Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Motto: Translating Knowledge into Actions

Conservation Science publishes high quality research papers that provide novel solutions to the conservation problems. Although the journal subject focus is rather broad, the journal prioritizes contribution that discusses conservation problem at ecosystem level and uses multidisciplinary approach. Papers on specific taxa of plants and animals will be considered provided that they address critical conservation questions. Unlike other conservation related academic outlets, the journal emphasizes multidisciplinary perspectives in solving conservation problem of ecological nature.

The journal welcomes following papers: original article, short communication, reviews, perspective, essay and conservation note.  Conservation Science is intended for a wide range of international readership, including both academicians and practitioners in the conservation.

Why Conservation Science?

Our 2013 editorial “The new journal for conservationists worldwide”, Paudel et al. provide outline of journal of benefits of choosing conservation science as an outlet of publication. Some of them: 

  1. Open access: No subscription is required to read and download the papers.
  2. No publication subscription: Author(s) do (es) not have to pay article processing charge.
  3. Rapid publication: Fast peer review and accepted articles are published immediately
  4. Online: Article submission, peer review and publication through online journal manuscript central.  
  5. Research works are valued: Editors will encourage author(s) to revise manuscript rather than rejection provided that paper (i) follows publication ethics, (ii) falls within the Aims and Scope of the journal, (iii) uses a clear and scientifically justified data collection and analysis strategy.   


Section Policies

Original Articles

Original articles should be based on the original work reporting interdisciplinary investigation of conservation problem. It should not be more than 8000 words. The word count includes all parts of paper except figures and tables. The manuscript should be organized as Summary, Introduction, Materials and Methods, Results, Discussion, Conclusion and Conservation Implications, References, Biography. Section should be numbered. Summary of the manuscript should be no more than 300 words and organized in the following subheadings: Aim, Location, Materials and Methods, Key findings, Conservation Implications, and ending with a list of 4-8 keywords arranged in the alphabetical order.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Short Communication

Short communication provides a short but insightful research report on the conservation issues within 3500 words limit. It should be organized as Summary, Introduction, Materials and Methods, Results, Discussion, Conclusion and Conservation Implications, References and Biography.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed


Reviews provide a detailed account of up-to-date syntheses of topical issues. They often describe previous works and offer new insights to guide future research works. There is no a specific format for review articles but sections should be broken up “reader friendly” sub-heading at author’s discretion. Reviews should not exceed 12000 words (excluding figures and tables). A list of 4-6 keywords, excluding words used in the title, arranged in an alphabetical order and separated by semicolon, should be provided beneath the abstract.

The journal welcomes review articles on topical themes of conservation and/or status of nature conservation (e.g. state of environment) in the particular regions/countries.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed


Essay is an opinion article, based on evidence based valid arguments, on a topic of broad interest to the conservation community.   It should not be more than 2500 words. The abstract of the essay article should not exceed 250 words. There is no specific format of section in the essay article. Authors are advised to present sections at their own discretion.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Conservation Note

Conservation note is a unique article that brings components of popular article (e.g., magazine) and research article. The main aim of conservation note is to bridge gap in communication among researchers, policy makers and conservation practitioners. This is achieved by providing easily accessible and browse-through content on specific conservation issue while maintaining scientific rigor. The note extensively uses infographic design to make layout appealing. Prospective authors are advised to make a pre-submission enquiry with one page proposal at info@conservscience.org. Please include following information in the proposal: title, main conservation issues, key message, significance of message, and scientific relevance. Executive editor makes decision in consultation with editorial board. The accepted proposal will go through several rounds of revisions before publication. 

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed


Perspective article provides a forum for authors to discuss on topical issues of high interest to a wide audience. Such articles may be opinionated but should provide a balanced point of view. There is no a specific format for perspective article but sections should be broken up “reader friendly” sub-heading at author’s discretion.  Perspectives are usually between 2000 and 4000 words including abstract, main text and references. The abstract of the manuscript should not exceed 300 words.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Letter to Editor

Letters to the editor are written to draw attention of scientific community about conservation issues. Letters should be less than 1000 words.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

Conservation Science adopts a single blind peer review protocol. Peer review process includes:

  1. The corresponding author submits the paper to the journal via an online submission system.
  2. The journal editorial staff carefully reviews the compliance of the journal’s Author Guidelines.  Please note that quality of manuscript is not evaluated at this stage.
  3. The journal editorial staff may communicate with author for any clarification. The article is forwarded to Executive Editor (Editor-in-Chief).
  4. Executive Editor screens manuscript for quality and if deemed appropriate the article is assigned to the subject editor as a handling editor.
  5. The handling editor sends invitations to individuals he or she believes would be appropriate reviewers. Handling editor attempts to secure at least two review reports.
  6. The handling editor considers review reports before making an overall decision. If the reviews differ widely, the editor may invite the third reviewer so as to get an extra opinion before making a decision.
  7. The editor makes a decision and communicates with author via journal manuscript central with detail of comments. 
  8. If the article is sent back for a major revision, the handling editor provides constructive comments. The once revision is received, the handling editor evaluates revision and sent again for second round of review. If the minor revision is required, handling editor may make a final decision.
  9. Handling editor sends his/her comments along with reviewer reports to the executive editor. Executive editor reviews compliance of peer review guideline, and make a final decision.


Publication Frequency

Accepted manuscripted will be published online immediately.


Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.



This journal utilizes the LOCKSS system to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration. More...


Publication Ethics

Conservation Science (Conserv Sci) gives the top most priority to the publication ethics in scholarly research and publication. Authors, editors and reviewers are strongly encouraged to review our policy on “Publication Ethics and Malpractice” to ensure that they follow it during article publication cycle. Failing to maintain best practice guidelines may result in article retractions with an official notification to concerned authorities (e.g., donor agencies, home institution of editors, authors and reviewers). We are also prepared to publish clarifications, corrections and rebuttal statements, if any.

Editors at Conservation Science are committed to maintain a fair peer review process, which include, among others, maintaining anonymity and privacy of reviewers, preserving privacy of personal data of authors and reviewers and any unpublished information. Editors work closely with authors and reviewers to keep a high standard of articles in the journal. Editorial board (editor(s) and/or executive editor) reserve a full authority to reject/accept an article submitted to the journal. Any conflict of interest should be disclosed and be notified to executive editor.

Our reviewers are required to treat content of the paper confidentiality and provide an objective evaluation on scientific merit of the submitted manuscripts. Reviewers should review whether they are conversant with subject matter, and examine any conflict of interest in respect with research and the funding agencies.

Authors must declare that the manuscript as submitted has not been published or accepted for publication, nor is being considered for publication elsewhere, either in whole or substantial part. The work should conform to the legal requirements of the country where the work is carried out (e.g., national research guidelines, research permission etc). Authors should acknowledge all sources, avoid any form of plagiarism, and disclose any potential conflict of interest. The corresponding author is responsible for timely communication with all authors during whole period of article publication cycle. We strongly discourage ‘honorary authorship’. Detailed criteria to qualify an individual as an author are available by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE).

Authors are suggested to review following documents:

  1. Guidelines for resolving authorship disputes;
  2. Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers;
  3. Guidelines for the medical research and publication ethics;
  4. Guidelines for the treatment of animals in behavioral research and teaching;
  5. Coauthors gone bad; how to avoid publishing conflict and a proposed agreement for co-author teams.