CRITERIA FOR ABSTRACT REVIEW

1. Topic

⮚ Relevance of topic to current and emerging Sustainable Development
⮚ Consistency of topic with the conference theme
⮚ Ability to clearly define topics /issue(s) examined and discussed
⮚ Originality and innovativeness of the topic

2. Theoretical and conceptual foundation

⮚ Relevance of theories cited or proposed theories ⮚ Clarity of conceptual framework

3. Research / program design

⮚ Adherence to solid research design and methodology (for research-based papers)
⮚ Coherence, logical flow, and realistic approach (for practice-based papers)
⮚ Clarity of scope and limitations

4. Research / program results and outcomes

⮚ Evidence-based results
⮚ Ability to contribute to the advancement of theory, research, and practice

5. Technical merit

⮚ Quality of writing
⮚ Appropriateness of language used
⮚ Logical organization of the paper

Please rate the abstracts on a scale of “1” to “5”, with “1” representing “poor” or “reject” and “5” representing “outstanding” or “accept”. Indicate your comments, especially for abstracts with “3” rating as these will be marked as “acceptance considered but for revision.” Your comments will help the concerned writer/s in improving their abstracts and the reviewers in re-assessing the revised versions. Kindly indicate, too, if the abstract is of outstanding quality so that authors can be encouraged to submit their papers to either the PCIU Journal.