Environmental Research Submission Guide
Environmental Research's submission process, first-decision timing, and the editorial checks that matter before peer review begins.
Readiness scan
Before you submit to Environmental Research, pressure-test the manuscript.
Run the Free Readiness Scan to catch the issues most likely to stop the paper before peer review.
Key numbers before you submit to Environmental Research
Acceptance rate, editorial speed, and cost context — the metrics that shape whether and how you submit.
What acceptance rate actually means here
- Environmental Research accepts roughly ~15-25% of submissions — but desk rejection runs higher.
- Scope misfit and framing problems drive most early rejections, not weak methodology.
- Papers that reach peer review face a different bar: novelty, rigor, and fit with the journal's editorial identity.
What to check before you upload
- Scope fit — does your paper address the exact problem this journal publishes on?
- Desk decisions are fast; scope problems surface within days.
- Cover letter framing — editors use it to judge fit before reading the manuscript.
How to approach Environmental Research
Use the submission guide like a working checklist. The goal is to make fit, package completeness, and cover-letter framing obvious before you open the portal.
Stage | What to check |
|---|---|
1. Scope | Scope check |
2. Package | Manuscript preparation |
3. Cover letter | Editorial Manager upload |
4. Final check | Editorial screen |
Quick answer: This Environmental Research submission guide covers the operating contract for the Elsevier multidisciplinary environmental-health journal: José L. Domingo's editorial process at Rovira and Virgili University, the Short Communications 4,000-word/3-figure format, the multidisciplinary scope that ties pollution science, exposure assessment, and health outcomes, and the editorial bar that distinguishes Environmental Research from sister Elsevier env-health journals (Environment International, Environmental Pollution).
Use this page if you're preparing an Environmental Research submission and want to understand the journal's multidisciplinary editorial focus, the Short Communications and Full Research Article formats, and how Environmental Research differs from Environment International (cross-disciplinary global) and Environmental Pollution (pollution-focused). Before you submit, you should know whether your contribution fits the environmental-health editorial focus, whether it's better as a Short Communication (no more than 4,000 words / 3 figures) or Full Research Paper, and which Elsevier env-health journal best matches the work.
From our manuscript review practice
Environmental Research is one of two top Elsevier environmental-health journals, alongside Environment International. The two have overlapping scope but distinct editorial cultures. Environmental Research emphasizes toxicology and exposure-science depth; Environment International emphasizes cross-disciplinary global environmental-health integration. Reading recent papers from each editor's queue helps identify the better fit before submission.
How this page was reviewed
We reviewed the Environmental Research journal page on ScienceDirect, the Guide for Authors, the Editorial Board, and recent issues. We see consistent patterns in Manusights submission reviews that match what the Elsevier materials describe.
This guide tells you what Environmental Research editors look for before reviewer assignment, and Manusights checks whether your paper passes the environmental-health framing, exposure pathway, methods, figures, highlights, graphical abstract, cover-letter, article-type, and Elsevier sister-journal routing checks that the official Elsevier upload instructions cannot evaluate from a generic checklist. Paid Manusights reviews are covered by a 60-day money-back guarantee, and we never train on submitted manuscripts.
In the 100-manuscript Manusights sample for Environmental Research-style fit when this guide was built, the stronger drafts tied exposure, process, toxicology, environmental technology, or epidemiology evidence to an environmental-health or global-relevance claim in the abstract, methods, figures, limitations, and discussion. The weaker drafts often had sound measurements but no clear reason the paper belonged in Environmental Research rather than Environment International, Environmental Pollution, Chemosphere, Journal of Hazardous Materials, STOTEN, or a narrower ecology or toxicology venue.
Through our diagnostic review, we treat the exposure pathway, health-relevance claim, section fit, study design, statistics, reporting checklist, highlights, graphical abstract, and cover letter as one Environmental Research-facing package rather than as separate upload tasks.
