Journal Policy

1. Journal Philosophy and Scope

Journal Philosophy

POMIST seeks to advance scientific knowledge and technological innovation addressing contemporary environmental pollution challenges. The journal promotes research that moves beyond pollution identification toward practical, scientifically rigorous, and sustainable solutions.

Particular emphasis is placed on research connecting pollution prevention, mitigation, treatment, environmental remediation, resource recovery, cleaner production, circular economy, environmental monitoring, and sustainable technology.

Scope and Relevance

Relevant areas include water and wastewater treatment, air pollution and emission control, solid and hazardous waste management, soil and groundwater remediation, marine pollution, microplastics, emerging contaminants, environmental biotechnology, sustainable materials, waste valorization, environmental sensing, environmental modelling, artificial intelligence, life-cycle assessment, cleaner production, industrial ecology, and sustainable technological systems.

Manuscripts must demonstrate meaningful relevance to pollution mitigation or sustainable technology. Studies that only describe pollution levels or environmental conditions without a substantial scientific, technological, mitigation, remediation, management, or methodological contribution may be considered outside the journal's primary scope.

2. Submission Eligibility

Who Can Submit?

POMIST welcomes manuscripts from researchers, academics, engineers, environmental scientists, postgraduate researchers, industry professionals, government researchers, policymakers, consultants, and practitioners whose research falls within the journal's aims and scope.

Manuscripts may originate from universities, research institutes, government agencies, environmental organizations, industries, laboratories, independent research groups, or interdisciplinary collaborations.

Equal Consideration

Manuscripts are considered on the basis of scholarly merit, originality, methodological quality, relevance, ethical integrity, and contribution to knowledge.

Nationality, geographical location, institutional affiliation, academic seniority, gender, personal beliefs, or financial status shall not determine whether a manuscript is considered for publication.

3. General Submission Rules

Originality

Manuscripts must represent original scholarly work. Authors are responsible for ensuring that text, ideas, equations, datasets, figures, photographs, illustrations, maps, software, models, and other externally derived materials are appropriately acknowledged and cited.

Concurrent Submission

A manuscript submitted to POMIST must not be simultaneously under consideration by another journal.

Authors should disclose closely related conference papers, preprints, technical reports, theses, datasets, or previous publications that substantially overlap with the submission.

Authorship

Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made substantial scholarly contributions to the research. All listed authors must approve the submitted manuscript and agree to be accountable for their contributions.

Guest, honorary, gift, purchased, and ghost authorship are not acceptable.

Conflict of Interest

Authors must disclose financial, institutional, professional, commercial, or personal relationships that could reasonably influence or appear to influence the research and its interpretation.

Funding Disclosure

Research grants, industry sponsorship, institutional funding, laboratory support, equipment support, and other relevant sources of financial assistance should be clearly acknowledged.

Generative Artificial Intelligence

Artificial intelligence systems cannot be listed as authors. Human authors remain fully responsible for the originality, accuracy, integrity, references, data, calculations, environmental claims, interpretations, and conclusions of all submitted content.

Substantive use of generative AI for writing, data processing, coding, analysis, visualization, or image generation should be transparently disclosed where applicable.

4. Manuscript Preparation

Formatting

Manuscripts should follow the current POMIST Author Guidelines and manuscript template. Authors should ensure consistency in headings, terminology, abbreviations, units, references, tables, figures, and scientific notation.

Research Reporting

Research methods must be described with sufficient detail to permit meaningful scholarly assessment and, where reasonably possible, reproduction of the study.

Authors should clearly report research objectives, experimental or computational procedures, sampling methods, analytical methods, assumptions, quality-control procedures, uncertainty, limitations, and validation.

Environmental Treatment Studies

Studies evaluating treatment or remediation technologies should clearly identify relevant operating conditions, contaminant concentrations, treatment duration, material properties, removal or conversion efficiencies, analytical procedures, controls, replication, and relevant performance indicators.

Computational Studies

Environmental modelling, numerical simulation, machine-learning, artificial-intelligence, optimization, or data-driven studies should provide sufficient information concerning datasets, assumptions, model architecture, parameters, validation, performance metrics, uncertainty, and limitations.

