Peer review framework

The International Conference on Sustainable Innovation in Business: Integrating Academia, Industry, and AI for Future Resilience (ICSIB-2026) follows a double anonymous peer review framework to ensure fairness, quality and integrity in all accepted manuscripts. The identities of authors and reviewers are not shared with each other at any stage of the review.

This process promotes impartial evaluation and helps maintain high scholarly standards for the conference proceedings.

Submission stage

Authors submit their manuscripts through the Microsoft Conference Management Portal. All submissions must follow the official conference template and instructions for authors.

Authors are responsible for preparing an anonymous version of the manuscript by removing names, affiliations, acknowledgements and any self referencing text that could reveal their identity. File properties and metadata must also be cleaned of personal information.

Initial editorial screening

The editorial team or track chairs perform an initial screening of each submission. This screening checks the following aspects.

• Compliance with formatting and submission requirements.
• Relevance to the theme and tracks of ICSIB-2026.
• Basic quality, completeness and ethical compliance.

Manuscripts that pass this stage move forward to double anonymous review. Those that do not meet minimum standards may be returned to the authors or declined at this point.

Assignment to reviewers

Each eligible manuscript is assigned to at least two independent reviewers. Reviewers are selected based on subject expertise, familiarity with the methods used and absence of conflicts of interest.

During assignment the editorial team works only with the anonymized version of the manuscript in order to preserve the double anonymous nature of the process.

Double anonymous review conditions

The following conditions are observed to maintain a double anonymous environment.

• Reviewers do not know the names or affiliations of the authors.
• Authors do not know who has reviewed their manuscript.
• All communication between reviewers and authors takes place through the conference management system under the oversight of the editorial team.
• Reviewers must declare any potential conflict of interest such as recent collaboration or shared institutional affiliation. When a conflict is present the reviewer is replaced.

Review criteria

Reviewers evaluate each manuscript using clear academic criteria. The main aspects include the following.

• Originality and importance of the research problem.
• Soundness and clarity of the theoretical and conceptual background.
• Appropriateness and rigour of the research design and methods.
• Quality of data analysis, interpretation and discussion.
• Clarity, coherence and organisation of the writing.
• Contribution to the field of emerging business models and related areas.

Reviewer feedback and recommendations

Reviewers provide written comments that highlight strengths, weaknesses and suggestions for improvement. Feedback should be constructive, respectful and focused on the content of the work.

Each reviewer also records an overall recommendation. The usual recommendation categories are the following.

• Accept with no or very minor changes.
• Accept after minor revisions.
• Resubmit after major revisions.
• Reject when the manuscript is not suitable for the conference proceedings.

Editorial decision and communication with authors

The editor or track chair consolidates the reviewer comments and recommendations in order to reach a decision. If reviewer opinions differ significantly an additional review may be requested.

The decision together with anonymized reviewer feedback is then communicated to the authors through the conference management portal.

Authors are encouraged to study the comments carefully and to respond to each point during revision.

Revisions and resubmission

When revisions are requested authors prepare a revised version of the manuscript and a separate response document that explains how each comment has been addressed.

Revised manuscripts must remain anonymous. In many cases the revised version is sent back to one or more of the original reviewers for a second evaluation.

Final decision and post acceptance steps

The final decision on acceptance rests with the editorial board or track chairs after they consider the reviews, the quality of revisions and the overall fit with the conference programme.

Once a manuscript is accepted it proceeds to copyediting, proofreading and layout for the conference proceedings. Authors receive proofs for checking within the deadlines specified by the organisers.

This complete double anonymous review process supports the credibility, rigour and scholarly value of the work presented at ICSIB-2026.