The first reviewer ran away, and the editor did not invite a new reviewer. What should be done in this situation? It's been August since the submission, and there is still no result from the first review.

(0) 讚！ | xt123456

When submitting a manuscript, if it is not reviewed by the 6 modules of the Editorial Board, and the submission is not related to the selected module but is related to other modules, the editor will provide the opportunity for rejection and resubmission, which will take approximately one week.

(0) 讚！ | 望乡

Due to the independent processing of articles by the 6 modules, articles cannot be directly forwarded between the modules within the editorial department.

(0) 讚！ | 望乡

Section I: Environmental Assessment and Monitoring
Section II: Pollution Control and Waste Management
Section III: Natural Resource and Ecosystem Management
Section IV: Climate Change and Environmental Resilience
Section V: Environmental Policy, Economics, and Social Science
Section VI: Human-induced Pollution and Environmental Impact

(0) 讚！ | 望乡

The Journal of Environmental Management is a very good journal, with a well-controlled volume of publications and increasing article quality. The stability of its impact factor in recent years also proves this point. The entire review process of JEM is getting shorter, with faster review speeds, thanks to the restructuring of the editorial department at the beginning of the year, which divided into 6 independent modules (which can be found on the journal's official website homepage through the Editorial board section).

(0) 讚！ | 望乡

Overall, first of all, since the internal reform of the journal editorial department, the division of labor has become more clear, the editors have become more professional, and submitted manuscripts can quickly reach the relevant editors, greatly improving the speed of review compared to previous years. Secondly, the editors are responsible, professional, and handle manuscripts promptly. During the review process, the invited reviewers are knowledgeable, highly professional, and provide constructive feedback, addressing the shortcomings of the manuscripts. After making revisions based on the feedback, the quality of the manuscripts has been greatly improved. I would like to thank the editors and reviewers for their collaboration, hard work, and valuable dedication.

(0) 讚！ | 望乡

The initial submission was on August 10, 2024.
Resubmitted on August 18, 2024.
Major revision on September 19, 2024.
Article revised on October 10, 2024.
Article accepted for publication on November 17, 2024.

(0) 讚！ | 望乡

My editor invited 35 reviewers, 7 of whom accepted the invitation. 5 reviews have been received, and we are waiting for the remaining 2 before giving our final opinion.

(0) 讚！ | weiyang1993

Excuse me, which editor is the boss using? The processing efficiency is so fast.

(0) 讚！ | 大变送审了

Which editor did the big shot choose?

(0) 讚！ | 大变送审了

Appealing is also useless, the editor does not accept it. Just a reminder for everyone.

(0) 讚！ | 不死鸟

In the previous article, changing the order of the authors halfway through was a hassle for a long time.

(0) 讚！ | dog

This editor is the slowest, Jay, I really suggest advising him not to be an editorial board member. He simply doesn't have time.

(0) 讚！ | 辣条哥

During the first revision, I got help from others in the process of making changes, and I added two authors without permission. As a result, the revised manuscript was rejected, with the editor stating that I did not have permission to add authors. Can I still appeal this decision? I was careless and thought that I could make changes to the authors before acceptance, but upon reading the requirements more carefully, I realized that once a submission is made, the authors cannot be easily changed.

(0) 讚！ | 不死鸟

2024/10/21 UR (17:00 INVITED 1, ACCEPTED 0, COMPLETED 0)
2024/10/21 UR (22:30 INVITED 1, ACCEPTED 1, COMPLETED 0)
2024/10/28 (23:30 RRC)
2024/10/29 (10:00 DIP)
2024/11/01 (ACCEPT)
2024/11/02 (proof)
2024/11/04 (proof return)
2024/11/05 (ONLINE)

(0) 讚！ | alone54201

2024/09/27 REVISED + WE
2024/09/28 WE (DATE UPDATED)
2024/09/30 UR
2024/10/01 UR (INVITED 3, INVITED 2, COMPLETED 1)
2024/10/14 RRC (INVITED 3, ACCEPTED 2, COMPLETED 2)
2024/10/15 MINOR (REVIEWER 1, COMMENT 1)
From UR to RRC is exactly 2 weeks, and only one reviewer's comments were received during this period. It is unclear whether the second reviewer did not provide comments in time or did not have any comments to offer. In any case, the editor decided to terminate the review process on the 14th day of UR, fortunately it was not the reviewer who had previously suggested rejection. The feedback this time only required adding specific experimental data to the conclusion and highlights.
2024/10/16 REVISED + WE
2024/10/20 WE (DATE UPDATED 23:00)
On the 4th day after revision, the status of the system was updated to WE, indicating a change in the timeline. It is unclear whether this was due to the editor being assigned today or some other reason, as many people have found that minor revisions are often followed by an immediate UR the next day.

