About the Journal

Focus and Scope

After observing the guiding axes, it is important to read the Guidelines for Authors in full.

The main guiding axes are:

• Daily Life and Environment
  A special section for high-relevance scientific-informational publications for the relevant time period.

• Environment and Social Sciences

1. Agroecology and Family Farming;
2. Traditional Communities and Ethnoscience;
3. Landscape, Culture, and Environment;
4. Environmental Education and Epistemology;
5. Social Movements and the Society/Nature Relationship;
6. Tourism, Sustainability, and Protected Areas.

• Technologies and Environmental Studies

7. Ecology, Biodiversity, and their correlates;
8. Geoprocessing, Remote Sensing, and Modeling applied to the Environment;
9. New Technologies/Alternative Sustainable Technologies;
10. Biochemistry and Environmental Sanitation;
11. Pollution, Climate Change, and Water Resources;
12. Precision Agriculture, Agroindustry, and their derivatives;
13. Soils, Minerals, and Rocks.

• Planning and Environment

14. Conservation and Preservation of Environmental Heritage;
15. Environmental Law and Ecological Law;
16. Environmental Governance, Management, Indicators, and Environmental Policies;
17. Health and Environment;
18. Ecological Economics, Ecosystem Services, and their Processes;
19. Urban Planning, Development, and City Issues.

---

Peer Review Process

Peer Review

This journal operates a double-anonymized (double-blind) review process. All submissions are initially evaluated by the Editor for suitability for the journal.

Articles deemed suitable are normally sent to a minimum of two independent specialist reviewers to assess the scientific quality of the article.

The Editor is responsible for the final decision on whether to accept or reject articles. The Editor's decision is final. Editors are not involved in decisions about articles that they themselves have written, that were written by family members or colleagues, or that relate to products or services in which the editor has an interest.

Any submission is subject to all of the journal's usual procedures, with peer review handled independently of the relevant editor and their research groups.

In addition, RVBMA uses double-anonymized review, meaning that the identities of the authors are hidden from reviewers and vice versa. For this reason, author information may not be submitted together with the article.

During peer review, reviewers may securely access the manuscript through our online system while the anonymity of both reviewers and the manuscript's authors is preserved. This procedure is called Double-Blind Peer Review, since no author information is available during the document review.

At the submission stage, authors may name a limited number of scientists who should not review the article. Excluded scientists must be identified by name. Authors may also suggest potential reviewers; these suggestions are often useful but are not always followed.

If no potential reviewers are recommended, we will use the reviewers in our database and match their research area to the subject of the manuscript in question.

Reviewers' recommendations may be (Reject – Out of Scope – Recommend for Another Journal – Revisions Needed – Accept).

Peer Review Process

(1) Manuscript Submission

Submitted articles must comply with the Author Guidelines, also available in the Guide for Authors.

(2) Initial Evaluation Procedures

Once submitted, your manuscript will be assigned to the Editor. Manuscripts that fall within scope and comply with the journal's editorial policies (Author Guidelines) will be assigned to the Section Editors, who will invite external reviewers for a double-blind evaluation; otherwise, the submission will be Declined and Archived. The journal applies ethical criteria regarding the plagiarism-checking process.

At this stage, the following are examined:

• scope
• originality
• structure
• ethics
• documents
• similarity

(3) Section Editors

Once the initial procedure has been completed, manuscripts are assigned to the Section Editors. Section Editors are researchers in the specific subject area, with the expertise and knowledge to send the research to external reviewers who are within the article's scope, thereby contributing important considerations to the submitted document. The Section Editor will assign two or more external reviewers to analyze the submitted document. The review will follow the double-blind peer review policy.

(4) Double-Blind Peer Review (External Reviewers)

During peer review, reviewers may securely access the manuscript through our online system while the anonymity of both reviewers and the manuscript's authors is preserved. This procedure is called Double-Blind Peer Review, since no author information is available during the document review.