Source limitations: Elsevier can update submission fields, article-type instructions, open-access charges, and editorial-board pages after this review date, so authors should verify final administrative requirements against the live Guide for Authors before upload. Use this guide for the decision official pages cannot fully answer: whether the manuscript's environmental-health contribution is visible enough for Environmental Research rather than Environment International, Environmental Pollution, or a narrower toxicology venue.
What is Environmental Research at a glance?
Metric | Value |
|---|---|
Impact Factor | 7.7 on ScienceDirect journal page |
Publisher | Elsevier |
Research Article word limit | no more than 7,500 words (excluding refs) |
Short Communication word limit | no more than 4,000 words, no more than 3 figures |
Review Article word limit | ~10,000 words (excluding refs) |
Abstract word limit | no more than 250 words |
Highlights | 3-5 bullets, no more than 85 characters each |
Article types | Original Research, Short Communication, Review, Letters |
Submission portal | Editorial Manager submission portal (Elsevier Editorial Manager) |
ISSN | 0013-9351 |
DOI prefix | 10.1016/j.envres.* |
Source: Environmental Research Guide for Authors, Editorial Board, Clarivate JCR 2024, accessed May 2026.
What happens during Environmental Research editorial triage?
Environmental Research follows the standard Elsevier Editorial Manager triage rhythm. The day/week timeline below is what authors should expect after upload to Editorial Manager submission portal.
Day 1-2: Receipt and tech-check
Editorial office confirms file integrity, COI/ethics declarations, and Highlights compliance. Manuscripts missing the 3-5 Highlights bullets, the graphical abstract, or the CRediT contribution list get a quick technical-return rather than a desk reject.
Day 3-7: Section-editor assignment
One of the section editors (toxicology, exposure science, epidemiology, environmental cancer, or environmental chemistry, depending on topic) takes the paper from the EIC queue.
Week 2-4: Editorial scope assessment
The section editor decides desk-reject, redirect to Environment International / Environmental Pollution, or send for peer review. Editors screen for environmental-health framing, methodological rigor, and anthropogenic global relevance in the first read. Desk-rejection rate is highest in this window.
Week 4-10: External peer review
Two or three reviewers report. Reviewer turnaround on Environmental Research has been slower than Environment International in 2025 issues.
Week 12-20: First decision
Reject / major revision / minor revision / accept. Revisions returned within the requested window typically reach the second decision in 4-6 weeks.
Who is José L. Domingo and what scope does Environmental Research enforce?
José L. Domingo at Rovira and Virgili University School of Medicine, Laboratory of Toxicology and Environmental Health, in Reus, Spain, serves as Editor-in-Chief. His research focuses on toxicology, human exposure assessment, and environmental health.
The journal's editorial scope is multidisciplinary environmental health:
- Human exposure assessment and biomonitoring
- Environmental toxicology and ecotoxicology
- Environmental epidemiology
- Air quality (indoor and outdoor) and respiratory health
- Water and food contamination and health effects
- Heavy metals and persistent organic pollutants
- Climate change health implications
How does Environmental Research compare with peer environmental-health journals?
This peer-comparison table compares the four high-IF Elsevier-and-allied env-health venues authors typically choose between. Numbers come from the most recent published author guidelines and 2024 JCR data. Cell Press, Nature Portfolio, Lancet, and BMJ also publish env-health-adjacent work for context, and a few are referenced here so readers can see where Environmental Research sits in the broader Nature / Cell / Lancet / Science / PNAS landscape.
Venue | Best fit and caution |
|---|---|
Environmental Research | Multidisciplinary environmental health, exposure science, toxicology, epidemiology, and real-world relevance. Think twice if the health pathway is implicit. |
Environment International | Cross-disciplinary global environmental health and policy integration. Think twice if the manuscript is narrower toxicology or exposure science. |
Environmental Pollution | Pollution science with ecosystem or human-health implications. Think twice if the paper is more health-epidemiology than pollution-process focused. |
Science of the Total Environment | Broad environmental science and policy-adjacent work. Think twice if the paper needs a tighter environmental-health audience. |
Source: Elsevier journal pages, JCR 2024, accessed May 2026.
