All scholarly articles submitted to the editorial office of the journal Economics: Theory and Practice are subject to mandatory peer review.

An article is accepted for consideration only if it fully corresponds to the journal’s scope and complies with the publication guidelines.

Submitted materials must be of an open nature. The presence of any restrictive classification marks constitutes grounds for rejection of the article.

The Editor-in-Chief assigns the article for peer review to a member of the Editorial Board, a Doctor or Candidate of Sciences, who is a recognized specialist in the subject area of the submitted manuscript and has publications on the topic of the reviewed article within the last three years.

Peer review is conducted anonymously. The reviewer is provided with the text of the article without any information identifying the author.

External reviewers may be involved in the following cases: when the topic of the article does not correspond to the scientific specialization of the Editorial Board members; when the Editorial Board member responsible for a particular scientific field is unable to conduct the review for valid reasons; or in the case of a negative review by a member of the Editorial Board. In such cases, the Editor-in-Chief invites a scholar who has relevant publications in the subject area of the submitted article. The review request is accompanied by the manuscript and the recommended review form.

The Editorial Board recommends the use of a standard peer review form. The review should include an assessment of the relevance of the research topic; the theoretical and applied significance of the study; the author’s personal contribution to addressing the stated problem; the style, logic, and clarity of presentation; the reliability and validity of the conclusions; as well as the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

The concluding part of the review must present the reviewer’s final recommendation: acceptance of the article in its current form; the need for revision taking into account the reviewer’s comments; or rejection of the article.

Reviewers are informed of the confidentiality of the peer review process and that the manuscripts submitted to them constitute the intellectual property of the authors and contain information that is not subject to disclosure. Reviewers are not permitted to make copies of the manuscripts.

The maximum peer review period is five days. Within this period, the reviewer must submit a signed review, certified by the human resources department, to the Executive Secretary of the journal.

A copy of the review is sent by the Executive Secretary to the author of the manuscript without indicating the reviewer’s name, position, or place of employment.

If the review contains recommendations for revision and improvement of the article, it is forwarded to the author with a request to take the comments into account when preparing a revised version. The revised manuscript is submitted for a second round of peer review and considered in accordance with the standard procedure.

In the case of a negative review by a member of the Editorial Board, the Editor-in-Chief may send the article for an additional review to another member of the Editorial Board or to an external reviewer.

The final decision on the publication of an article is made by the editorial office. The author is informed of this decision by the Executive Secretary of the journal.

In the event of rejection, the author is sent a letter stating the reasons for refusal.

Copies of peer review reports are provided by the editorial office upon request from the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation.

Original peer review reports are stored in the editorial office for five years.