Journal of Environmental Monitoring

2.0 Article types

2.1 Full papers

Original research papers on all the subjects outlined above and related areas are encouraged and welcomed. All papers should give due attention to overcoming limitations and to underlying principles. All contributions will be judged on the criteria of (i) originality and quality of scientific content, (ii) contribution to our existing knowledge of the subject area, (iii) clarity of objectives and aims of the work, and (iv) appropriateness of length to content of new science. JEM is not an archive for large data sets - such papers are not within the scope of the journal. Papers reporting local studies are also not acceptable, all papers should provide insights that go beyond those of the original local interest. All reported measurements should have their uncertainties and limitations clearly stated. It should be emphasised that it is mandatory to justify and/or reference all claims regarding health impairments or toxic consequences.

Although short articles are acceptable, The Society strongly discourages fragmentation of a substantial body of work into a number of short publications. Unnecessary fragmentation will be a valid reason for rejection of manuscripts.

Referees of papers submitted to JEM are also asked to comment on the appropriateness of any optimization and/or experimental design procedures used and the correctness of any statistical procedures applied for the evaluation of results. Descriptions of methods should be supported by experimental results showing accuracy, precision, sensitivity and selectivity. If the paper presents analytical results, these should be qualified by inclusion of quality control data, including certified reference materials where appropriate, spike recoveries, blanks and other relevant information for validation of the presented results. Referees also give consideration to whether the length of an article is commensurate with its interest to the scientific community. Papers that do not give due consideration to any/all of these topics may be rejected.

2.2 Communications

These must report preliminary research findings that are novel/original, of immediate interest and are likely to have a high impact on the JEM community. Communications receive priority treatment and are published within approximately 8 weeks of receipt. Authors must provide a short paragraph explaining why their work justifies rapid publication as a communication.

2.3 Perspectives

These may be articles providing a personal view of part of one discipline associated with JEM (its present state, where it may be leading, etc) or a philosophical look at a topic of relevance. Alternatively, Perspectives may be historical articles covering a particular subject area or the development of particular legislation, technologies, methodologies or other subjects within the scope of JEM.

2.4 Technical Notes

These should be brief descriptions of instrumental developments, techniques or applications that offer definite advantages over those already available. Technical Notes should offer practical solutions to problems that are of interest to the JEM readership and merit publication, but neither a Full Paper nor an Urgent Communication is justified. Technical Notes are subject to a strict three-page limit and should be as brief as possible; wherever appropriate authors should use references to the established technique, explaining in full only what is novel about the proposed approach.

2.5 Critical Reviews

These must be a critical evaluation of the existing state of knowledge on a particular facet of environmental science. However, some original work may be included. Simple literature surveys will not be accepted for publication. It is desirable that potential review writers should contact the Managing Editor before embarking on their work.

2.6 Mini-Reviews

These are summaries of research in a well-defined, specific topic area covering approximately the last 24 months (guideline).

• Given topics should review work no more than 24 months old.
• Articles should cover only the most interesting/significant developments in that specific subject area.
• The article should be highly critical and selective in referencing published work.
• One or two paragraphs of speculation about possible future developments may also be appropriate in the conclusion section.
• Mini-reviews should be brief, four journal pages are recommended (ca. ten double spaced, typed A4 pages) and should contain no more than two or three tables and a minimal number of figures. 

Mini-reviews may also cover techniques/technologies that are too new for a full review or may address a subset of technologies available for a given area of research.