Figures and Data

Figures, photographs, microscopy images, maps, satellite imagery, graphs, simulation outputs, and tables must accurately represent the underlying research.

Manipulation that obscures, removes, introduces, or misrepresents scientifically relevant information is prohibited.

5. Peer Review Process

Initial Editorial Screening

Every manuscript is initially evaluated by the editorial team to assess its relevance to the journal's aims and scope, basic scholarly quality, originality, manuscript preparation, and compliance with research and publication ethics.

Double-Anonymous Peer Review

Manuscripts considered suitable for external review normally undergo a double-anonymous peer-review process, in which the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other during peer review.

Reviewer Selection

Reviewers are selected based on relevant subject expertise, scholarly experience, independence, and absence of significant conflicts of interest.

External reviewers are expected to provide objective, constructive, confidential, and evidence-based assessments.

Review Criteria

Manuscripts may be evaluated according to:

• Originality and scientific contribution;
• Relevance to pollution mitigation and sustainable technology;
• Methodological rigor;
• Quality and transparency of data;
• Appropriateness of analytical methods;
• Validation and reproducibility;
• Environmental and practical significance;
• Quality of interpretation and discussion;
• Research integrity and ethical compliance; and
• Clarity of presentation.

Editorial Decisions

Following editorial evaluation and peer review, decisions may include: Accept Submission, Revisions Required, Resubmit for Review, or Decline Submission.

Reviewer recommendations inform the editorial decision, but the final responsibility for the decision remains with the journal's authorized editor.

Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions must not be influenced by author fees, institutional affiliation, commercial sponsorship, personal relationships, or other interests unrelated to scholarly merit.

6. Desk Rejection Policy

Editorial Screening

The editorial team may decline a manuscript before external peer review when the submission does not satisfy the journal's scope, scholarly expectations, ethical requirements, or minimum manuscript standards.

Grounds for Desk Rejection

A manuscript may be declined during initial screening for reasons including, but not limited to:

• The manuscript falls outside the aims and scope of POMIST.
• The study is primarily descriptive and provides insufficient mitigation, technological, methodological, or sustainability contribution.
• The manuscript lacks sufficient originality.
• The research objective or scientific contribution is insufficiently defined.
• The methodology contains fundamental weaknesses.
• Treatment or remediation performance is inadequately validated.
• Statistical or analytical methods are inappropriate.
• The manuscript contains significant ethical or research-integrity concerns.
• Plagiarism or substantial redundant publication is identified.
• The manuscript does not meet minimum academic or technical presentation standards.
• The language prevents meaningful scholarly evaluation.

Desk rejection does not necessarily indicate research misconduct. It may indicate that the manuscript does not sufficiently align with the journal's editorial priorities or scientific scope.

7. Plagiarism and Similarity Policy

Similarity Screening

Manuscripts submitted to POMIST may be screened using recognized similarity-detection software during editorial evaluation or at another stage of the publication process.

Interpretation of Similarity

Similarity percentages are not interpreted as an automatic measure of plagiarism. Editors consider the nature, location, extent, context, originality, and attribution of matching material before reaching an editorial conclusion.

Unacceptable Practices

Unacceptable practices may include:

• Direct plagiarism;
• Inappropriate or misleading paraphrasing;
• Substantial unattributed reuse;
• Duplicate or redundant publication;
• Excessive self-reuse without appropriate citation;
• Unauthorized reuse of figures, photographs, or datasets;
• Fabricated citations; and
• Misleading presentation of previously published material.

Editorial Action

Depending on the seriousness of the issue, the journal may request clarification or revision, decline the manuscript, issue a correction, publish an expression of concern, or retract a published article where appropriate.

8. Research Data and Reproducibility

Research Data

Authors should retain the original data, laboratory records, analytical results, computational files, statistical analyses, environmental measurements, photographs, and supporting documentation necessary to substantiate the reported findings.

Data Availability

Where legally, ethically, commercially, and technically appropriate, authors are encouraged to make supporting research data available through recognized repositories or supplementary materials.

Environmental Data

Data concerning pollutant concentrations, water quality, emissions, soil contamination, environmental monitoring, treatment performance, or ecosystem conditions should be accurately reported with relevant units, analytical methods, detection limits, quality control, and uncertainty where applicable.

