Journal of Hazardous Materials Impact Factor

2024 Impact Factor: 11.3

5-Year Impact Factor: 12.4 (shows longer-term stability)

Category Rank: 19 out of 374 journals in Environmental Sciences & Ecology

Percentile: 95th

Quartile: Q1 (top 25%)

Publisher: Elsevier

Type: Peer-reviewed, full-text articles and reviews

Among Environmental Sciences & Ecology journals, Journal of Hazardous Materials ranks in the top 5% by impact factor (JCR 2024).

The 5-year JIF of 12.4 indicates the journal has maintained strong citation impact consistently. The slight decline from 5-year to 1-year may reflect the addition of more niche content or competition from newer environmental safety outlets.

Data sourced from our analysis of 20,449 journals in the Clarivate JCR 2024 database.

The journal grew steadily from ~6.1 in 2017 to a peak of ~14.2 in 2021, reflecting the explosion of hazardous materials and environmental remediation research. The post-2021 decline follows the broader citation normalization pattern seen across Elsevier environmental journals.

Journal of Hazardous Materials accepts research on:

• Characterization of hazardous materials (toxicity, persistence, bioavailability)
• Environmental transport and fate of pollutants
• Remediation technologies (sorption, degradation, chemical treatment)
• Industrial and occupational safety
• Risk assessment and exposure modeling
• Novel materials or additives and their environmental implications
• Heavy metals, persistent organic pollutants (POPs), endocrine disruptors, nanomaterials

The broad scope within hazardous materials means it competes for papers across chemistry, environmental engineering, toxicology, and public health. The 11.3 IF reflects citation strength across these applied disciplines.

Journal of Hazardous Materials has a selective process. Published acceptance rates are typically 25-35%, which is moderate for environmental science but aligns with its Q1 status and high IF.

The 60-90 day peer review window is longer than some competing environmental journals. If you need a faster first decision, Environmental Research or Water Research tend to move quicker. But for most environmental and hazardous materials researchers, the timeline is standard and the IF payoff justifies the wait.

One practical note: Journal of Hazardous Materials uses Elsevier's editorial system, so expect the standard Elsevier submission workflow. Reviewers are typically given 3-4 weeks to return reports, but delays in securing reviewers can push the first decision past 90 days.

In our pre-submission review work with manuscripts targeting Journal of Hazardous Materials, three patterns generate the most consistent desk rejections.

Materials paper without genuine hazard characterization. The Journal of Hazardous Materials' aims and scope state the journal focuses on "the evaluation, management and mitigation of hazardous materials risks." The most common desk-rejection trigger: papers about novel adsorbents, photocatalysts, or nanomaterials that present remediation efficiency data without addressing the materials' own hazard profile. JHM editors expect papers about new remediation technologies to address whether the treatment material itself introduces secondary contamination, what happens to the hazardous compound after "removal" (adsorption vs. degradation vs. concentration), and whether the degradation products are less toxic than the parent compound. A paper demonstrating high removal efficiency for a micropollutant without characterizing the transformation products does not meet the journal's core scope.

Regional contamination study without transferable scientific contribution. JHM receives a high volume of field survey papers documenting hazardous material contamination at specific locations. The journal's editorial guidance requires that papers make a "significant contribution to the field." Survey papers that characterize contamination levels at a new geographic location, without identifying a novel exposure pathway, a new remediation approach, or a mechanistic insight about fate and transport, are regularly desk-rejected. The editorial question is not "is this contamination documented?" but "what does this study teach the field about hazardous materials behavior that was not previously known?"

Risk assessment without validated exposure scenarios. JHM publishes health risk assessments, but the journal's standards require quantitative exposure modeling grounded in measured or well-characterized data. The most common failure pattern: risk assessments using generic exposure factors from EPA or WHO guidance documents applied to a new setting, without local data on exposure routes, bioavailability, or receptor populations. Risk assessments where all inputs are default values and the "contribution" is applying an established framework to a new region are treated as incremental work that does not justify publication in a Q1 journal.

A Journal of Hazardous Materials submission readiness check can assess whether the manuscript addresses the hazard characterization requirements and whether the scientific contribution is framed distinctly enough for JHM's competitive editorial bar.

Submit if:

• Your research addresses hazardous materials characterization, environmental transport, or remediation
• Data are robust with clear environmental or industrial safety implications
• Scope aligns with the journal's established topics (toxicity, contamination, cleanup technologies)
• You're targeting an established, selective, Q1 journal in environmental science

Consider alternatives if:

• Your work is too applied or too preliminary (try Chemosphere, Journal of Hazardous Materials Letters)
• You need a faster decision (check Ecological Engineering or Environmental Research)
• The work is highly interdisciplinary but not directly on hazardous materials (consider broad environmental journals)

An 11.3 IF doesn't mean every paper in Journal of Hazardous Materials will get 11 citations. Some papers in the journal may get very few citations; high-impact papers will get far more. The metric is an average, not a promise.

The Q1 ranking is more meaningful: it confirms the journal is among the top 25% by citation impact in its category, which usually correlates with rigorous peer review and established readership.

If you work in:

• Industrial safety or hazmat management: An 11.3 IF journal is top-tier, expect strong visibility
• Environmental remediation: Q1 status is significant; papers accumulate citations in this community
• Toxicology or risk assessment: The strong IF reflects active citation in safety literature
• Materials science (environmental angle): Strong but not the highest (Nature Materials, Advanced Materials are higher)

Citation behavior varies by subfield. Within hazardous materials and environmental safety, an 11.3 IF is genuinely selective.

Impact factor doesn't measure:

• Quality of individual papers: High-IF journals publish some weak papers; low-IF journals publish influential work
• Reproducibility: JIF counts citations, not whether cited findings hold up
• Clinical or practical relevance: Citation frequency ≠ real-world impact
• Review rigor: A high-IF journal may have high citation count without proportionally rigorous review (though selectivity often correlates with quality)

Use JIF as a signal of journal selectivity and citation reach, not as proof of paper quality.