Skip to main content

About Frontiers in Environmental Chemistry

Specialty chief editor

Scope

The Environmental Analytical Methods section is dedicated to publishing research focused on advancing the understanding of environmental processes through analytical methodologies.

Led by Dr. Armando Duarte from the University of Aveiro, the Environmental Analytical Methods section welcomes submissions in various domains of environmental chemistry, which contribute to the enhancement of knowledge in environmental protection and sustainable development.

Topics considered in the scope of this section include:

  • assessment of uncertainties in measurements with environmental significance
  • analytical methods for emerging environmental issues
  • analytical quality control and quality assurance
  • fit-for-purpose methods for key species in environmental matrices
  • methodologies for large data sets and extraction of environmentally relevant information
  • multidimensional analytical methods for complex environmental matrices
  • reference materials, method validation, and chemometrics in environmental analysis
  • sampling, sample processing, separation, analyte detection, and quantification
  • speciation analysis and related analytical issues in environmental chemistry

Submissions should provide detailed, in-depth knowledge about the analytical methodologies and their application in understanding environmental processes.

In particular, the section welcomes submissions which support and advance the understanding of environmental processes, environmental protection, and sustainable development (SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation, SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities, SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production, SDG 13: Climate Action, SDG 14: Life Below Water, and SDG 15: Life on Land).

This multidisciplinary section is at the forefront of disseminating and communicating cutting-edge scientific knowledge and impactful discoveries in the field of environmental chemistry to researchers, industry, policymakers, and the public worldwide.

Frontiers in Environmental Chemistry is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics.

Facts

  • Short name

    Front. Environ. Chem.

  • Abbreviation

    fenvc

  • Electronic ISSN

    2673-4486

  • Indexed in

    Google Scholar, DOAJ, CrossRef, CLOCKSS, OpenAIRE, Web of Science Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI) , Scopus

  • Impact

    1.9 Impact Factor

    3.8 CiteScore

Submission

Environmental Analytical Methods welcomes submissions of the following article types: Brief Research Report, Correction, Data Report, Editorial, Methods, Mini Review, Opinion, Original Research, Perspective, Review, Systematic Review, Technology and Code.

All manuscripts must be submitted directly to the section Environmental Analytical Methods, where they are peer-reviewed by the Associate and Review Editors of the specialty section.

Open access statement

Open access logo

Frontiers' philosophy is that all research is for the benefit of humankind. Research is the product of an investment by society and therefore its fruits should be returned to all people without borders or discrimination, serving society universally and in a transparent fashion.

That is why Frontiers provides online free and open access to all of its research publications. For more information on open access click here.

Open access funder and institutional mandates

Frontiers is fully compliant with open access mandates, by publishing its articles under the Creative Commons Attribution licence (CC-BY). Funder mandates such as those by the Wellcome Trust (UK), National Institutes of Health (USA) and the Australian Research Council (Australia) are fully compatible with publishing in Frontiers. Authors retain copyright of their work and can deposit their publication in any repository. The work can be freely shared and adapted provided that appropriate credit is given and any changes specified.

Eligible for fee support?

If your institution is partnered with us you can benefit from full or partial support for article processing charges (APCs) on manuscripts you submit.

Learn moreDiscover benefits for researchers


If you want to benefit from support to publish open access, recommend our institutional partnerships program to your librarian.

Recommend program

Quality

Each article we publish is of the highest quality, thanks to collaboration between authors, editors and reviewers, who include many of the world's best scientists and scholars. We understand the potential impact of published research both on future research and on society and do not support superficial review, light review or no-review publishing models. Research must be certified by peers before entering a stream of knowledge that may eventually reach the public and shape society.

We use the single anonymized peer review model:

  • The reviewers' identities are not made visible to the author

  • The authors' identities are visible to the reviewer

  • Reviewer and the author identities are visible to the decision-making editor.

Reviewers interact with the handling editor and the authors. Editor and reviewer names and affiliations are published on all Frontiers' articles.

Frontiers applies the most rigorous and unbiased reviews, established in the high standards of our review system. Only the top certified research, evaluated objectively through quantitative online article level metrics, is disseminated to increasingly wider communities as it gradually climbs the tiers of our tiering system from specialized expert readership towards public understanding.

We have a number of procedures in place to support and ensure the quality of the research articles that are published:

    • Editorial board quality

      • Only leading experts and established members of the research community are appointed to Frontiers' editorial boards. Chief editors, associate editors and community reviewers are listed with their names and affiliations on the journal pages and are encouraged to publicly list their publication credentials.

    • Associate editor assignment quality

      • Associate editors oversee the peer review and take the final acceptance decision on manuscripts. Editorial decision power is distributed in Frontiers, because we believe that many experts within a community should be able to shape the direction of science for the benefit of society.