Before submitting to Environmental Research, an Environmental Research manuscript fit check identifies whether the package meets the editorial bar before you commit to the submission.
For a broader file-level scan before upload, use the Manusights AI manuscript review to catch readiness gaps across framing, methods, and journal fit.
What failure patterns does the editorial team screen for at desk?
Three operational signals govern editorial assessment:
1. Real-world environmental application. Environmental Research explicitly seeks work demonstrating environmental application in real-world contexts. Pure-laboratory toxicology without environmental relevance fits specialty toxicology journals; pure-ecological work without health implications fits ecology venues.
2. Methodological rigor in exposure-science / toxicology / epidemiology. The journal expects rigorous study design, appropriate statistical analysis, and careful interpretation of dose-response, exposure assessment, or epidemiological associations.
3. Anthropogenic global relevance. The journal's editorial framing emphasizes anthropogenic environmental issues of global relevance. Highly local case studies without broader implications often face redirection.
One failure pattern we see is the exposure-only abstract: the manuscript documents pollutant levels carefully, but the health implication, human exposure pathway, or decision relevance appears only in the discussion. For Environmental Research, that logic should be legible in the title, abstract, and first-page framing before the editor reaches the methods.
Readiness check
Run the scan while Environmental Research's requirements are in front of you.
See how this manuscript scores against Environmental Research's requirements before you submit.
What recent Environmental Research direction should authors read?
Recent issues span air-pollution health effects, microplastics exposure, PFAS biomonitoring, climate-health interactions, occupational exposure assessment, and environmental cancer epidemiology. For specific recent papers and DOIs, see the Environmental Research journal page on ScienceDirect. The DOI prefix is 10.1016/j.envres.* with paper-specific identifiers.
What artifacts belong in the Environmental Research submission package?
Editors screen Environmental Research uploads against the following artifacts on tech-check before assignment. Missing any of the first four triggers a technical return; missing reporting checklists or DAS triggers a query during initial review.
Stage | Timing and author-side requirement |
|---|---|
Pre-upload format check | Confirm article type, 7,500-word Research Article cap or 4,000-word / 3-figure Short Communication cap, 250-word abstract, 3-5 highlights, graphical abstract, CRediT statement, funding, COI, generative AI declaration, data availability statement, and reporting checklist. |
Editorial Manager submission | Upload through Editorial Manager submission portal with the cover letter, manuscript, figures, highlights, graphical abstract, declarations, suggested reviewers, and any reporting checklist required by study design. |
Technical return window | Expect a quick office query if highlights, graphical abstract, declarations, ORCID, reporting checklist, or article-type limits are incomplete. |
Editorial scope screen | Expect the editor to test whether the abstract and cover letter make the environmental-health pathway clear enough for Environmental Research rather than Environment International, Environmental Pollution, Chemosphere, STOTEN, or a narrower toxicology venue. |
The required artifacts are the cover letter (with environmental-health framing and any prior-rejection disclosure), the structured abstract (no more than 250 words), the 3-5 highlights bullets (no more than 85 characters each), the graphical abstract, the CRediT-formatted author contributions statement, the funding-source disclosure, the conflicts-of-interest declaration, the generative AI use declaration (required since 2024), the data availability statement, the suggested reviewers (typically 3-5 non-conflicted experts), and the reporting checklist appropriate to the design (STROBE for observational, CONSORT for clinical trials, PRISMA for systematic reviews).
ORCID for the corresponding author is mandatory and strongly encouraged for all co-authors.
A Environmental Research submission readiness check before upload can flag whether the environmental-health framing is visible, whether format limits (especially for Short Communications) are respected, and whether scope fits Environmental Research vs sister journals.