(0) 讚！ | alone54201

2024/07/04 reject
Even though the editor and system said the deadline was extended to July 30th, the system status suddenly changed to rejected. I emailed the editor for clarification, and they said the editorial system [not sure if it refers to the website system or the editorial department's personnel system] rejected it, so I can no longer upload the revised version through the submit revision button. On one hand, it may be because the quality of the article is indeed too poor, and on the other hand, it may be because I needed almost 2 months to make revisions after applying for an extension, which may have caused impatience on the part of the editorial department, leading to the rejection for resubmission. I noticed in the comments section that many teachers also experienced their reject & resubmit suddenly turning into a rejection.

2024/07/20 resubmit
2024/09/12 major (invited 10, accepted 5, completed 3)
There were 3 reviewers this time, with a total of 12 comments. It seems that the reviewers were reassigned, and possibly the editor as well. The reviewers' comments were slightly better this time, with most of them just requiring a response rather than substantial changes to the article. One reviewer was quite critical, stating directly that the article lacked innovation compared to other research and suggesting rejection. I had to scramble to find a few references to compare and demonstrate the article's innovation.

(0) 讚！ | alone54201

2024/07/04 REJECT
Even though the editor and system both said the deadline was extended to July 30th, the system suddenly changed to REJECTED. I emailed the editor to inquire, and they said the editorial system [not sure if referring to the website system or the personnel system of the editorial department] rejected it, so I can't upload the revised version through the submit revision button anymore. On one hand, it is likely that the quality of the article was indeed too poor, and on the other hand, it probably took me about two months to make the revisions after applying for an extension, which may have made the editorial department impatient and led to the rejection for resubmission. I noticed in the comments section that many teachers who were initially asked to resubmit suddenly had their submissions rejected.

2024/07/20 RESUBMIT

2024/09/12 MAJOR (INVITED 10, ACCEPTED 5, COMPLETED 3)

There were 3 reviewers with a total of 12 comments, indicating that the reviewers may have been reassigned, and possibly the editor as well. The reviewers' comments were slightly better this time, with most of their suggestions being easily addressed without requiring any substantive changes to the article. However, one reviewer's comment was particularly critical, stating that the article lacked innovation compared to other research and recommending rejection. I had to scramble to find additional references to demonstrate the innovation in the article.

(0) 讚！ | alone54201

SUBMIT by 03/03/2024
REJECT & RESUBMIT MAJOR REVISION NEEDED by 05/30/2024
There were 3 reviewers, with a total of 31 comments. One reviewer's comments were mostly straightforward and easy to address. The second reviewer's comments required significant changes to the introduction and results discussion sections. The last reviewer was very demanding, requesting major changes to the introduction, additional citations, deeper analysis, and new experiments.
Due to the need for new experiments, I used the "send email" function on the platform to request an extension twice, but did not receive a response. The system's DATE DUE did not change until a few days before the deadline when an editor emailed me to upload the revised manuscript. I then directly emailed the editor from my personal email address, and received a prompt response the next day, with the system's DATE DUE also being updated. It seems that the "send email" function on the platform may not always reach the editor.

(0) 讚！ | alone54201

I have submitted articles to nearly ten journals as the first author (although not many), and this is the slowest journal I have ever submitted to, without a doubt. The reviewers process the manuscript quickly, but the editors' efficiency is extremely low, they completely disregard the time of other researchers. I strongly recommend that all journal editors, especially associate editors, log in at least once a week on average. Otherwise, don't be an editor if you are so irresponsible.

(1) 讚！ | 辣条哥

No progress should not be that the corresponding author is not you. Generally, after acceptance, the rights and access and proof will be sent to the corresponding author's email quickly, allowing the author to fill out forms and proofread before online publication. If the corresponding author is not you, then you should ask if there are any relevant emails in the corresponding author's mailbox.

(0) 讚！ | alone54201

Um, I'm already online.

(0) 讚！ | Yufei Zhang

May I ask what is the current status of tracking your article? Mine was also accepted on the same day, but there has been no progress so far.

(0) 讚！ | 哈斯哈斯

One round is 15 days, starting from 11.1 for me to provide feedback by 11.15. Minor revisions may be completed faster than this.

(0) 讚！ | Prming

I saw on a forum before that besides the total ring that was put on hold, there are also some journals on the review list, including JEM, JCP, and Water among others. Have any of you encountered this? What impact will this review have?

(0) 讚！ | liuaohan