Is Sustainability (MDPI) Predatory? A Practical Verdict
Sustainability is not predatory by standard definitions. It has a 3.3 Impact Factor and dual SCIE/SSCI indexing — but Norway removed it from approved lists and Finland downgraded it to Level 0.
Senior Researcher, Oncology & Cell Biology
Author context
Specializes in manuscript preparation and peer review strategy for oncology and cell biology, with deep experience evaluating submissions to Nature Medicine, JCO, Cancer Cell, and Cell-family journals.
Next step
Choose the next useful decision step first.
Use the guide or checklist that matches this page's intent before you ask for a manuscript-level diagnostic.
Quick answer: No, not by standard definitions. Sustainability is indexed in both SCIE and SSCI on Web of Science, in Scopus, and in DOAJ. It has a 3.3 Impact Factor. But it is the most aggressively questioned journal in MDPI's portfolio for good reason: Norway removed it from approved lists, Finland downgraded it to Level 0, Scopus briefly paused its indexing for reevaluation, and its special issue numbers are genuinely staggering — 3,303 open special issues against just 24 regular issues at one point.
Why people ask the question
No MDPI journal draws more scrutiny than Sustainability.
In September 2021, Sustainability was among the first 13 journals placed on Norway's "Level X" watchlist. By 2022, Norway had fully removed it from its national register of approved scientific publications. Norwegian researchers who publish in Sustainability no longer receive institutional publication credits. The decision was based on publication volume, scope breadth, and concerns about quality assurance.
Finland went further. In December 2024, its JUFO system downgraded 193 MDPI journals, including Sustainability, to Level 0. Finland specifically noted that Sustainability "also publishes high-quality articles, but the wide scope, large publication volume and fast publication processes have undermined confidence that the journal's procedures to ensure scientific quality work reliably down the line." Level 0 means publications earn only 0.1 points in Finnish funding formulas, compared to 1.0 for Level 1.
In January 2024, Scopus itself placed Sustainability's indexing on hold for reevaluation. Retraction Watch broke the story. Within days, Scopus completed its review and confirmed continued indexing — but the pause signaled that even Elsevier's indexing team was paying attention.
What is actually true about Sustainability
The journal was founded in 2009. Its current editor-in-chief is Steve W. Lyon (Ohio State University). It is indexed in both SCIE and SSCI, reflecting its cross-disciplinary scope bridging natural science and social science. It is also in Scopus and DOAJ.
Its Impact Factor is 3.3, 5-year IF is 3.6, CiteScore is 5.0, SJR is 0.688, h-index is 207. It ranks Q2 in Environmental Studies on JCR and Q1 in Geography, Planning and Development on Scopus. The Scopus categories also include Energy Engineering, Renewable Energy, Computer Science, and Computer Networks — an unusually broad range.
Annual output peaked at over 17,000 articles in 2022 (comparable to PLOS ONE), declining to approximately 13,500 in 2023. The APC is CHF 2,400. Estimated acceptance rate is around 40%. The journal grew from 78 articles in 2009 to 17,000+ in 2022. No traditional editorial system scales from 78 to 17,000 without fundamental changes in how quality control works.
When self-citations are removed from the Impact Factor calculation, the number drops by 38.96% — the largest self-citation-driven decline among studied MDPI journals, where the average drop was 14.8%.
Where the real risk sits
The risk is scale, scope, and the special issue infrastructure.
As of March 2021, Sustainability had 3,303 open special issues and only 24 regular issues — a ratio of 138 to 1. The journal was opening nearly 10 new special issues per day. If each special issue hosts 6-10 papers, the journal was soliciting 60-100 papers per day through special issues alone. The editorial board cannot possibly monitor thousands of special issues with the same attention. Guest editors become the real gatekeepers for the overwhelming majority of content, and their qualifications and rigor vary enormously.
The breadth of scope is simultaneously the journal's strength and its biggest vulnerability. "Sustainability" can be connected to nearly any research topic, maximizing the submission pool but making consistent editorial expertise across all papers nearly impossible at 17,000 articles per year.
Norway and Finland acted on this journal specifically, not just on MDPI generally. These are not symbolic gestures — both countries directly tie research funding to publication outputs in approved journals. The 38.96% self-citation drop further suggests the official IF overstates the journal's independent citation impact. MDPI reports reducing special issue content from 88% to 55% of articles, but it is unclear how much of this reduction applies specifically to Sustainability.
The better question than "is Sustainability predatory?"
The better question is whether the reputational cost is worth it.
If you are based in Norway (no publication credit) or Finland (Level 0, minimal credit), the answer is likely no. If your paper could target Environmental Science and Technology (IF 10.8), Journal of Cleaner Production (IF 10), One Earth (IF 15.3), or a discipline-specific venue, those carry stronger signals. If you need fast open-access publication with Web of Science indexing and the IF range works, Sustainability is technically legitimate — but understand that it is the MDPI journal where institutional skepticism is most advanced and most consequential.
Check regular versus special issue tracks before submitting. Look at the special issue size — one with 5-8 focused papers is normal, one with 40+ across loosely related topics is a volume play. Vet the guest editor's expertise in the topic.
How to evaluate Sustainability papers
For researchers evaluating Sustainability papers as a reader, reviewer, or committee member, check regular versus special issue track. Papers in regular issues went through the journal's main editorial pipeline. Special issue papers were managed by guest editors of varying quality. A special issue with 5-8 focused papers is normal; one with 40+ papers across loosely related topics is a volume play.
Check the guest editor's record if the paper came from a special issue. Do they have expertise in the topic? Have they published their own papers in the same issue? Do not write off the paper because of the journal — Sustainability publishes genuinely excellent research alongside weaker papers. At 17,000 articles per year, the variance is enormous, and individual papers should be assessed on their own merits.
Practical verdict
Sustainability is not predatory by standard indexing definitions. It has real SCIE/SSCI coverage, a real Impact Factor, and a functioning editorial process. But it operates at a scale that has made multiple national research systems uncomfortable enough to act. Two Nordic countries have removed or downgraded it. Scopus paused to reevaluate. The special issue ratio of 138-to-1 is unprecedented in academic publishing. If you publish here, know the institutional landscape in your country and field, and understand that this journal carries more reputational risk than most MDPI titles.
For the full picture on MDPI as a publisher, see our MDPI predatory assessment. To evaluate whether your manuscript fits Sustainability, try a free manuscript review.
Sources
Reference library
Use the core publishing datasets alongside this guide
This article answers one part of the publishing decision. The reference library covers the recurring questions that usually come next: how selective journals are, how long review takes, and what the submission requirements look like across journals.
Dataset / reference guide
Peer Review Timelines by Journal
Reference-grade journal timeline data that authors, labs, and writing centers can cite when discussing realistic review timing.
Dataset / benchmark
Biomedical Journal Acceptance Rates
A field-organized acceptance-rate guide that works as a neutral benchmark when authors are deciding how selective to target.
Reference table
Journal Submission Specs
A high-utility submission table covering word limits, figure caps, reference limits, and formatting expectations.
Before you upload
Choose the next useful decision step first.
Move from this article into the next decision-support step. The scan works best once the journal and submission plan are clearer.
Use the scan once the manuscript and target journal are concrete enough to evaluate.
Anthropic Privacy Partner. Zero-retention manuscript processing.
Where to go next
Conversion step
Choose the next useful decision step first.
Use the scan once the manuscript and target journal are concrete enough to evaluate.