What should you check before Environmental Research submission?
- [ ] The title, abstract, and cover letter name the environmental-health pathway, not only the contaminant, organism, or exposure dataset.
- [ ] The manuscript fits the selected article type, especially the 7,500-word Research Article cap or the 4,000-word / 3-figure Short Communication cap.
- [ ] Highlights, graphical abstract, CRediT statement, COI, funding, AI-use declaration, data availability statement, ORCID, and suggested reviewers are ready for Editorial Manager.
- [ ] The methods section includes the exposure, toxicology, epidemiology, statistics, or reporting checklist details a section editor will need before peer review.
- [ ] The cover letter explains why Environmental Research is a better fit than Environment International, Environmental Pollution, Chemosphere, Journal of Hazardous Materials, or Science of the Total Environment.
What timing should Environmental Research authors expect?
Editorial review takes 2-4 weeks, the first peer-review round runs 6-10 weeks, and total time to first decision is typically 3-5 months. Revisions returned within the requested window typically reach the second decision in 4-6 weeks.
Decision risks before submitting to Environmental Research
Across environmental-health manuscripts targeting Environmental Research, three recurring decision risks matter most across submissions that the journal's editors filter out at the desk-screen stage.
Relevant published-guidance constraints:
- Elsevier published guidelines, Environmental Research is a multidisciplinary journal publishing high-quality novel information on issues of global relevance with applicability across real-world environmental contexts
- topics include human exposure assessment, environmental toxicology, environmental epidemiology, ecotoxicology, indoor and outdoor air quality, water and food contamination, and anthropogenic environmental issues with health implications
- José L. Domingo (Rovira and Virgili University, Reus, Spain
Oversees the editorial board; explicitly does NOT welcome analyses of green/circular-economy or sustainability or carbon-footprint policies without human-health context, infectious/communicable diseases without environmental factors, or small / locally-significant health-risk assessments; runs Editorial Manager intake with days-not-weeks scope screening.) Use the three checks below before you open Editorial Manager Environmental Research upload slot.
Pure-ecological or pure-toxicological manuscript
Across Environmental Research-targeted manuscripts, we consistently see authors submit work where the contribution is strong on toxicology (mechanistic toxicity study, in-vitro cytotoxicity, ecotoxicology bioassay, organism-level toxicity) or strong on ecology (biodiversity assessment, ecosystem function, species-distribution modeling, food-web analysis) but lacks the human-environmental-health framing Environmental Research's scope requires.
ER handling editors specifically check whether the manuscript:
- addresses human-environmental-health implications explicitly (exposure pathway connecting environmental contaminant to human exposure with biomonitoring evidence
- epidemiological connection between environmental factor and disease outcome with appropriate study design
- risk-assessment translating toxicology to human-health risk with quantitative dose-response
- environmental-justice dimension connecting exposure inequalities to health-outcome inequalities
- intervention-evaluation connecting environmental-health policy to health-outcome change)
- meets the human-health-relevance bar (anthropogenic contaminants with established or plausible human-exposure routes, biomonitoring data showing measurable exposure in populations, epidemiological evidence of human-health association, mechanistic data linking exposure to disease, intervention evidence showing exposure reduction → health-outcome improvement)
- is not framed as pure ecology (biodiversity / ecosystem-function studies without human-health connection get redirected to ecology venues)
- is not framed as pure toxicology (mechanistic toxicology studies in vitro without exposure context get redirected to toxicology venues)
- is not framed as pure sustainability / policy (green economy / circular economy / sustainable development / carbon footprint analyses without human-health framing are explicitly out of scope per the published policy)
- is not framed as pure infectious disease (communicable-disease epidemiology without environmental factors is out of scope)
- is not framed as small local risk assessment (locally-significant studies without broader global applicability are out of scope)
Manuscripts without human-environmental-health centrality get redirected within days to:
Environment International (Elsevier broader environment-and-health with stronger policy framing), Environmental Pollution (Elsevier pollution-focused with broader scope), Environmental Health Perspectives (NIEHS flagship environmental-health with stronger US-anchored regulatory focus), Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC environmental-toxicology with stronger ecology), Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety (Elsevier ecotoxicology), Science of the Total Environment (Elsevier broader environmental science), Chemosphere (Elsevier broader environmental chemistry), Journal of Hazardous Materials (Elsevier hazardous materials focus), Environmental Science & Technology (ACS broader environmental science with engineering focus), Environmental Science:
Processes & Impacts (RSC broader environmental science), or specialty venues.
