Submission

Submissions should be emailed to the Editor-in-Chief at:
haralambides@ese.eur.nl.

To maintain the integrity of the double-blind refereeing process, two separate files must be submitted:

Cover letter

The template for the required Cover Letter can be downloaded from the link below.
The Cover Letter must contain: (i) the title of the paper as well as a statement indicating that the paper is not currently being considered by another journal; (ii) complete information on the corresponding author (address and other contact particulars); (iii) acknowledgements and headnotes as well as information on possible co-authors.

Manuscript

Manuscripts can only be accepted in MS Word format.

Author(s) information should only appear in the Cover Letter.
Submission of a paper for refereeing means that the author certifies that the manuscript has not been accepted for publication by another journal, nor is it being refereed elsewhere at the same time. Withdrawing a paper under review without prior consultation with the Editor-in-Chief is not advisable.

Authors should detail any commercial interests they might have in the subject matter of their article. Maritime Economics and Logistics will not publish articles whose argumentation and or modelling is based on privy, commercially sensitive, or otherwise confidential information. Prior to submission, therefore, authors are advised to seek publication permission from the respective information or data sources.

An electronic acknowledgement is sent when the paper has been safely retrieved.

Click here to download the Cover Letter (doc, 29 kB)

General advice

Authors are advised that strict adherence to our "Instructions to Authors" will help speed up the refereeing and production stages for most papers.
In addition to the submission instructions below, we recommend that you read the Editor's advice in his editorial 'Dos and don’ts in scholarly publishing'.
We also recommend the following (Text taken from Five golden rules for writing a good scientific paper by Julian Venables, reproduced with permission.)

1) Focus EVERYTHING around the ONE MAIN RESULT.

Identify the main important figure and a couple of figures that support that finding and write the Introduction as build up to that figure and the Discussion to discuss that figure. Strip away as many unnecessary figures as possible from the results so that your central narrative runs through the paper.

2) Tell the audience what is GOOD about your paper.

Frame the Introduction in terms of the problem your result solves and the knowledge gap it fills. Then tell the audience how your result IMPROVES things and brings our knowledge forward. What are the potential applications? Restate this take-home message throughout the paper in the Results and Discussion.

3) EDUCATE and INFORM

The paper might not have the most earth shattering result in it (see point 1) but it should explain the field and the problems of the field (see point 2). There should be a mini-review in the introduction that explains everything you need to know to understand the paper. People from other fields will like you for this and cite you, as will, even, experts in the field. It is always pleasant to learn, and hearing stuff you already know is fulfilling, compared to looking at an agarose gel or Western blot.

4) Everything should STAND ALONE

The paper should contain all the information needed to understand the paper (see point 3). Each section of the Results should explain why each experiment was done and what was found. Each figure legend should explain everything in the figure. Each sentence should explain what it is talking about and so it is best to avoid pronouns. It is OK and good to repeat the name of the object of the previous sentence.

5) BE CLEAR - SENTENCES SHOULD BE LESS THAN 25 WORDS LONG.

Yes you maybe heard it here first (its in the book along with more golden rules)! If you notice in point 1, the whole paper should be about one result. Well that goes for sentences too! Just simple subject and verb for sentences please! The 20 + 10 rule says that for each 10 words above 20 a sentence becomes twice as hard to read. So for a 70 word sentence, which is not uncommon for francophone scientists, there is an ‘excess of 50 words’ i.e. 5 extra 10s, or a 2x2x2x2x2 = a 32-fold increase in difficulty!