THE REFERENCE DOCUMENT FOR REVIEWERS TO DECIDE ON THE RESEARCH IS AVAILABLE THROUGH THIS LINK: EVALUATION FORM – DOCUMENT FOR JOURNAL REVIEWERS

At the submission stage, authors may name a limited number of scientists who should not review the article. Excluded scientists must be identified by name. Authors may also suggest potential reviewers; these suggestions are often useful but are not always followed. If no potential reviewers are recommended, we will use the reviewers in our database and match their research area to the subject of the manuscript in question.

Reviewers' recommendations may be (Reject – Out of Scope – Recommend for Another Journal – Revisions Needed – Accept).

(5) Decisions After Review

After evaluating the manuscript and the reviewers' reports, the assigned Section Editor will make one of the following decisions:

Accepted Where a minor revision is requested, in which the authors revise their manuscript to address specific concerns.

Revisions Needed Where a major revision is requested, in which the authors revise their manuscript to address significant concerns and possibly undertake additional work. The revised manuscript must be submitted through the original submission link, not as a new manuscript. The revision must also be accompanied by a point-by-point response to the reviewers, explaining how the manuscript was changed. Our goal is for accepted manuscripts to go through a new round of review before being accepted for publication, so please make sure that all issues raised in the first review recommendation have been addressed. Articles with the editorial decision "Revisions Needed" are not accepted, and may be rejected if they fail to comply with, or apply, any procedure that violates the ethical guidelines.

New Rounds of Evaluation If necessary, there may be new rounds of evaluation to re-examine changes made, or to request and recommend further changes. Although this makes the process slower, we understand that this procedure supports sound decision-making and scientific improvement. There may be as many rounds of article re-evaluation as necessary.

Rejected The article is declined and the reasons are explained. It is possible to resubmit the same manuscript to the journal at a later date.

(6) Final Submission and Acceptance

Once the article has an "Accepted" decision and all editorial issues have been resolved, your work will be formally accepted for publication. The receipt date shown on the article will be the date on which the original article passed our standard quality-control checks, based on the journal's submission criteria. The acceptance date shown on the article will be the date on which the Editorial Board Member sent the email indicating acceptance.

After acceptance, proofs of your manuscript are sent to the authors, but only changes to the title, the author list, or scientific errors are permitted. All corrections will be checked by the layout team. Other matters regarding the size of Figures, Tables, and Equations may also be adjusted in order to improve the manuscript's visualization.

(7) Appeals

Authors may ask the Editorial Board to reconsider a rejection decision. These are treated as appeals, which, as a matter of policy, must take second priority relative to the journal's workload. In practice, this means that decisions on appeals may take a long time to be answered. Final decisions on appeals will be made by the Editorial Board Member handling the article.

About Article Rejection

ABOUT ARTICLE REJECTION (RESUBMISSION TIME):

A) As stated in the basic Author Guidelines, we emphasize that files that do not follow the journal's template (no journal header, numerous inadequate formatting standards, etc.) will not be evaluated. In this case, the article falls under point "B" and may only be resubmitted after an interval of 4 months.

B) ARTICLES REJECTED BY THE JOURNAL DUE TO MISSING DOCUMENTS MAY BE RESUBMITTED AFTER AN INTERVAL OF 3 MONTHS.

C) ARTICLES REJECTED BY THE JOURNAL AT THE REVIEWERS' REQUEST MAY BE RESUBMITTED AFTER AN INTERVAL OF 5 MONTHS.

D) ARTICLES REJECTED BY THE JOURNAL AT THE REVIEWERS' REQUEST THAT WERE RECOMMENDED FOR A PARTNER JOURNAL MAY BE RESUBMITTED AFTER AN INTERVAL OF 3 MONTHS (CORRECTED).

