Public Administration and Policy

Aims & Scope

Peer review process This journal engages in a double-anonymous peer review process, which strives to match the expertise of a reviewer with the submitted manuscript. Reviews are completed with evidence of thoughtful engagement with the manuscript, provide constructive feedback, and add value to the overall knowledge and information presented in the manuscript. Mission The mission of the peer review process is to achieve excellence and rigour in scholarly publications and research. Vision Our vision is to give voice to professionals in the subject area who contribute unique and diverse scholarly perspectives to the field. Values The journal values diverse perspectives from the field and reviewers who provide critical, constructive, and respectful feedback to authors. Reviewers come from a variety of organizations, careers, and backgrounds from around the world. Ethics All invitations to review, abstracts, manuscripts, and reviews should be kept confidential. Reviewers must not share their review or information about the review process with anyone without the agreement of the editors and authors involved, even after publication. This also applies to other reviewers’ “comments to author” which are shared with you on decision. Resources to guide you through the review process Discover practical tips and guidance on all aspects of peer review in our reviewers' section. See how being a reviewer could benefit your career, and discover what's involved in shaping a review. More reviewer information

Based on the Think.Check.Submit framework by DOAJ, COPE & OASPA. All data from verified open sources.

Source: OpenAlex · Each year’s green bar = citations earned by that year’s papers, counted to date — so recent years look lower simply because their papers haven’t had time to be cited yet.

SJR Quartile by Discipline

Scimago ranks this journal separately in each subject category — its quartile can differ by discipline.

Subject Classification