      • Submitting authors can choose a preferred associate editor to handle their manuscript, because they can judge well who would be an appropriate expert in editing their manuscript. There is no guarantee for this preference of choice, Associate Editors can decline invitations any time, and the handling editor can also be over-ridden by the chief editor before they are invited to edit the article or at any other stage.

      • Associate editors are mandated to only accept to edit a manuscript if they have no conflicts of interest (as stated here and in their review invitation and assignment emails).

      • If it becomes clear that the associate editor has a conflict of interest or is unable to perform the peer review adequately, a new associate editor can be assigned to the manuscript by the chief editor, who has full control to intervene in the peer review process at any time.

      • The associate Eeditor initially checks that the article meets basic quality standards and has no obvious objective errors.

    • Reviewer assignment quality

      • The associate editor can then personally choose and invite the most appropriate reviewers to handle the peer review, including community reviewers or external reviewers.

      • The associate editor is aided in this by our review forum software and interface, which suggests the most relevant community reviewers based on a match between their expertise and the topic of the manuscript. Associate editors can however choose any reviewer they deem adequate.

      • After a certain time frame and if no reviewers have in the meantime been assigned to the manuscript, Frontiers' platform automatically invites the most appropriate community reviewers based on constantly updated and improved algorithms that match reviewer expertise with the submitted manuscript.

      • Community reviewers and external reviewers are mandated to only accept to review a manuscript if they have no conflicts of interest (as stated here and in their review invitation and assignment emails).

      • Frontiers' algorithms are constantly fine-tuned to match community reviewers with manuscripts, and additional checks are being coded into the platform, for example regarding conflicts of interest.

      • If it becomes clear that a particular reviewer has a conflict of interest or is unable to perform the peer review adequately, they will be replaced with an alternative reviewer by the associate editor or chief editor, who will be alerted and has full control to intervene into the peer review at any time.

    • Independent review stage quality

      • In the independent review stage the assigned reviewers perform an in-depth review of the article independently of each other to safeguard complete freedom of opinion.

      • The reviewers are aided by an online standardized review questionnaire – adopted to article types – with the goal to facilitate rigorous evaluation according to objective criteria and our review guidelines.

    • Interactive review stage quality

      • The associate editor assesses the reviews and activates the interactive review – informing the authors of the extent of revisions that are required to address the reviewers’ comments, and starting the interactive discussion forum where authors and also the reviewers get full access to all review reports.

      • Manuscript and review quality at this stage are enhanced by allowing authors and reviewers to discuss directly with each other in real-time until they reach consensus and a final version of the manuscript is endorsed by the reviewers.

      • Reviewer identity is protected at this stage to safeguard complete freedom of opinion.

      • Reviewers can recommend rejection at this stage if their requests to correct objective errors are not being met by the authors or if they deem the article overall of insufficient quality.

      • Should a dispute arise, authors or reviewers can trigger an arbitration and will alert the associate editor, who can assign more reviewers and/or bring the dispute to the attention of the chief editor. The associate editor can also weigh in on the discussion and is asked to mediate the process to ensure a constructive revision stage.

    • Decision stage quality

      • The decision to accept an article needs to be unanimous amongst all reviewers and the handling associate editor.

      • The names of the associate editor and reviewers are disclosed on published articles to encourage in depth and rigorous reviews, acknowledge work well done on the article and to bring transparency and accountability into peer review.

      • Associate editors can recommend the rejection of an article to the chief editor, who needs to check that the authors’ rights have been upheld during the peer-review process, and who can then ultimately reject the article if it is of insufficient quality, has objective errors or if the authors were unreasonably unwilling to address the points raised during the review.

      • Chief editors can at any stage of the peer review step in to comment on the review process, change assigned editors, assign themselves as a reviewer and even as the handling editor for the manuscript, and therefore have full authority and all the mechanisms to act independently in their online editorial office to ensure quality.

    • Safeguards against financial conflicts of interest

      • Only leading researchers acting as associate editors, who are not part of Frontiers' staff, can make acceptance decisions based on reviews performed by external experts acting as community reviewers or reviewers. None have a financial incentive to accept articles, i.e. they are not paid for their role as associate editor or community reviewer, and any award scheme is not linked to acceptances of manuscripts.

      • Chief editors receive an honorarium if their specialty section or field reaches certain submission levels. However, this honorarium is based on the total number of submitted articles during a calendar year, and not the number of accepted articles. Therefore they also have no financial incentive to accept manuscripts.

    • Post-publication stage quality

      • The Frontiers platform enables post-publication commenting and discussions on papers and hence the possibility to critically evaluate articles even after the peer-review process.

      • Frontiers has a community retraction protocol in place to retract papers where serious concerns have been raised and validated by the community that warrant retraction, including ethical concerns, honest errors or scientific misconduct.