The Change Architect logo The Change ArchitectHumanitarian Governance
Home / Publish with us / Review workflow

Publishing review workflow.

A clear path for humanitarian papers, studies, field notes, practitioner essays, and organization case studies from submission to editorial decision.

Submit work →Author guidelinesPublication formatEditorial policy
Review boundary

Not a journal. Not academic peer review. Still serious.

The Change Architect publishing route is an editorial review route for public humanitarian knowledge. It is designed to make useful work discoverable while protecting authors, communities, organizations, and readers from unclear claims.

  • There is no fee to submit.
  • Publication is not guaranteed.
  • Accepted work is labeled honestly by content type.
  • Confidential, identifying, or unsafe field data should not be submitted unless it has been properly anonymized.
  • Work should not be described as peer reviewed unless a separate formal peer-review process is created and disclosed.
Review stages

From intake to decision.

1. Received / intake logThe submission is recorded with title, author details, topic, country or region focus, and selected content type.
2. Completeness and rights checkWe check whether the file is readable, the author can be contacted, and the author has the right to submit it.
3. Safety and sensitivity screenWe look for confidential data, identifiable vulnerable people, unsafe allegations, or details that could expose field teams.
4. Editorial quality reviewWe review relevance, structure, evidence, source transparency, practical value, and fit with the platform.
5. Author clarification or revisionWhen useful, the author may be asked for stronger sources, anonymization, clearer limitations, or a cleaner version.
6. Publication decision and labelThe submission may be accepted, declined, withdrawn, or returned for revision with a clear public label if published.

Publication labels

Accepted work is labeled according to its real form and evidence base, not just the author's preferred category.

Working paperStudent researchPractitioner essayField noteOrganization case studyData brief

Author metadata we request

Good metadata helps readers understand who wrote the work, where it is grounded, and how to cite or contact the author responsibly.

  • name, email, affiliation or organization, and author role or discipline
  • ORCID, LinkedIn, SSRN, institutional profile, or other profile URL where available
  • country or region focus, keywords, abstract, and preferred public label
  • rights or prior publication status, including whether the work is already public elsewhere
  • AI assistance disclosure, if AI helped with drafting, editing, translation, coding, analysis, or summarization
  • sensitivity or confidentiality note where field details need special handling

Decision labels

Internal decision labels keep the process organized and honest.

ReceivedNeeds clarificationRevision requestedAccepted for platform publicationDeclinedWithdrawn
Submit work →Publication formatCorrections