The fix is to identify the human-environmental-health connection explicitly (exposure / epidemiology / risk-assessment / intervention), make it load-bearing in the abstract, and either reframe with human-health framing or route to the sibling venue where the work's center actually lies.
Wrong environmental-health sister journal
We frequently see Environmental Research manuscripts misroute within the Elsevier environmental-health journal family because the boundaries between Environment International, Environmental Pollution, Environmental Research, Chemosphere, Journal of Hazardous Materials, and Science of the Total Environment are not immediately obvious to authors.
ER handling editors specifically check whether the contribution fits ER (multidisciplinary environmental-health with global relevance, exposure assessment + toxicology + epidemiology focus, anthropogenic environmental issues with health implications) or another sister:
- Environment International (Elsevier broader environment-and-health with stronger international / policy / global-context framing, higher JIF, broader scope including environmental management)
- Environmental Pollution (Elsevier pollution-focused with broader scope including ecological-pollution effects, not just human-health)
- Chemosphere (Elsevier broader environmental chemistry with both environmental fate and toxicology, mid-tier impact)
- Journal of Hazardous Materials (Elsevier hazardous-materials focus including treatment / remediation / disposal technology, broader scope including engineering)
- Science of the Total Environment (Elsevier broadest environmental scope including atmospheric / aquatic / terrestrial / biosphere, mid-tier impact)
- Environmental Research Letters (IOP open-access broader environmental research)
- Environmental Research Communications (IOP OA letter format)
- Environmental Health Perspectives (NIEHS flagship environmental-health with stronger US-anchored regulatory framing)
- Environmental Health (BMC OA environmental-health)
- Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology (Springer Nature exposure-and-epidemiology specialty)
- International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (MDPI broader OA)
- Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety (Elsevier ecotoxicology)
- Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC)
- Aquatic Toxicology (Elsevier aquatic-toxicology)
- Reproductive Toxicology (Elsevier reproductive-toxicology specialty)
- Toxicology Letters (Elsevier toxicology)
- Toxicology (Elsevier toxicology)
- for indoor air quality: Building and Environment / Indoor Air / Atmospheric Environment
- for water: Water Research / Environmental Science: Water Research & Technology
Manuscripts misrouted face desk redirects within 1-2 weeks.
The fix is to read 3-5 recent papers from each candidate venue before choosing, identify the contribution's center of gravity (human-health-anchored multidisciplinary = Environmental Research; international / global-policy = Environment International; pollution-and-ecology = Environmental Pollution; broader environmental science = STOTEN; hazardous materials / engineering = J Hazardous Materials), and write the cover letter to justify Environmental Research specifically over the sibling alternatives.
Format and article-type misalignment
The third recurring pattern in Environmental Research-targeted manuscripts is article-type misalignment between Environmental Research's format classes.
ER editors specifically check format compliance at desk: Short Communications must be no more than 4,000 words and no more than 3 figures (papers exceeding the cap get returned for shortening before peer review); Full Research Papers must have substantive contribution justifying the longer format (a comprehensive empirical study with adequate sample size, multiple analyses with sensitivity testing, comprehensive discussion of implications); Review Articles must be comprehensive integrative reviews (not narrow specialty reviews); Editorials and Letters to the Editor have their own format limits.
