Thank you for your interest in JNRD! Please carefully read the guidelines below and follow the instructions before you upload your manuscript to the Journal’s submission site. Inadequate manuscripts that do not fulfil these requirements will not be reviewed. Receipt of each article is acknowledged by e-mail to the contacting author upon receipt.
All manuscripts must be submitted in English (either British or American English is acceptable, but the author must ensure that they have consistently used one style throughout their manuscript). The manuscript pages must be numbered consecutively, beginning with the title page. All manuscripts must be uploaded as MS-Word© documents. Please upload a Cover Letter that includes a brief overview of the manuscript, author presentation, the assurance that the manuscript has not been previously published whole or in part and that it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere. The authors must also indicate any Financial Support for their research.
It is important that the manuscript is saved in the native format of the word processor used. The text should be in single-column format. Keep the layout of the text as simple as possible. Most formatting codes will be removed and replaced when the article is processed. Use bold face, italics, subscripts, superscripts etc. Do not embed “graphically designed” equations or tables, but rather prepare these using the in-built features of the word processor. Please use the “spell-check” and “grammar-check” functions of your word processor.
Modifications to authorship are not allowed during the review process. This policy also applies to the addition, deletion, or rearrangement of author names in the authorship of accepted manuscripts.
Please do not incorporate footnotes in the text.
The JNRD only accepts the abbreviations of the International System of Units (SI). For more information, please see here.
Under this link you can find a word template for research articles: LINK
- Title. Concise and informative. Titles are often used in information-retrieval systems. Avoid abbreviations and formulae.
- Author names and affiliations. Present the authors’ affiliations below the names. Indicate all affiliations with a lower-case superscript letter immediately after the author’s name and in front of the appropriate address. Provide the full postal address of each affiliation, including the country name.
- Corresponding author. Clearly indicate who is the corresponding author and include email address.
A concise and factual abstract is required. It should not exceed 250 words and must and contain information related to the introduction, data and methods, results and discussion and conclusion. It should end with a strong concluding remark related to the overall performance of your study.
An abstract is often presented separately from the article, so it must provide a clear narrative as a stand-alone text. References should be avoided, but if essential, then cite the author(s) and year(s). In addition, non-standard or uncommon abbreviations should be avoided, but if essential, they must be defined at their first mention in the abstract itself.
Provide a maximum of 6 keywords, which must not be part of the title of the paper, avoiding general and plural terms and multiple concepts (avoid, for example, “and”, “of”). Be sparing with abbreviations: only abbreviations firmly established in the field may be eligible. These keywords will be used for indexing purposes.
The introduction presents the background of your study following a coherent storyline. It illustrates both: general and specific problems (i.e., why is the topic relevant?); and how the topic has been studied by other authors. All statements need to be based on the literature you reviewed using citations. From this information, you derive the research demand that leads to your research objectives (or research questions or/and hypothesis). You should formulate an overall objective and specific objectives related to each work step or result you want to obtain.
2 Data and Methods
2.1 Study region (optional)
Under “data and methods”, you can include a section on your study region briefly describing the biophysical environment as well as socioeconomic and demographic features relevant for your analysis. Alternatively, you can include it in the introduction before you derive your research demand and objectives.
The document should have a separate section on the data you used (ideally using one or more tables) indicating data period, temporal and spatial resolution and sources of the information.
Experiments: If you measured, collected or generated data, please illustrate the procedure.
Specify each method you used to reach the specific objectives you defined in the introduction. Refer to the developers of the methods and to other studies that applied them in similar contexts.
Please clarify: which are the input data? What is the output/target variable? Data period and spatio-temporal resolution?
Ideally, elaborate a conceptual diagram illustrating the overall approach as well as the input and output variables.
Please present your results in relatively few figures and tables that illustrate the key findings of your results. These should be strongly related to your specific objectives. The text should briefly explain the figures and tables. Do not interpret the results in this section!
