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnicity, citizenship, and political affiliation, the Editor in Chief evaluates the submitted article.
Confidentiality
The Editor in Chief and Associate Editors are prohibited from sharing any information regarding the article to anyone other than the Author, Reviewers, and Publishers, as necessary.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
The Editorial Board is required to obtain written permission from the Author before using any material or information from an article that was not published in their research.
Contributions to Editorial DecisionsReviewers helps the Editor in Chief in making editorial decisions and helps the writer improve the quality of the article.PromptnessAny selected Reviewers, who feels not qualified to review the article or feels unwilling to review an article must notify the Editor in Chief and excuse himself from the article review process.ConfidentialityEvery article received for review must be treated as a confidential document. Articles may not be displayed or discussed with others unless authorized by the Editor in Chief.Objectivity StandardsThe review process must be carried out objectively. Reviewers must express their views clearly, objectively, and using supporting arguments.Source RecognitionReviewers must identify relevant published works that have not been cited by the author. A statement that observations, derivations or arguments that have been previously reported must be accompanied by relevant citations. Reviewers informs the Editor in Chief if there is a substantial or overlap between the article being reviewed and other articles that have been published from the personal knowledge they have.Disclosure and Conflict of InterestSpecial information or ideas obtained through the peer review process must be kept confidential and must not be used for personal gain. Reviewers are not allowed to review texts where they have a conflict of interest due to competition, collaboration, or other relationships with any of the Authors, companies or institutions related to the article.
Author's Duties
Reporting StandardsThe author must present an accurate report of the research conducted and conduct an objective discussion. The underlying data must be accurately displayed in the article. An article must contain sufficient detail and references so that others can replicate the research activities carried out. Fraud or intentional statements are not unethical and unacceptable behavior.Data Access and Retention
The author is asked to provide raw data in connection with the article for the review process, and must be prepared to provide public access to the data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), and if possible, in any case ready to store the data in reasonable time after publication.Originality and PlagiarismThe author must ensure that the work written is original, and if the author has used the work and / or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited.Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent PublicationAn author may not generally publish articles that basically describe the same research in one or more journals. Submitting the same article to more than one journal simultaneously is unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior.Source RecognitionProper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors must cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature or results of the work reported.
1. Google Scholar
Creative Common Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-SA 4.0)
You are free to:
The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
Notices:
Air Quality and Climate Change Management welcomes discussions and corrections from readers regarding published articles. Readers may contact the Editor in Chief via email to provide such feedback, and if accepted, the discussions and corrections will be published in the next issue as a "Letter to the Editor". The respected Authors of the published article have the option to respond to the feedback from the reader by sending a reply to the Editor in Chief, which may be published as a "Reply to the Letter to the Editor" by the Editors. Post-publication corrections and amendments will only be made with appropriate references and after thorough scientific consideration, as it is not a simple process and requires significant work to replace or retract an article, along with providing adequate explanations to the scientific indexing database. Therefore, it is recommended that Authors carefully review the final draft version of their paper prior to publication.
1. Original Research Paper
2. Review Paper
3. Case Studi
4. Book Chapter