Authors arriving from journals with looser Short Communication limits (some journals allow 5,000-6,000 words) routinely submit oversized Short Communications and get returned for either conversion to Full Research Paper or shortening.
Authors who try to submit borderline-novel work as a Full Research Paper when the work is methodologically thin get returned with redirect to Short Communication or sibling venue.
The fix is mechanical: decide format before drafting (Short Communication for compact contribution; Full Research Paper for comprehensive contribution; Review for integrative synthesis), check word and figure counts against ER-specific limits (4,000-word / 3-figure for Short Communication), verify the contribution depth matches the chosen format, and convert article-type before submission rather than after format-return.
Check whether your Environmental Research manuscript is submission-ready →
Submit If
- the contribution is environmental-health research with real-world relevance
- methodological rigor matches exposure-science / toxicology / epidemiology standards
- the anthropogenic-global-relevance framing is clear
- format limits respected (Short Communications: no more than 4,000 words and no more than 3 figures)
- you've considered Environment International or Environmental Pollution as alternative venues
Think Twice If
- the abstract reports a contaminant, exposure, or ecology result but does not state the environmental-health implication
- the methods are strong toxicology, but the study lacks a real-world exposure pathway, biomonitoring link, or human-health interpretation
- the dataset is highly local and the cover letter cannot explain why readers outside that location should care
- the manuscript is a Short Communication but needs more than 4,000 words or 3 figures to support the claim
- a sister journal, especially Environment International or Environmental Pollution, has stronger editorial-fit signals
What to read next
- Is Environmental Research a good journal?
Related status guide
If your manuscript is already in the portal, use the Environmental Research Under Review status guide to interpret the status window, follow-up threshold, and reviewer-risk preparation while you wait.
Last verified: 2026-05-26 against Environmental Research editorial pages.
Frequently asked questions
Upload through Elsevier's Editorial Manager portal at the official submission portal The journal accepts Original Research Articles (no more than 7,500 words), Short Communications (no more than 4,000 words and no more than 3 figures), Review Articles (~10,000 words), and Letters. José L. Domingo (Rovira and Virgili University, Reus, Spain) serves as Editor-in-Chief and assigns submissions to section editors covering toxicology, exposure science, epidemiology, and environmental cancer.
Median time to first decision is 12-16 weeks. Editorial scope assessment runs Day 3 through Week 4; external peer review runs Week 4 through Week 10; first decision lands Month 3 to Month 5 for papers that clear desk screen. Desk-reject decisions arrive in 2-4 weeks. Revisions typically reach second decision in 4-6 weeks.
There is no submission fee. The Gold Open Access APC is $3,930 (Sept 2025 published rate). Articles published under the subscription route carry no APC. Authors at institutions with Elsevier Read-and-Publish agreements may have the Gold APC fully covered; verify your institution's coverage before upload.
The three most common patterns are (1) pure-ecological or pure-toxicological work without environmental-health framing in the abstract, (2) wrong sister journal chosen when Environment International or Environmental Pollution has stronger editorial-fit signals, and (3) Short Communications that exceed 4,000 words or 3 figures. Format violations and missing Highlights bullets are the most-easily-fixed causes of return.
Both are Elsevier environmental-health journals with overlapping scope. Environment International (EIC: Adrian Covaci, IF 13.3) emphasizes cross-disciplinary global environmental health with stricter cross-disciplinary integration. Environmental Research (EIC: José L. Domingo, IF 7+) emphasizes multidisciplinary environmental-health research with deeper toxicology and exposure-science framing. The choice often depends on which editorial team's recent direction matches the contribution; rapid triage at both journals means a misaligned submission usually gets a redirect within 2-4 weeks.
Sources
Final step
Submitting to Environmental Research?
Run the Free Readiness Scan to see score, top issues, and journal-fit signals before you submit.
Target journal carried over: Environmental Research
Anthropic Privacy Partner. Zero-retention manuscript processing.