I submitted an article to the journal for the first time. Generally speaking, it is relatively easy to be accepted, but it does not mean that the journal is not good. It went through two major revisions during the submission period, and then was directly accepted. A total of 4 reviewers, one of the reviewers put forward a relatively negative opinion, but in the end the reviewer also agreed to publish after adding experiments. The specific timelines are as follows: 2020/01/03, Pending review; 2020/01/07, Under review (later I found that it was a Sunday and holiday, so it was delayed for a few days); 2020/01/31, Major Revisions (limited to 10 days); 2020/02/10, Revised Version Review; 2020/02/16, Major Revisions (limited to 3 days); 2020/02/18, Accepted for Publication. The reason for two major revisions was: in the first round, reviewers pointed out the defects of the article, let us provide targeted content; in the second round, three reviewers agreed to accept, but the other one felt unsatisfied with the revision, and required a major revision, then agreed to publish in the third round. Personally, I feel that the reviewers are still very serious and put forward some very targeted opinions. The quality of the article has also been further improved. I hope that the above information can bring some useful information to everyone's submissions. I wish you all the best!

(15) Thank | 小兵么么

The article has been accepted. Let’s talk about my submission experience. The process was much slower than someone’s here, but much faster than others’. I submitted it on May 23; it was under review the next day. There were three reviewers. The first reviewer submitted the comments on minor revision on June 6, the second reviewer submitted the comments on major revision on May 31, and the comments were quite many. The third reviewer submitted two comments on June 19. I received the notice of major revision from the editor on June 27, and I was given 10 days. Then, I submitted the revised version on July 5. On the same day, two reviewers submitted their agreement on acceptance to the system. And the other one submitted his agreement on acceptance to the system on July 11. And then there was a long waiting time until I received the notice of acceptance from editor on August 2. And then the fee was paid these days, then the proof. The expense is a bit high. This journal rejects manuscript quickly, sends manuscript for review quickly as well. The efficient is very high. It means a half of the success as long as it is sent for review. And then, it will be 90% successful as long as it is carefully revised in accordance with the expert comments. I hope that the journal will become better and better. Received Date: 23 May 2019; Revised Date: 5 July 2019; Accepted Date: 2 August 2019; Submission to First Decision (Days): 34.

(4) Thank | 游客

I should have submitted to Sustainability Planning, but I submitted to the wrong subject direction at the beginning. In fact, it took 2 weeks to communicate and reselect submission section. The official review was in mid-November, and then the result came out in one month. Both of the reviewers’ comments were major revision. Because of the first submission, there was no experience. I suffered a heavy blow. I happened to attend a meeting in Washington, so it was suspended for a week. There was no explicit time for the revision in the first review, but my friend said it’s better to submit the revised manuscript in 20 days. It took half a month to revise 45 comments. The first draft was too crude; it’s nice not to be rejected directly. I revised every comment with a very, very good attitude, and then I submitted it. In the second review, the comments were halved to more than 20 in total, but the comments were still major revision. Generally, in this case, if the revision was not good, it would be rejected. I found that many problems were explained clearly but not reflected in the manuscript. The reviews were experts, and the questions asked were all professional. What’s more, the language was referred to several times, so I polished twice. I submitted the manuscript. There were basically no major problems after the third round, just minor revision, I waited for half a month after the submission, the professional editor replied and agreed to accept it. It is an open access journal, so the teacher thinks it is valueless, but I think it’s OK. It is a both SCIE and SSCI journal, so it is not bad, and the reviewers are professional. I wish the journal to be better. Their responsible editors are good; they would actively contact to help solve questions once there are any.

(8) Thank | harlembeat

2018.09.24 submitted; 2018.10.01 Received major revision comments, a total of 2 reviewers, 1 major revision, 1 acceptance; 2018.10.12 resubmitted after revision; 2018.10.15 2 reviewers’ comments received; 2018.10.22 accepted; 2018.10.24 Published online. The advice given by the reviewers was very pertinent and helpful. The journal gave 10 days for revision, but I was afraid it would not be enough so I requested another 10 days. Took 7 days to revise the paper and then polished the language. On the 12th, we submitted the revised manuscript in the evening. Reviewers returned their comments on the 15th, then the status became pending editor decision. I was anxious, checking every day, and finally received the editor's acceptance mail on the morning of the 22nd. Then it was the proof step, but you can sign a payment statement first so the paper can be published online. Now you have to send the payment directly to the Swiss account. On the 24th, the paper was published online. Sustainability has high standards for novelty. The assistant editors are all very nice and responsible, whether rejection or sending to peer review is all fast, highly efficient. If the paper is sent out to peer review, and you can carefully revise according to the reviewers’ comments, there is a good chance that the paper will be accepted. I hope the journal is getting better and better. I am very grateful to this journal because now I have met our institute’s requirements for graduation. I also appreciate that this platform makes it possible to find a lot of journal information so conveniently. I hope my second paper will be accepted with much trouble.

(96) Thank | 小Paper

I have been in PED status for nearly 14 days. I asked the editor and they said they have contacted the academic editor, but did not provide any further details. I feel like it has been dragging on for a long time, so I am preparing to explain the situation to the editor and urge them to take action.

(0) Thank | Mr.Αδάμ

How are you doing, OP? Have you submitted for review? Mine has also been pending for 5 days.

