Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Silva Fennica publishes significant new knowledge on forest sciences. The scope covers research on forestry and forest ecosystems. Silva Fennica aims to increase understanding on forest ecosystems, and sustainable use and conservation of forest resources. Use of forest resources includes all aspects of forestry containing biomass-based and non-timber products, economic and social factors etc.

 

Section Policies

Research article

Research articles report findings of original research. They follow a structure that best fits to the research problem, e.g. when reporting experimental work, the structure must be Introduction – Material and methods – Results – Discussion – References. Results and discussion items should never be combined. Modelling studies must include an adequate validation of the model, verification of enhanced performance, or applications. Research article text is normally not longer than 8 000 words. Abstract may not be longer than 250 words (submission of longer abstracts is disabled).

Editors
  • Karipekka Byman
  • Eeva Korpilahti
  • Pekka Nygren
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Review article

Review articles are literature-based critical surveys summarising and analysing particular fields or topics in forest science. Authors planning to submit a review article are encouraged to contact the editor before hand about the proposed review topic. The editor may also invite reknown scientists to write a review article on a topical issue of general relevance. No specific length recommendation is set for review articles. However, the authors are requested to write as concisely as possible. Abstract may not be longer than 400 words (submission of longer abstracts is disabled).

Editors
  • Karipekka Byman
  • Eeva Korpilahti
  • Pekka Nygren
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Research note

Research notes report preliminary or tentative results of projects underway (e.g. test of a research methodology), or completed research with limited scope but relevant to an international readership. Research note must not be longer than 2 500 words and include more than 4 tables and/or figures. Abstracts may not be longer than 250 words (submission of longer abstracts is disabled).

Editors
  • Karipekka Byman
  • Eeva Korpilahti
  • Pekka Nygren
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Discussion article

Discussion articles put forward fresh ideas or new views about the theory and practice of science, point out problems needing the attention of researchers, or comment on topical issues. The views presented must be justified with adequate references to earlier work. Discussion articles are revised by the scientific editors of Silva Fennica. Discussion article is normally not longer than 2 500 words and includes no more than 4 tables and/or figures.

Editors
  • Karipekka Byman
  • Eeva Korpilahti
  • Pekka Nygren
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Commentary

Commentaries are always invited by the editor. He/she may ask a reknown scientist to write  a comment on an important manuscript submitted to Silva Fennica or another topical issue.

Editors
  • Karipekka Byman
  • Eeva Korpilahti
  • Pekka Nygren
Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Special section

Special sections may be occasioannally published, e.g. for publishing selected presentations from a scientific conference or for publishing main results of a large research programme in one issue. Proposals for special sections must be addressed to the Editor-in-Chief. Manuscripts submitted to a special section must follow the author guidelines of Silva Fennica and they are submitted to the normal peer-review of the journal. The journal recieves the right to accept or reject any manuscript submitted to a special section on the basis of the recommendation of the reviewers.

Editors
  • Karipekka Byman
  • Eeva Korpilahti
  • Pekka Nygren
Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

When a manuscript arrives to the Editorial System, the Editor-in-Chief or an Associate Editor reviews that it fits within the scope of Silva Fennica and fulfils minimum requirements for peer-review. Manuscripts clearly out of the scope of the journal will be declined in this phase. A manuscript may also be declined if it is apparent that it does not contain any new knowledge on the studied topic. Manuscripts with poor presentation, serious linguistic problems, and those that do not adhere to the Author Guidelines of Silva Fennica will be returned to the authors for revision. If the authors decide to resubmit the revised version, it will be considered as a new submission. Manuscripts are screened for similarity using the iThenticate software. Screening results are always interpreted case by case by the Editor-in-Chief or an Associate Editor. Manuscripts deemed to be too similar with earlier work will be declined.

After the initial review, the manuscript is submitted to peer-review. Double blind review process is employed to ensure that manuscripts are evaluated objectively. Normally, two reviews by qualified scientists are sought for each manuscript. If a manuscript has an interdisciplinary approach, reviewers are chosen accordingly. The reviewers are asked fill in the review form and justify verbally their recommendation.

Normally the manuscript is evaluated on the scale:

  • Accept submission: Only minor editorial revisions may be recommended.
  • Revisions required: Minor revisions that can be evaluated in the Editorial Office without second peer-review
  • Resubmit for review: Major revisions that may require a new peer-review.
  • Resubmit elsewhere: The manuscript is not within the scope of the journal or it has minor value for an international readership
  • Decline submission

In addition to reviewer reports, recommendations of an Associate Editor may be sought. Final decision on publication is made by the Editor-in-Chief.

A contribution should be novel and have broad and international interest for being published in Silva Fennica. A reviewer should always reason his/her opinion about these criteria in the review statement. If a study does not fulfil these criteria, the manuscript is not qualified for publication in Silva Fennica. A repetition study that opens new viewpoints to an earlier study is also considered to be novel.

The relevance of methods used is always carefully evaluated. Silva Fennica has an Associate Editor for mathematical and statistical methods. His opinion on the adequacy of the methods to the research problem and their correct application is asked when reviewers indicate potential problems with methodology.

 

Publication Frequency

Accepted articles are published immediately after copy editing and proof reading. Published articles are collected in five annual issues. An e-mail alert is sent after appearance of each issue to readers who have subscribed the alert.