Here you should objectively discuss your findings in the context of the reviewed literature (State of the Art). Are the findings relevant and new? Are they consistent with previous research results? Were the data and methods you chose adequate to generate new findings? What were the limitations in terms of data, methods and resources? Please use the reviewed literature to support your statements throughout the discussion. Check again whether there are new recently published articles.
The conclusion should start with a very brief summary of your work and then list the key conclusions (take-home messages) you derive from your findings followed by recommendations for future research or stakeholder action in this field. The conclusion should end with a strong statement summarising the overall benefits of your work.
6 Acknowledgments and Financial support
This section is not mandatory but if you wish to include it please add the section at the end of the article before the references.
Acknowledgments: In this section, you can acknowledge any support given which is not covered by the funding sections. This may include administrative and technical support, or donations in kind (e.g., materials used for experiments).
Example for acknowledging funding: This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health [grant numbers xxxx, yyyy]; the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Seattle, WA [grant number zzzz]; and the United States Institutes of Peace [grant number aaaa].
For original articles (research, review articles) at least 75% of the references should be from the Science Citation Index Expanded and from the last decade. In addition, the DOI number must be included at the end of each reference.
In-text citations should follow the referencing style used by the American Psychological Association (APA) (LINK).
Example for reference:
Benjaminsen, T. A., Maganga F. P., & Abdallah, J. M. (2009). The Kilosa killings: Political ecology of a farmer–herder conflict in Tanzania. Development and Change, 40(3), 423–445. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7660.2009.01558.x
Examples for citations in Text:
After the intervention, the number of books read by children per week increased (Kajembe & Mutabazi, 2013).
Kajembe and Mutabazi (2013) argued that, the intensities, types and levels of many natural resource use-conflicts in Tanzania are poorly known and documented.
*Note the use of “&” when both author and year are inside parentheses, while “and” is used when only the year is in parentheses.
For multiple citations within parentheses, place the references in chronological order and separate them by semicolons, as shown in the following example:
The conflicts experienced in Kilosa, Mvomero, Kiteto and Kilindi (Benjaminsen, Maganga & Abdallah, 2009; King, 2013; Massoi, 2015) are cases in point, which substantiate the aforementioned conflict consequences.
Citations depending on the number of authors:
- One or two : Palmer & Roy, 2008
- Three: Sharp, Aarons, & Gittens, 2007
- More than three: Sharp et al., 2007
Please elaborate a small number of self-explanatory figures. Where required, include axis descriptions and a legend (explaining all data shown).
Number figures consecutively in accordance with their appearance in the text. Ensure that each figure has a caption. Supply captions separately, not attached to the figure. A caption should comprise a brief title (not on the figure itself) and a description of the figure. Keep text within the figures to a minimum but ensure that all symbols and abbreviations are explained.
Number tables consecutively in accordance with their appearance in the text. Place table footnotes below the table body and use superscript lowercase letters. Avoid vertical descriptions. Use tables sparingly and ensure that the data presented in tables do not duplicate results described elsewhere in the article.
- Only use a maximum of six figures and tables. As a general rule, one figure related to each specific objective (plus maybe one map for the study region).
- Use uniform lettering and sizing.
- Save text in illustrations as “graphics” or enclose the font.
- Only use the following fonts in your illustrations: Arial, Courier, Times, Symbol.
- Number the illustrations according to their sequence in the text.
- Use a logical naming convention for your figures.
- Submit images close to the desired size of the printed version.
- Submit each figure as a separate file.
Images and Photographs:
Digitalized images and photographs must be sent using a JPG or TIFF format only, with a minimum of 200 dpi.
JNRD is committed to peer-review integrity and upholding the highest standards of review based on a single blind review process, where the author does not know who the reviewers are.
Initial assessment of the manuscript
All contributions will be initially assessed by the Editors in Chief regarding its suitability for the journal and its conformity to the Author Guidelines. Preliminary articles will not be considered for publication. Failure to meet the criteria outlined in the Author Guidelines may result in return of the manuscript for correction or in rejection before the review-process.
