Reviewers Guidelines


Reviewers Guidelines


Tanzanian Economic Review (TER) is a biannual journal of the University of Dar es Salaam School of Economics (UDSE). TER is not limited to the Tanzanian economy; it covers all aspects of Economics and Economic Transformation in developing countries. The Journal’s Keywords are; economic trends, economic transformation, socio-economic factors, growth and development. TER accepts articles of full length of 7,000 – 11,000 words. Short outstanding articles of not less than 3,000 words and book reviews are also accepted. The article's title should appear on the first page of the manuscript. For anonymity purposes, the author’s name or any other identifications do not appear on any page of the manuscript sent for review. Similarly, the reviewers should not include their names or any identifications in their reports.  

Guide to the reviewers

Normally the reviewer is expected to write her/his report on each specific part of the manuscript as an evaluation and a succinct guide to the author(s) on how to improve the manuscript in case the reviewer thinks the paper can be accepted after the comments are addressed. The reviewer should make a verdict as to whether the manuscript can be accepted as it is; subject to the comments given or rejected altogether. For major changes, the reviewer may indicate the resubmission of the revised manuscript before he/she recommends it for publication.

The areas of focus in the review start right from the title; then the abstract which should not exceed 150 words, and thereafter the rest of the content. All sections need to be reviewed and the reviewer will make comments in terms of the key sections such as introduction and background; objectives; theoretical and empirical literature review; and the methodology. Further, the empirical analysis, findings and discussion as well as conclusion and recommendations/policy implications should also be reviewed accordingly.

Note that TER management does not restrict the format and length of the reviewer’s report, but we prefer a detailed and guiding approach which can indicate to the author(s) the issues that must be addressed in the paper. The reviewer should be independent and anonymous to enhance the quality of the reviews.