Ecological and Environmental Anthropology publishes articles and commentary by scholars in diverse fields such as anthropology, ecology, and geography, as well as practitioners who specialize in conservation, health, and other socio-natural issues, and all of our articles are peer-reviewed before publication. Some of our reviewers have been recommended by the authors, some serve on our editorial board, and some are invited to review and possibly provide published commentary on specific articles. While we at EEA will narrow down our initial choices and ultimately will make the final decisions, we rely on our reviewers for suggestions on whether manuscripts should be accepted, accepted with revisions, or rejected. We ask our reviewers to critically examine the main arguments of the article under consideration for publication and to write a fair assessment of the conceptual and practical issues raised by the article, the significance and quality of research, the clarity of the writing, the citation of relevant research, and the accuracy and applications of the conclusions of the authors.

Once we at EEA decide which articles are to be sent for review, we will allow reviewers one month to read and review the article. We ask for a review of approximately 500-1000 words, and also for any editorial comments reviewers have about grammar, spelling, or fact-checking. We will send the editorial comments and reviews (without the reviewers’ names) to the authors along with our own suggestions, and the authors will be expected to make the appropriate editorial changes and to take into consideration the suggestions of the reviewers.

Published Commentary

For articles that have been chosen by the reviewers to be published with written commentary, a copy of said commentary will be forwarded to the original author before publication. If the author so chooses, he or she may provide a written response that will be published alongside the commentary and the original article. We encourage online discussions prompted by the articles, reviews, and authors’ responses; we are hoping to facilitate a dynamic exchange of ideas on current issues and case studies in environmental and ecological anthropology.

We ask all reviewers to be fair and considerate, and we reserve the right to reject or return for revision any submitted material on the grounds of inappropriate subject matter, quality, length, or nonconformity with the submission guidelines. Authors and reviewers are responsible for the content of their writings and for the legality of their submissions due to agreements with other publishers.

Book/Video Review Guidelines
General Guidelines

Reviews should be sent to the book review editor. We prefer to receive them electronically at eea@uga.edu. If files cannot be sent electronically, they may be burned onto a CD and mailed to the journal’s office. Please note that CDs cannot be returned. All manuscripts will be acknowledged on receipt. Review manuscripts should be relatively brief (250-500 words); longer review essays or reviews of multiple items will be considered on an individual basis. Edited manuscripts are sent back to authors, who should answer any queries and respond to suggested substantive changes. The author should retain a copy of the manuscripts.

When writing your review, we request that you consider the following guidelines: Please do not simply summarize or list each chapter. Instead, we ask that you offer analytic commentary on, for example, the quality of the theory, methodology, and writing, or the relevance of the research to other current or recently published work. When reviewing an edited volume, do not feel that you must write about, or even mention, every chapter. Instead describe the overall focus of the volume, pick a few significant contributions, and discuss those in detail. Finally, please do not exceed the word limit, avoid lengthy direct quotations, and minimize outside references.

Reviews should provide balanced critical assessments that take into account EEA’s diverse online audience and its associated diversity of perspectives and backgrounds. Accuracy and fairness are expected in EEA reviews. Although the editors do not take any particular position regarding any specific work of media to be reviewed, we encourage a polite and professional tone. As part of this standard, we discourage hostile writing and inappropriate or personal attacks. The editors reserve the right to reject or return for revision any submitted material on the grounds of inappropriate subject matter, quality, length, or nonconformity with the submission guidelines. In deciding to have the book reviewed, or to accept an unsolicited review, we will consider the source of the review to ensure that the reviewer is an appropriate one in terms of expertise and that there are no obvious personal connections that might bias the review (e.g., the reviewer is cited in the acknowledgments).

Authors must recognize that they are responsible for the content of their articles, for the accuracy of quotations and their correct attribution, for the legal rights to publish any material submitted, and for submitting their review, commentary, or review essay in proper form for publication.

Unsolicited Reviews

EEA is open to accepting unsolicited reviews; however, solicitation of book reviews does not guarantee publication. Scholars who wish to review particular books, films, or other works of media may identify themselves to the book review editor.

Previously Published Reviews

A manuscript submitted to EEA may be under consideration or have been published elsewhere; however, responsibility for arranging permission from other publishers lies with the author, and this information should be provided to EEA at the time of submission.

Author Responses to Reviews

Commentaries on previously published reviews should be submitted directly to the editors; authors of the reviews commented on are invited to respond.