Appropriate manuscripts will be sent to a JNRD Co-Editor who is responsible for the review process and looks for at least one independent expert reviewer. At least two persons need to review the manuscript; either two external reviewers or one external reviewer and the co-editor her-/himself.
Reviewers are matched to the paper according to their expertise in the subject area represented by each manuscript. Our database is continuously updated.
The evaluation of the manuscripts is made based on the following aspects:
- Originality of the work;
- Relevance to scientific knowledge in the field of natural resources and sustainable development;
- Follows appropriate ethical guidelines, especially with regards to plagiarism.
- Introduction: Theoretical background adequate addressing the most recent State of the Art.
- Overall and specific objectives are clearly described at the end of the introduction.
- References are up-to-date and relevant to the manuscript.
- Data and Methodology: Data and methods are appropriate and adequately described. Sound experimental design.
- Results: Data concise and sufficient. Figures are clear and correct. Text only includes information that is describing the figures.
- Discussion: In-depth discussion in the context of the state of the art.
- Formal Aspects: Correct language. Title and summary sufficiently informative. References properly cited. Adherence to common and consistent nomenclature.
Language correction is not part of the peer review process, but reviewers are encouraged to suggest corrections of language and style to the manuscript. In the final round, the Editor will check matters of linguistic and stylistic correctness, and may suggest or apply corrections.
The Co-Editor will consider the feedback of the reviewers and make the decision, which will be one of the following:
- Accepted with no further revision
- Accepted after minor revision (i.e., article can be accepted if the author makes the requested minor revisions)
- Accepted only after major revisions (i.e., article can be accepted after major revisions have been made)
Submitting a revised version: The preferred method of indicating changes is Microsoft Word's “Track Changes” feature. Video tutorial HERE
- Authors: all the changes made in the manuscript must appear in the document using the M.S.-word tool "track changes". The response to the previous report should be as specific as possible, and directly address each of the points raised by the editor and/or referee.
- Reviewers: all the comments in the document must appear in the document using the M.S.-word tool "new comments" and please without your name. The review process is single blind.
The reviewers may request more than one revision of a manuscript if the initial revision does not satisfy all points that were raised. The number of revisions will depend upon the changes needed in the article as per the instructions from the editor/reviewers to ensure quality of the article before publishing. Should the decisions of the reviewers contradict one another, a further expert opinion may be sought. If the paper is accepted after major revisions, it must be sent again for review to the same reviewers. In case the original reviewer(s) are no longer willing or are unavailable to re-review the manuscript, the manuscript may be sent to new reviewers.
To avoid a lengthy peer review process, manuscripts should go through no more than two rounds of revision. In some cases, according to the recommendations from editors and reviewers, a third round of peer review may be initiated, although this should be assessed case by case.
Once the review process is concluded, Co-Editor and Editor in Chief will jointly take the final decision regarding acceptance or rejection of articles.
Ensure that the following items are included:
- E-mail address and
- Full postal address of the corresponding Author
Ensure that all necessary files have been uploaded:
- Cover letter
- All figure captions
- All tables (including title, description)
- Manuscript has been spell-checked and checked for grammar.
- References are in the correct format for this journal.
- All references mentioned in the Reference list are cited in the text, and vice versa.
- Permission has been obtained for use of copyrighted material from other sources (including the internet).
As part of the submission process, authors are required to check their submission’s compliance with all of the following items, and submissions may be returned to authors that do not adhere to these guidelines.
- The manuscript has not been previously published whole or in part.
- The manuscript is not under consideration for publication elsewhere.
- The submission file is in Microsoft Word 2003 (.doc), Word 2007 (.docx) .
- At least 75% of the cited articles are from the last decade.
- Where available, URLs for the references have been provided.
- Where available DOIs for the references are provided at the end of each citation.
For all inquiries, please contact the JNRD Editorial Office at email@example.com
After the acceptance of an article by the Journal of Natural Resources and Development, authors will be asked to send us a Copyright Transfer Agreement. Acceptance of the agreement will ensure the widest possible dissemination of information.
The Copyright Transfer Agreement must be submitted as a signed scanned copy to firstname.lastname@example.org