(0) Thank | 大鹏借风起

Brothers in the same direction, PED has been for six days, asking the editor said that learning to code has no response, waiting anxiously.

(0) Thank | Mr.Αδάμ

Could you please help me check why my paper has been in the status of "Pending conversion" for the past 3 days? Is it because I haven't paid the fee? Do I need to pay the fee in order to go online?

(0) Thank | 枫林秋

Chinese Academy of Sciences is in the third quartile, and JCR is in the second quartile.

(0) Thank | Mr.Αδάμ

It has been six days since PED, I don't know what the situation is.

(0) Thank | Mr.Αδάμ

Submission in the morning of January 2, 2025
Assignment of editor in the afternoon of January 2, 2025
Confirmation of author and co-author emails on January 9, 2025
Three reviewers suggested major revisions on January 23, 2025, stating that due to time constraints, the paper was rejected but encouraged resubmission
More than a month of experimental and data supplements...
Resubmission on February 25, 2025
Same editor on February 27, 2025, APC confirmed on the same day
Three reviewers provided minor revision comments on March 11, 2025 (10 days)
Resubmission on March 17, 2025
One reviewer provided minor formatting comments on March 20, 2025 (5 days), returned on the same day
PED academic editor ruling on March 26, 2025
Email inquiry on March 31, 2025, editor waiting for academic editor ruling

This journal is not as easy to submit to as before, with a clearly enhanced process and professional feedback. It is recommended to be cautious if busy with graduation or work demands. Additionally, the publication fee has increased to CHF2400 (approximately 20,000 RMB), so it is advisable to communicate with your supervisor before making a decision.

(0) Thank | Mr.T

MDPI Special Issue: Disaster Risk Management and Resilience
Special Issue Homepage: https://www.mdpi.com/topics/MJUA3YX9T2
Participating Journals: Buildings, Climate, Fire, Sustainability, Water, Infrastructures
Submission Deadline: July 31, 2026

We welcome submissions related to this topic!

(0) Thank | junyao

Do submissions need to be formatted according to the journal template? Is it necessary to follow the MDPI citation format for references, or is a uniform format acceptable?

(0) Thank | VV

Could you please clarify whether the current APC processing fee is 2400 Swiss Francs as stated on the official website or 3400?

(0) Thank | zxy9797

January 13, 2025 submitted for review Pending
January 14, 2025 assistant editor assigned Under review
January 15, 2025 APC confirmed
February 5, 2025 pending minor revisions (5 days)
February 10, 2025 Resubmit
February 10, 2025 Pending
February 11, 2025 accepted
February 11, 2025 Pending English
February 11, 2025 English correction done
February 11, 2025 author proofreading
February 12, 2025 author proofreading - resubmitted
February 12, 2025 Pending conversion
February 12, 2025 xml2pdf done
February 12, 2025 Pending online
February 12, 2025 website online

(0) Thank | HHU2131

The page charge has already reached 3400 Swiss francs.

(0) Thank | 粒粒山楂丸

How long does it take to retrieve?

(0) Thank | kaigong

Submitted in the morning of January 15, 2025.
Passed the initial review in the afternoon of January 15, 2025, and entered the first round of review.
The first round of review was completed in the afternoon of January 31, 2025, waiting for the editor's decision.
On the morning of February 6, 2025, the editor requested a major revision within 10 days.
The revision was submitted on the morning of February 12, 2025.
In the morning of February 13, 2025, the second round of reviewer's comments returned, all YES, entering the academic editor's decision-making process (really fast).

(0) Thank | 梦博

Accepted after 45 days of review, undergoing major and minor revisions with feedback from four reviewers, whose comments were very constructive and responses were prompt. Once the issue and volume number are assigned, it is estimated that the total number of articles published this year will be around 7k-8k.

(0) Thank | kiwikk

It took more than 70 days from submission to acceptance, which is not as easy as rumored. Four experts provided a lot of suggestions for major revisions, but fortunately the outcome was good.

(0) Thank | kaigong

I really feel that this journal is getting stricter, it's not as easy as it used to be to get published.

(0) Thank | kaigong

Because of the urgent need for a paper, I resubmitted the manuscript that was previously rejected by a journal in the first round with encouragement to resubmit. The first round of review took about a month and a half. There were opinions from five reviewers, and the opinions of two reviewers who requested major revisions were extremely difficult to deal with. After making the revisions for ten days, the figures and tables were almost completely redone, and then another reviewer was still not satisfied. Then came the third round, in which one reviewer insisted on rejecting the manuscript. Unable to handle it, the editor invited another academic editor to double-check, and after dragging on for over half a month, it was finally accepted. This is actually from MDPI. If MDPI dares to promote this review process and quality of reviews, I would be embarrassed to mention some Elsevier journals.

(0) Thank | 欺言乐翁

Could you please tell me how long it takes to receive the next feedback after resubmitting for minor revisions? It has been 8 days since I submitted for major revisions and it is still under review, I don't know the reason for the delay.

(0) Thank | kaigong

The review of the reversed version has been on the 8th day without any new progress. May I ask what the reason is?

(0) Thank | kaigong

It's the 8th day of R V R, what could be the reason for no new developments yet?

(0) Thank | kaigong