E) ARTICLES WITH AN EDITORIAL DECISION APPLIED THAT ARE NOT RESUBMITTED IN THE REQUESTED NEW VERSION, OR FOR WHICH THE CORRESPONDING AUTHOR'S ABSENCE HAS NOT BEEN JUSTIFIED, WILL BE REJECTED WITHIN AN INTERVAL OF 1 MONTH (AND MAY BE RESUBMITTED AFTER 6 MONTHS — WHEN RESUBMITTING, PLEASE STATE THE PREVIOUS SUBMISSION NUMBER IN THE AUTHOR COMMENTS).

F) ARTICLES FALLING UNDER EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES AND REJECTED WILL NO LONGER BE ELIGIBLE FOR SUBMISSION TO RVBMA.

Click here to return to the home page ||| Click here to return to the Guide for Authors

Periodicity

The journal follows a quadrimesterly (every four months) publication schedule. That is, the journal publishes three (3) editions per year. The respective editions cover the following months:

1. January/February/March/April
2. May/June/July/August
3. September/October/November/December

Occasional special editions may be published to honor academic events.

---

Open Access Policy

This journal provides public access to all its content, following the principle that offering free access to research promotes greater global knowledge exchange. Such access is associated with increased reading and citation of an author’s work. For more information on this approach, visit the Public Knowledge Project, a project that developed this system to enhance the academic and public quality of research by distributing OJS and other software supporting the public access publishing system for academic resources.

---

Open Access Declaration

Open Access is a broad international academic movement that seeks free and open online access to academic information, such as publications and data. When anyone can read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or use information for education or other purposes within legal agreements, the publication is called "open access," as there are no technical or financial barriers.

Open access is also a term for a new business model for academic publishing that makes research information available to readers at no cost. This contrasts with the subscription model, where readers access academic information, often through a library, by paying a subscription fee.

This movement offers several advantages:

• Increased visibility and use of academic research results.
• More people can read academic research results, including those who would otherwise not have access due to the inability to afford expensive journal subscriptions.
• New ideas can be disseminated more quickly and widely, triggering new research studies and serving as a catalyst for knowledge.
• Companies also benefit from broader access to the latest scientific ideas, which they can build upon.
• Since open access implies broader reuse, recent knowledge can be immediately applied in education.

Criticism: In science and medicine especially, researchers are ranked based on their ability to publish in journals with a high impact factor. However, it takes time for new journals—both traditional and open access—to acquire an impact factor. Only then do they become attractive to researchers. The number of fully open-access, high-quality journals varies greatly across disciplines. Some fields have very few or insufficient options. Researchers may also receive spam from open-access journals of often questionable quality, which request significant financial contributions under the guise of publication offers.

The principles of open access are outlined in the Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities (2003). This declaration has been signed by many international academic research organizations, including all Dutch universities and research institutions.

Open Science includes open access to academic publications, research data, learning tools, software, etc. Regarding research data, we refer to open data. Open data offers many benefits for scholarship, such as:

• Increasing the visibility of research results.
• Making research results citable through digital object identifiers (DOIs).
• Encouraging the reuse of data for new research questions and verification purposes.

It is worth emphasizing once again that the principles of open access are outlined in the Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities (2003). The document can be accessed at: Berlin Declaration. The Portuguese version can be viewed at: Berlin Declaration (Portuguese).

The Brazilian Journal of Environment aligns with the principles of the Open Access Declaration.

 

Anti-Plagiarism Guidelines

Before initiating the Peer Review process, the Brazilian Journal of Environment employs a plagiarism screening system consisting of the following steps:

1. The author submits the article to the journal.

2. The editor uses the CopySpider software (https://copyspider.com.br/main/), and if the manuscript falls within the accepted percentage range for publication (up to 3%), it proceeds to the evaluation process.

3. The editor uses Turnitin Similarity software, and if the manuscript meets the software's recommended acceptable specifications, it will proceed to the evaluation process.

4. The Peer Review process is initiated, during which reviewers are recommended to use, in addition to CopySpider, other anti-plagiarism software for assessment.

