Critical policy decisions miss out on research stuck in an 18-month publishing queue.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Relevant articles
Open Access articles citing this article.
-
Duration and quality of the peer review process: the author’s perspective
Scientometrics Open Access 09 March 2017
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 51 print issues and online access
$199.00 per year
only $3.90 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on SpringerLink
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References
Wilson, E. O. Conserv. Biol. 14, 1 (2000).
Harrison, S., Stahl, A. & Doak, D. Conserv. Biol. 7, 950 (1993).
ISI Journal Citation Reports (Institute for Scientific Information, Philadelphia, 2000).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kareiva, P., Marvier, M., West, S. et al. Slow-moving journals hinder conservation efforts. Nature 420, 15 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1038/420015a
Issue date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/420015a
This article is cited by
-
All-pervading insider bias alters review time in Turkish university journals
Scientometrics (2023)
-
A framework for assessing the peer review duration of journals: case study in computer science
Scientometrics (2021)
-
Duration and quality of the peer review process: the author’s perspective
Scientometrics (2017)
-
Should conservation biologists push policies?
Nature (2006)