Resources, Conservation and Recycling Submission Guide

Source: RCR on Elsevier, Clarivate JCR 2024, accessed April 2026.

Three operational signals govern editorial assessment:

1. Circular-economy / resource-management substance. The journal requires substantive circular-economy or resource-management contribution.

2. Methodological rigor. Empirical, modeling, LCA, or policy work must be top-tier.

3. Sustainability framing. The work should engage circular-economy or resource-conservation framing.

Recent RCR issues span:

• Circular economy strategies and frameworks

• E-waste and urban mining

• Plastic recycling and degradation

• Construction and demolition waste

• Industrial symbiosis and eco-industrial parks

• Life-cycle assessment (LCA) methodologies

• Policy and governance for circular economy

• AI/ML in resource and waste management

For specific recent papers and DOIs, see RCR on Elsevier. Representative recent papers:

• 10.1016/j.resconrec.2023.107456

• 10.1016/j.resconrec.2024.107789

• 10.1016/j.resconrec.2024.107923

• Initial decision: typically 4-8 weeks

• First decision after review: typically 8-14 weeks

• Revision rounds: typically 1-2 major revisions to acceptance

• Time to publication after acceptance: weeks (online first available)

Start with the official rules for upload mechanics, then judge the draft itself. The review tells you whether your paper clears the Resources, Conservation and Recycling fit check before upload, especially around sustainability framing thin, wrong sustainability venue chosen, and methodological execution doesn't clear top-tier bar. Paid Manusights reviews include a 60-day money-back guarantee, and we do not train models on submitted manuscripts.

Three patterns generate the most consistent rejections.

Sustainability framing thin

Pure-engineering or pure-economics work without circular-economy or resource-management framing faces redirection. The fix is to articulate the sustainability contribution.

Check sustainability framing thin before submitting to Resources, Conservation and Recycling →

Wrong sustainability venue chosen

RCR competes with JCP, Waste Management, Resources Policy, SP&C, and CES. The fix is informed routing.

Check wrong sustainability venue chosen before submitting to Resources, Conservation and Recycling →

Methodological execution doesn't clear top-tier bar

The fix is rigorous execution. A RCR manuscript readiness check can identify whether circular-economy framing, methodological rigor, and venue alignment align before submission.

Check methodological execution doesn't clear top tier bar before submitting to Resources, Conservation and Recycling →

Resources, Conservation and Recycling requires these at first submission:

• editable manuscript source file (.docx or .tex, not PDF)

• cover letter establishing the circular-economy or resource-management contribution for a broad readership

• highlights file (3-5 bullet points, 85 characters each) quantifying the resource-management or sustainability outcome

• graphical abstract showing the resource-flow or circular-economy diagram

• CRediT author contribution statement

• data availability statement covering life-cycle-assessment input data, material-flow-analysis datasets, recycling-process data, and any simulation source files

• declaration of competing interests

• ethics statement (where applicable)

• suggested reviewers with institutional affiliations and email addresses

• preprint deposition opt-in declaration if posting to SSRN

• $3,690 USD APC for the gold open-access option (2026; many institutional Elsevier transformative agreements cover the fee)

• declaration of generative AI use in the writing process per Elsevier policy

• for Review Articles, a separately submitted proposal abstract before drafting (recommended)

• for revised submissions, point-by-point reviewer response and marked-up manuscript

Across Manusights submission reviews for Resources, Conservation and Recycling, the most common artifact-related issue is life-cycle-assessment work submitted without explicit functional-unit and system-boundary specification in the methods. The journal's editorial culture treats LCA-style claims as falling short of acceptance criteria when the functional unit is implicit; submissions reporting environmental impact reductions without naming the functional unit (e.g., "per kg recycled material" vs "per service-life year") face routine major-revision requests on methodological transparency before substantive critique begins.

Run a Resources, Conservation and Recycling pre-submission readiness check before clicking submit to verify the package meets the journal's circular-economy and methodological-transparency bar.

Across Manusights submission reviews for Resources, Conservation and Recycling, manuscripts move through a four-stage editorial timeline. The editorial triage pattern at Elsevier sustainability journals favors submissions where the cover letter names a failure pattern in current resource-management practice that the manuscript addresses. Editors routinely reject "we calculated LCA for X process" framings without an explicit circular-economy stake and consistently screen for cover letters that demonstrate awareness of the journal's recent editorial culture around resource-flow integration.

Day 0 to 5: Editorial Manager intake and technical check

The platform performs automated checks (source-file format, highlights, declarations, AI-use disclosure). PDF source files are returned. Editorial staff verify the cover letter, data statement, and SSRN-preprint opt-in declaration if applicable.

Day 5 to 21: Editor-in-Chief or Subject Editor desk-screen

A Subject Editor (matched to industrial ecology, waste management, recycling technology, urban metabolism, circular-economy systems, life-cycle assessment methodology, or sustainable resource policy) reviews scope fit, the circular-economy framing, and the methodological rigor on LCA, MFA, or process-engineering work. Pure-engineering or pure-economics submissions without sustainability framing are routinely transferred via Elsevier's Article Transfer Service to Journal of Cleaner Production, Waste Management, or Resources Policy.

Week 4 to 8: External peer review

Manuscripts that pass desk-screen go to 2-3 reviewers selected for both the circular-economy subfield and any quantitative methods used (LCA, MFA, optimization, machine learning).

Week 8 to 16: Decision and revision rounds

First decisions arrive at the 4-8 week median, typically as major or minor revision. Revision cycles add 4-10 weeks. Authors may file a formal appeal per Elsevier's Appeal Policy (one appeal per submission, decision final). If posted on SSRN, the preprint becomes citable while peer review continues.

• Is Resources, Conservation and Recycling a good journal?

• Journal of Cleaner Production Submission Guide

• Waste Management Submission Guide

Before the reviewer-invitation stage, read the Resources, Conservation and Recycling package against the same risks this guide flags in the Manusights section. The practical question is whether the abstract, cover letter, figures or tables, methods, reporting statements, supplementary files, and references all make the journal choice obvious.

• If the abstract still points toward sustainability framing thin, revise the central claim before upload.

• If the evidence package leaves wrong sustainability venue chosen, strengthen the methods, controls, figures, or supplementary material rather than expecting reviewers to infer it.

• If the cover letter cannot resolve methodological execution doesn't clear top-tier bar, compare the target journal against the adjacent venues named above before submitting.

Last verified: April 2026 against RCR editorial pages.