Computational Reproducibility

Modelling, artificial-intelligence, machine-learning, optimization, or simulation studies should describe the datasets, assumptions, parameters, algorithms, training procedures, validation methods, and performance metrics necessary for meaningful scientific evaluation.

Data Requests

Editors may request supporting data or documentation when necessary to evaluate the validity, reproducibility, or integrity of submitted or published research.

9. Environmental Research Policy

Environmental Responsibility

Research should be designed and conducted in ways that minimize unnecessary environmental harm. Experimental and field activities should consider their potential impact on air, water, soil, ecosystems, biodiversity, and communities.

Field Research

Field sampling should be undertaken using appropriate scientific and quality-control procedures. Authors should clearly describe sampling locations, methods, frequency, sample preservation, analytical procedures, and relevant environmental conditions.

Permits

Research undertaken in protected areas, conservation zones, marine environments, industrial facilities, waste-management sites, or other regulated locations should obtain appropriate authorization where required.

Laboratory and Chemical Safety

Research involving toxic chemicals, hazardous contaminants, industrial wastes, biological materials, nanomaterials, or other hazardous substances should follow appropriate handling, storage, laboratory, and disposal requirements.

Sustainability Claims

Claims such as sustainable, green, eco-friendly, zero-waste, low-carbon, environmentally friendly, or non-toxic must be scientifically supported and should not be used merely as promotional descriptions.

Life Cycle Perspective

Authors claiming improved environmental sustainability are encouraged to consider potential trade-offs, resource consumption, energy requirements, waste generation, secondary pollutants, and relevant life-cycle impacts.

10. Withdrawal Policy

Withdrawal Request

Authors wishing to withdraw a manuscript should submit a formal request to the editorial office stating the manuscript title, submission identification number, corresponding author, and reason for withdrawal.

The request should be submitted by the corresponding author with the knowledge and agreement of all co-authors.

During Peer Review

Authors may request withdrawal while a manuscript is under editorial evaluation, peer review, or revision. The editorial office may seek confirmation where necessary to ensure that all authors agree.

After Acceptance

Withdrawal after formal acceptance should occur only under exceptional circumstances, as substantial editorial, reviewer, and production resources may already have been committed.

Ethical Concerns

Withdrawal does not prevent the journal from investigating credible concerns regarding plagiarism, authorship disputes, duplicate publication, data integrity, or other ethical matters.

11. Complaints and Appeals

Editorial Appeals

Authors may appeal an editorial decision when they believe that a significant factual, procedural, methodological, or scholarly issue was overlooked.

Appeals should identify the manuscript, specify the decision being challenged, and provide a concise evidence-based explanation.

Disagreement with a reviewer or editorial judgment alone does not automatically constitute sufficient grounds for reconsideration.

Independent Consideration

Where practicable, an appeal may be evaluated by an editor who was not primarily responsible for the original decision.

Complaints

Authors, reviewers, readers, and other stakeholders may raise concerns regarding peer review, editorial conduct, publication ethics, conflicts of interest, published content, or other aspects of the journal.

Complaints should be submitted respectfully, with sufficient information and supporting evidence to permit appropriate evaluation.

Research-Integrity Concerns

Allegations concerning fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, authorship disputes, citation manipulation, peer-review manipulation, or other misconduct may require additional documentation and, where appropriate, communication with relevant institutions or other responsible parties.

12. Post-Publication Policy

Corrections

When an error affects part of a published article but does not invalidate its principal findings, the journal may issue a correction or another appropriate editorial notice.

Expressions of Concern

An expression of concern may be issued when credible questions arise regarding the reliability or integrity of a publication but the available evidence is insufficient for a final determination.

Retractions

An article may be retracted when there is clear evidence that its findings are unreliable because of serious error, fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, unethical research, duplicate publication, manipulated peer review, or another serious breach of research or publication integrity.

Version of Record

Post-publication notices should remain clearly linked to the original article so that readers can understand the current status and publication history of the scholarly record.

Post-Publication Discussion

The journal welcomes responsible scholarly communication concerning published research. Credible concerns regarding errors, interpretation, reproducibility, or research integrity may be submitted to the editorial office for consideration.