5. If any inconsistencies in the manuscript related to academic plagiarism or self-plagiarism are identified during the evaluation process, the evaluation form includes a specific section for this matter. If filled out negatively, the manuscript will be entirely rejected.

[Click here to return to the homepage] ||| [Click here to return to the Author's Guide]

---

Exceptional Situations: Procedures

EXCEPTIONAL SITUATIONS (EXCEPTIONAL PROCEDURES)

These procedures are of an exceptional nature but may arise. Below is a step-by-step guide on how the journal will handle each exceptional case:

1. What the journal will do if it suspects redundant (duplicate) publication:

   • Suspicion of redundant publication in a submitted manuscript:

2. What the journal will do if it suspects redundant (duplicate) publication:

   • Suspicion of redundant publication in a published manuscript:

3. What the journal will do if it suspects academic plagiarism in submitted works:

   • Suspicion of plagiarism in a submitted manuscript:

4. What the journal will do if it suspects plagiarism in a published manuscript:

   • Suspicion of plagiarism in a published manuscript:

5. What the journal will do if it suspects fabricated (non-real) data:

   • Suspicion of fabricated data in a submitted manuscript:

6. What the journal will do if it suspects fabricated data in published articles:

   • Suspicion of fabricated data in a published manuscript:

7. Changes in authorship:

   • Corresponding author requests addition/removal of an extra author before publication:

8. Changes in authorship:

   • Request for addition/removal of an extra author after publication:

---

Note: These points align with the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) best practices policy. The document has been modified and translated based on COPE's recommendations (see link).

 

Procedures Involving Humans and Animals (Ethics Committee)

The Brazilian Journal of Environment takes great care with procedures involving animals and humans in research. For this reason, the Supplementary Letter/Document requires and verifies whether any manipulation in research with humans or animals has occurred.

If the work involves chemicals, procedures, or equipment that pose unusual risks inherent to their use, the author must clearly identify them in the manuscript. The recommended section for this notice is Methodology (Materials and Methods).

If the work involves the use of animals or humans, the author must ensure that the manuscript contains a statement confirming that all procedures were conducted in accordance with relevant institutional laws and guidelines and were approved by the appropriate institutional committees.

The Supplementary Letter includes a declaration that authors confirm, both in the manuscript and externally, that informed consent was obtained for experimentation involving humans. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be respected. Ethical Committee codifications are also recommended to be detailed in the Methodology (Materials and Methods) section.

For research involving humans and animals, the author must ensure that the work described was conducted in accordance with the Brazilian Code of Ethics, provided by the Plataforma Brasil - National Health Council, or the councils established by universities and institutes, which adhere to Brazilian and international ethical guidelines for research involving humans.

Appropriate consents, permissions, and releases must be obtained when an author wishes to include case details or other personal information or images of patients or any other individuals in a publication. Even with consents, the journal considers it entirely relevant for the Ethics Committee on Research to provide approval for the study. Such support reinforces best practices within the scientific community.

It is strongly recommended that, in addition to the approval codes from National Ethics Committees or university and institute councils (federal or private), the Methodology (Materials and Methods) section includes explanations about consent, participant anonymity, measures to safeguard participants, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and any other responsibilities pertinent to specific situations. A subsection within the Methodology may be included if necessary to provide pertinent and transparent information regarding human and animal research processes.

In addition to numbering the research approval in Plataforma Brasil, written consents (e.g., Informed Consent Form - TCLE) must be retained by the author, and copies of these consents or evidence of their acquisition must be provided to the Brazilian Journal of Environment upon request.

The procedures are aligned with the Brazilian Ethics Committee, observed and recommended via Plataforma Brasil (https://www.gov.br/conselho-nacional-de-saude/pt-br/camaras-tecnicas-e -comissoes/conep/plataforma-brasil) and its specific documentation (https://www.gov.br/conselho-nacional-de-saude/pt-br/camaras-tecnicas-e-comissoes/conep/plataforma-brasil/manuais/manual-de-cep-versao-3.3).

