Journal Guide
Remote Sensing Impact Factor 4.1: Publishing Guide
Earth observation for environmental monitoring, mapping, and change detection
4.1
Impact Factor (2024)
~50-60%
Acceptance Rate
~60-90 days median
Time to First Decision
What Remote Sens. Publishes
Remote Sensing published by MDPI is an open-access journal covering Earth observation, satellite imagery, and geospatial analysis. With JIF 4.1 and broad Q1-Q2 coverage, RS emphasizes research applying remote sensing to environmental monitoring, land cover mapping, and change detection. The journal publishes research on satellite data analysis, sensor technology, and geospatial applications. Critically: RS values applications with clear environmental or resource management relevance. Pure algorithm development without environmental context is less competitive. The journal seeks papers showing how remote sensing enables environmental understanding or management.
- Land cover and land use mapping: classification, monitoring, urban expansion
- Vegetation monitoring: biomass estimation, crop health, forest change detection
- Water resources: water body mapping, drought monitoring, flood detection
- Disaster monitoring: earthquake damage, flood extent, wildfire spread
- Climate change: glacier monitoring, sea ice extent, surface temperature
- Agricultural applications: crop classification, yield estimation, soil mapping
- Coastal and marine: coral bleaching, sea level change, ocean temperature
- Urban analysis: urban growth, impervious surface, heat island effects
Editor Insight
“Remote Sensing publishes Earth observation applications. We seek validated methods demonstrating environmental monitoring utility and operational feasibility.”
What Remote Sens. Editors Look For
Remote sensing application addressing environmental monitoring or resource management challenge
Present application with clear utility. Improved land cover accuracy? Earlier drought detection? Better crop yield prediction? Show practical benefit with quantified improvements.
Rigorous validation with ground truth data and independent datasets
Validate remote sensing results against in-situ measurements or field observations. Test on independent data. Proper validation proving practical applicability essential.
Algorithm or methodology with clear improvement over existing approaches
Show your classification, detection, or analysis method outperforms existing approaches. What advantages drive adoption? Quantitative comparison with state-of-the-art essential.
Practical implementation feasibility with real satellite or drone data
Use actual remote sensing data (Sentinel, Landsat, high-resolution imagery). Show workflow is operationalizable. Real data validation proves practical utility.
Scalability and transferability to other regions or timeframes
Show method works across different areas or over time. Generalizability important for operational application. Single-site studies less competitive.
Why Papers Get Rejected
These patterns appear repeatedly in manuscripts that don't make it past Remote Sens.'s editorial review:
Algorithm development without environmental application context
Remote Sensing expects environmental or resource management relevance. Developing algorithm without showing real environmental benefit is insufficient.
Validation with synthetic data or simulation without ground truth
Real in-situ validation against field measurements essential. Synthetic validation alone doesn't prove operational utility.
No comparison with existing remote sensing methods
Show your approach outperforms established methods. Quantitative accuracy comparison necessary.
Applicability limited to single study site without demonstrating transferability
Methods must generalize to other locations or time periods. Site-specific development has limited operational value.
Ignoring practical data availability and processing requirements
Operationalizable methods must use available satellite data and run on practical computing resources. Requiring rare imagery or supercomputing limits adoption.
Does your manuscript avoid these patterns?
The quick diagnostic reads your full manuscript against Remote Sens.'s criteria and flags the specific issues most likely to cause rejection.
Insider Tips from Remote Sens. Authors
Climate change monitoring and extreme weather detection highly valued
Applications addressing climate impacts (glacial melt, sea ice loss, drought) have high relevance.
Tropical deforestation and forest monitoring competitive
Remote sensing monitoring forest cover in tropical regions aligns with conservation priorities.
Machine learning and deep learning for image analysis trending
Neural networks for satellite image classification increasingly valued in remote sensing papers.
High-resolution and multispectral analysis gaining importance
High-resolution (sub-meter) imagery and multispectral analysis enabling detailed mapping increasingly prominent.
UAV and drone-based Earth observation emerging field
Unmanned aerial systems for localized monitoring increasingly competitive.
The Remote Sens. Submission Process
Manuscript preparation
Prep5,000-8,000 words with 5-7 figures. Include remote sensing approach and data description, algorithm or methodology, validation with ground truth, accuracy assessment, comparison with existing methods, application demonstration.
Submission via MDPI system
Day 0Submit at https://www.mdpi.com/journal/remotesensing/. Required: manuscript emphasizing application and validation, figures showing remote sensing data and results, cover letter highlighting novelty and utility.
Editorial assessment
1-2 weeksEditor assesses novelty and environmental relevance. Papers lacking application context or weak validation face lower priority. Moderate desk rejection ~15-25%.
Peer review
60-90 days2-3 remote sensing experts assess methodology rigor, validation quality, comparison with state-of-the-art, and environmental significance. First decision 60-90 days.
Revision and publication
Revision: 2-4 weeksRevisions often request additional validation or comparison data. Publication 1-3 weeks after acceptance (fast MDPI OA).
Remote Sens. by the Numbers
| 2024 Impact Factor | 5.0 |
| 5-Year Impact Factor | 5.3 |
| Acceptance rate | ~50-60% |
| Desk rejection rate | ~15-25% |
| Median first decision | ~75 days |
| Open access APC | ~$1,900-2,200 |
| Publisher | MDPI |
| Founded | 2009 |
Before you submit
Remote Sens. accepts a small fraction of submissions. Make your attempt count.
The pre-submission diagnostic runs a live literature search, scores your manuscript section by section, and gives you a prioritized fix list calibrated to Remote Sens.. ~30 minutes.
Article Types
Research Article
5,000-8,000 wordsRemote sensing application with validation
Review
7,000-12,000 wordsRemote sensing topic review
Landmark Remote Sens. Papers
Papers that defined fields and changed science:
- Land cover classification and mapping (various) - satellite imagery analysis
- Glacier and ice sheet monitoring (various) - climate change signals
- Deforestation detection (2000s+) - tropical forest monitoring
- Flood and disaster mapping (various) - rapid damage assessment
Preparing a Remote Sens. Submission?
Get pre-submission feedback from reviewers who've published in Remote Sens. and know exactly what editors look for.
Run Free Readiness ScanNeed expert depth? Human review from $1,000
Primary Fields
Related Articles
- Desk Rejection: What It Means, Why It Happens, and What to Do Next
- How to Respond to Reviewer Comments (Without Losing Your Mind)
- How to Choose the Right Journal for Your Paper (A Practical Guide)
- Pre-Submission Scientific Review: What It Costs, When It Works, and When to Skip It
Ready to submit to Remote Sens.?
A desk rejection costs months. Get expert feedback before you submit, from scientists who know exactly what Remote Sens. editors look for.
Avoid Desk Rejection
Get expert pre-submission review before you submit to Remote Sens.. 3-7 day turnaround.
Manuscript Rejected?
Expert revision help to strengthen your manuscript and resubmit with confidence.
Reviewer Response Help
Get expert guidance crafting your response to Remote Sens. reviewers.
Need field-expert depth? Human review from $1,000