1️⃣2.10-3.14 After being rejected by various journals three times, it was finally submitted to JEM for review.
2️⃣3.23 Under review, two reviewers were invited to review, but one of them disappeared. The editor invited a third reviewer on 5.8, and the decision was made on 5.12.
3️⃣5.20 Major revision requested, deadline is 6.10. There were a total of 15 comments from the two reviewers, decision was made on 7.2.
4️⃣7.3 Major revision requested, deadline is 7.17. The first reviewer had only 1 comment, while the second reviewer had 9 comments. Decision was made on 8.13.
5️⃣8.13 Minor revision requested, deadline is 8.27. The first reviewer had no comments, while the second reviewer had 3 minor comments. Minor revisions were completed on 8.14, and the decision was made on 8.18.
?8.22 Acceptance, 8.23 proofreading.

(1) 讚！ | 似乎有些触动

Submitted to the special journal
2026-08-07 Submitted to Journal
2026-08-08 More than eight charts were requested for resubmission
2026-08-13 Submitted to Journal
2026-08-15 With editor
2026-08-22 Decision in Process Probably rejected, haven't received an email yet, but quite efficient

(0) 讚！ | bingfengling306

Is my current situation the same as yours, did you finally reject it? How long have you been in DIP?

(0) 讚！ | bingfengling306

For the same fourth quarter, I invested on July 31st and it is still "we". Have you submitted it for review?

(0) 讚！ | 布隆

I invested on 7.31, there was a time change on 8.6, and until now it is still "we". I invested in the fourth section, is there really an opportunity? Afraid of another month of rejection.

(0) 讚！ | 布隆

Extremely slow, WE22 days.

(0) 讚！ | 君君发sci

Is the first section fast? It has been over a week already.

(0) 讚！ | doubility

I would like to ask everyone, since I sent the manuscript for external review on March 14th this year, it has been more than five months now and the editor has invited 27 reviewers, but none of them have reviewed the manuscript. Regardless of whether I remind them or not, the editor is actively expanding the invitations. Can friends who have had this experience share what might be the reason? What should I do? I am already desperate and in tears.

(0) 讚！ | pidan

Dear experts, I submitted my work at 2 pm this afternoon, uploaded the LaTeX source file. However, the system status has been stuck at "Submission Received via Ingest" and the old system cannot view the PDF, number, or receive the submission email.

(1) 讚！ | 陆才干

Could you please tell me why I am stuck at "Submission Received via Ingest" after uploading the LaTeX source file? I can't see the PDF and email. Thank you.

(0) 讚！ | 陆才干

It's been a month since we launched the fourth section, have any new friends joined recently?

(0) 讚！ | .阿巴阿巴.

Section 4 seems to be edited by Jason Evans, submitted on February 22. The first review was completed on March 25, with major revisions. The revision was submitted on April 5. The second review was completed on April 15, with the first reviewer accepting the submission. However, the first reviewer suddenly had more comments than during the first review, and the editor requested a moderate revision. The revision was submitted on April 22, and the editor sent it for review in mid-May. It was accepted on June 22.

The first two rounds were very quick, but the third round may have been slightly delayed due to an increase in submissions during that time period. However, the final result was still good.

(0) 讚！ | Sunch

Section Three
6.25 Submission directly With editor
7.13 Desk reject

(0) 讚！ | pipishu6

Section 1, ecological evaluation direction, edit for half a month to a month can't see the submission system for a while, really slow. The first review waited for 22 days, and it has been sent back for revision for 8 days and still no response. It's really speechless.

(0) 讚！ | 君君发sci

2025.2.21 submitted
2025.2.23 under review
2025.4.9 major revision
2025.5.7 submitted
2025.5.9 under review
2025.6.13 accepted

(0) 讚！ | tanseley

The submission period has been changed to 2 months.

(0) 讚！ | Jyliu

5.6 Submitted, reviewed a few days later
5.28 Major revision (received many comments from 2 reviewers)
6.15 Revised major revision
6.27 Minor revision (accepted by reviewer 1, received more comments from reviewer 2)
7.3 Revised minor revision
7.4 Accepted
We were very lucky to have encountered an exceptionally good editor who processed our article very quickly, allowing it to be accepted so fast. We also had two very good reviewers who provided us with many suggestions for improvement, leading to a significant enhancement of our article. In fact, this article had been submitted to numerous top journals, undergone multiple major revisions and resubmissions, only to be rejected in the end, which was extremely discouraging. Therefore, we are truly grateful to the editor and reviewers at the Journal of Environmental Management for helping us regain our confidence. Thank you!

(1) 讚！ | Jyliu

There has been a change in the schedule, indicating that the chief editor has delegated tasks to the deputy editor. When there is a change, it is usually followed by a review process.

(0) 讚！ | 科研难搞

Has anyone submitted recently? It's been 10 days with editor, and there has been one change in the meantime.

(0) 讚！ | .阿巴阿巴.

I submitted my paper for review four months ago and received minor revisions from two reviewers. However, after revisions, one of the reviewers refused to review the paper again. As a result, we added another reviewer who provided feedback after two months, which could be addressed. However, the editor ultimately rejected the paper. This entire process took six months and was a very unpleasant experience.

(1) 讚！ | 宁毅

The journal is overall okay, but the review process for manuscripts in the field of ecology is too slow. The journal handling is still acceptable. Submitted on 12.15, feedback on 12.31 saying the format is not suitable, feedback on 1.3, status updated on 1.18, under review on 1.25, reviewer 1 completed on 2.13. A total of 19 people were invited on 3.25, but only one accepted the review. Invited 22 people on 3.31, no one introduced the review until 4.17 when the second reviewer was invited. Major revision on 4.25, revised on 5.12, reviewer invited on 5.20, reviewer 1 completed on 5.22, reviewer 2 completed on 5.29, request for revision and resubmission on 5.29, decision in principle on 6.05, accepted on 6.08.

(0) 讚！ | 不想打扫卫生的辅导员

6.3 提交
6.3 我们
6.12 你们

(0) 讚！ | Ammo

The submission has been rejected, but the reviewers provided some helpful suggestions for optimization. The submission process took about one and a half months.

(0) 讚！ | @GaoFei

The submission is for the resilience section, and the overall processing speed is very fast. We hope everyone can also encounter kind-hearted reviewers.

2025.11.24 submitted to journal
2025.12.5 under review
2026.2.2 major revision (2 reviewers, 21 days)
2026.4.1 with editor (revision, delayed due to personal reasons)
2026.4.16 moderate revision (1 reviewer accepts, the other reviewer has 2 comments, 14 days)
2026.5.11 accept

(0) 讚！ | Simon0990

Module Two: 
Submission in 8 days for review;
Two months for review, one round of major revisions;
Three months for review, two rounds of minor revisions;
Accepted for online publication over a month later.
A total of over seven months.
Overall acceptable, professional feedback, difficult to make changes, good attitude, and effort in revisions.

(0) 讚！ | 沐光而行