Peer review – rigorous, accountable and documented

IIED is committed to making sure its research outputs are of the highest standard. We want policymakers and practitioners to use our findings confidently and our funders to know their resources have been used effectively. To this end, our core evidence-based knowledge products are peer reviewed.

IIED’s evidence-based knowledge products are peer reviewed to ensure consistent quality standards (Photo: Chris Brody)

Our formal peer review process supports our ethics process and our research excellence framework to achieve top quality research that is informed and engaged for impact. It enables researchers to consider and learn from different expert perspectives both from within IIED and outside and contributes to research skills development.

The formal peer review procedure for our three core evidence-based knowledge products – research reports, country reports and issue papers – builds consistent quality standards across the institute. The procedure comes out of a nine-month internal consultation process.

It is a rigorous, accountable and documented ‘open and acknowledged’ review process, which while being robust, is pragmatic and recognises researchers’ many competing priorities.

IIED’s peer review process

  • A minimum of two reviewers is required, one of whom is external. Authors are encouraged to seek more reviewers, but this may not always be possible 
  • Comments and response in writing. Reviewers will share comments in writing, the author/s reflect on the comments, develop a written response and revise the paper accordingly 
  • Sign off The reviewers’ comments and the written response are shared with the line manager or series editor (where this is relevant) and the group director who signs off the proposed action. All  comments are kept on file in case of enquiries.
  • Open or attributed reviewing Reviewers will be formally acknowledged as reviewers in the final publication, unless they request otherwise. The reviewers’ names will be published if they agree; if they do not agree, this will be stated. 

For all other knowledge practice, researchers are encouraged to follow best practice guidelines, to support achieving the best outputs, in which we, our partners and all our many stakeholders can have confidence.