Research Incentive Policy (Waiver Policy)

To encourage research in environments where data collection is difficult, whether remote or collected in Brazil, the Brazilian Journal of Environment will give priority to research conducted in the Northeast, North, and Central-West regions, especially in the most inland territories. Outside Brazil, priority will be given to Portuguese-speaking countries.

Authors who are unable to pay the APC may request a partial waiver before acceptance. Requests are assessed independently of editorial decisions and have no influence on peer review or acceptanc

---

On Article Rejections

ABOUT ARTICLE REJECTIONS (RESUBMISSION TIME):

A) As stated in the basic guidelines for authors, files that do not conform to the journal's format (e.g., missing journal header, significant formatting errors, etc.) will not be evaluated. In this case, the manuscript will fall under point B and can only be resubmitted after a 4-month interval.

B) ARTICLES REJECTED DUE TO MISSING DOCUMENTS can be resubmitted after a 3-month interval.

C) ARTICLES REJECTED BASED ON REVIEWER REQUESTS can be resubmitted after a 5-month interval.

D) ARTICLES REJECTED BASED ON REVIEWER REQUESTS AND RECOMMENDED TO A PARTNER JOURNAL can be resubmitted after a 3-month interval (with corrections).

E) ARTICLES WITH EDITORIAL DECISIONS APPLIED, where no revised version was submitted or where the corresponding author failed to justify their absence, will be rejected and subject to a 1-month rejection period (resubmission allowed after 6 months). When resubmitting, the previous submission number must be included in the author's comments.

F) ARTICLES FALLING UNDER EXCEPTIONAL SITUATIONS THAT WERE REJECTED WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED FOR FUTURE SUBMISSIONS IN RVBMA.

---

Indexation and Research Portals

Indexations:

• SCOPUS [Elsevier]
• REDALYC (Scientific Information System of Open Access Journals)
• LATINDEX (DIRECTORY) (Regional Online Information System for Scientific Journals of Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain, and Portugal)
• Miguilim (Directory of Brazilian Scientific Electronic Journals)
• ERIHPLUS (European Reference Index for the Humanities and Social Sciences)
• MIAR (Information Matrix for the Analysis of Journals)
• CAPES Journals
• QUALIS CAPES
• AURA (Amelica.org)
• LatinREV (Latin American Journal Network)
• DIADORIM (Directory of editorial policies for Brazilian scientific journals)
• FATCAT!
• SUDOC (Agence bibliographique de l'enseignement supérieur)
• MIR@BEL (Mutualisation d'informations sur les revues et leurs accès dans les bases en ligne)
• ZDB (German Union Catalogue of Serials)
• SUMÁRIOS.ORG (Summaries of Brazilian Journals)
• LATINOAMERICANA.ORG (Latin American Journals)
• LET PUB (CHINA) - Scientific Data

---

Journal History

The journal was founded in April 2018 by Afonso Feitosa Reis Neto and Jadson Freire da Silva, with a multidisciplinary editorial board focused on Development and Environment. The creation of the journal emerged while the founders were pursuing their doctorates in the Graduate Program in Development and Environment at the Federal University of Pernambuco (PRODEMA/UFPE). Despite their different academic backgrounds (Law/Environmental Management and Geography/Administration), both agreed on the need for a journal dedicated to exploring all dimensions and interconnections of the environment (natural, artificial, cultural, and work-related). This initiative aimed to promote knowledge sharing across various educational levels (high school, undergraduate, and graduate), regardless of geographical location.

From the diverse perspectives necessary to understand the environment, the Brazilian Journal of Environment (RVBMA) was born. Its mission is to disseminate environmental research to society, providing broad visibility to those seeking to share their experiences and observations. The journal's values are grounded in the plurality of ideas, the dissemination of knowledge, and the appreciation of the environment. RVBMA strives to fulfill its role based on these principles, aiming to reach the widest possible audience interested in understanding the environmental context.

ISSN: 2595-4431