Peer review

Revista Andaluza de Administración Pública, in coordination with the reviewers, commits to a maximum review period of eight months for an article.

Once a manuscript that meets all formal requirements is received, the journal's secretariat will acknowledge the submission and initiate the evaluation process.

The review of submitted manuscripts will follow a double-blind process, ensuring that neither the authors nor the reviewers know each other's identities. Manuscripts will be sent to two specialists in the relevant subject or area of research, accompanied by the manuscript review form. In case of differing evaluations, a third review will be requested.

At least 40% of the reviewers will be women. Individuals associated with the editorial board members or the Andalusian Institute of Public Administration may be appointed to evaluate manuscripts, as long as their proportion is less than 50% of the total number appointed each year.

RAAP’s secretariat will send an email to the reviewers requesting their collaboration. The reviewers will announce their decision to review the work within five days. Once the review is accepted, the reviewer will have 15 days to complete it.

The review will be based on the following criteria, which must be assessed together:

◦ The quality of the research conducted related to the advancement of knowledge.
◦ The originality, novelty and engagement of its subject matter.
◦ Methodological quality.
◦ The practical relevance of the research conducted.
◦ Contribution to improving the functioning of public administrations.
◦ Grammatical correctness.

In light of the review results, the editorial board will make a well-reasoned decision regarding whether to publish the manuscript. The author will be informed of the decision through the journal's secretariat.

Publication of the papers is subject to corrections deemed necessary by the reviewers. The author will have 10 days to make these corrections; this period may be extended if required, based on the requested corrections. The review of the corrections will be the responsibility of the editorial board members deemed appointed by RAAP management for each paper.

(Refer to the journal's regulations.)

RAAP will release an annual list of all those who have conducted anonymous reviews. It may also disclose any scientific malpractice it identifies.