Our peer review policy has three main features:

1. This policy is designed to evaluate the validity and quality of articles prior to publication. This supports the maintenance of the integrity of the knowledge domain to which the articles belongs and filters out irrelevant and poor-quality manuscripts (Eysenbach &Till, 2001).
2. Our peer reviewers ensure that data is clearly presented and findings and conclusions are adequately supported by data.
3. We follow the double-blind review process, which means neither authors nor reviewers are aware of each other’s identities or affiliations throughout the review process. Authors are instructed to prepare their manuscripts in such a way that their identities are not revealed. This anonymity prevents bias from either side.

Regarding plagiarism, replication, and duplication, we adhere to the COPE guidelines. In addition, as a Crossref member, Asian Development Policy Review (ADPR) uses similarity checking tools recommended by Crossref. To ensure the originality of content, ADPR uses iThenticate software, a powerful, user-friendly tool, to detect plagiarism.

Additionally, in order to ensure publication ethics are applied throughout the peer review process, ADPR has clear and distinct policies for conflict of interest, human rights, and informed consent (COPE, 2011, 2015). To comply with the guidelines set out by COPE, we require authors to clearly state any conflict of interest regarding financial and non-financial matters. In cases where human subjects are involved, or if any research shows human health intervention, ADPR requires authors to submit their research for approval to their institutional ethics committee or review board. ADPR also ensures that authors have obtained informed consent from the participants, who are permitted to opt out of the research process at any stage. See publication ethical guidelines of ADPR for more details: http://www.aessweb.com/journals/5008/info/pe.

Our research articles, therefore, convey scientific validity and compatibility with state-of-the-art knowledge. The articles are not only comprehensible but also offer a valuable contribution to the knowledge domain.

References
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). (2011, March). Flowcharts on how to handle common ethical problems. Retrieved from
http://publicationethics.org/files/Code_of_conduct_for_journal_editors_Mar11.pdf
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). (2015, November). Flowcharts on how to handle common ethical problems. Retrieved from
https://publicationethics.org/files/cope-publication-ethics-flowcharts-full-set.pdf
Eysenbach G and Till JE (2001). Ethical issues in qualitative research on internet communities. The BMJ, 323: 1103-1105. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.323.7321.1103
https://www.crossref.org/services/similarity-check/

Guidelines for Reviewers:

Asian Development Policy Review (ADPR) depends heavily on our referees, and we are greatly indebted for maintaining the quality and timeliness of our journal. Thank you for your help in assessing manuscripts.

Review Process:

The manuscript submission and peer review process is broken down into the following steps:

1. The Author submits a manuscript.
2. The Editor-in-Chief assigns an Associate Editor to act as Review Editor for the paper.
3. The Associate Editor assigns Referees.
4. The Referees reviewed the manuscript and send reports.
5. The Associate Editor makes a decision and the author is contacted.

All ADPR papers go through review in the web-based Journal Submission & Tracking System; http://trackyoursubmissions.com/index.php/70. When invited to serve as a referee there are two ways to gain access to the manuscript. You will receive an email with basic information about the paper, a link to accept the assignment, and a link to decline the assignment.

1. Accept referee assignment: If you accept, the link will automatically log you into the system and take you directly to the files for the pertinent paper. You will be able to enter your review in the web-based system when you are ready.
2. Decline referee assignment: If you are unable to review this manuscript and must decline we appreciate any suggestions of potential referees. You can suggest other reviewers or offer any observation on the paper by e-mailing review@aessweb.com . 

You can alternately access your files by logging into the system through http://trackyoursubmissions.com/index.php/70  using your user name and password. You are then taken to your "Home" page. It will list your assignments. 

Review Steps:

1. Notify the submission’s editor as to whether you will undertake the review.
2. Click on file names to download and review (on screen or by printing) the files associated with this submission. 
3. Click on icon to fill in the review form. Please fill the online review form. 
4. In addition, you can upload files for the editor and/or author to consult. If you accept the referee invitation, you will gain access to a page with links to the full manuscript and author cover letter. You will also have links to "check status" and "Review Manuscript." 

Supplementary Materials:

ADPR authors are encouraged to submit Supplementary Materials to complement articles. They might include additional figures or examples, animations, data sets used in the paper, computer code used to generate figures or tables, or other materials that are necessary to fully document the research contained in the paper or to facilitate the readers’ ability to understand and extend the work. If you are refereeing a paper that does include Supplementary Materials, along with the manuscript, know that the Supplementary Materials are generally not refereed but are available to you, as a referee. As part of your review you are asked to give the materials at least a cursory look and verify that they are appropriate to accompany the article. You may suggest changes, including removing some extraneous Supplementary Materials or moving items from the main text to the Supplementary Materials. The author is also asked to submit an index of the supplementary materials. You should find a listing of each item along with a brief description and a justification for why the item should be included. This should be helpful in judging the appropriateness of the materials.

Getting Help:

If you need additional help, email us: review@aessweb.com 

Manuscript Status:

1. To get the status of your assigned manuscript(s): Log into the system with your password, you will find the current status of article. 
2. All manuscripts are privileged documents; an author retains the right to the unpublished work. A referee should not use results or ideas obtained exclusively through the refereeing process in his or her own research.