About the Journal

1.   Focus and Scope

The aim of Landscape Review (ISSN 2253–1440) is to showcase the relationship between research and professional practice in the field of landscape architecture. It offers a forum for scholarly writing and critique on a wide range of topics that particularly impact Oceania, and more broadly, the rest of the world.

We encourage articles that further develop research ideas and findings from previously published peer reviewed sources, critiques or reflections, to analyse and synthesise them for impact within professional practice and/or academic research.

2.   Audience

The articles published in Landscape Review will be of interest to a broad readership, including:  

  • landscape architecture practitioners and allied disciplines who are committed to ensuring their design, planning and management practice is informed by the latest and relevant research;
  • policy advisors and decision makers in business and government who seek to ensure best practice in landscape change and land development;
  • landscape architecture researchers who seek to maximise their impact and those with an interest in the impact of academic research in society;
  • students and teachers seeking up to date knowledge on research applications.

3.   Journal History and Archiving

Landscape Review  was established in 1995 by the Department (now School) of Landscape Architecture, Lincoln University, Christchurch, New Zealand. The journal is committed to the development of a culture of research, scholarship and research-informed practice in landscape architecture.

Issue 14(1) in 2011 was the first fully digital issue of Landscape Review. In addition, all earlier back issues have been scanned and are searchable via the index feature of this site by author, title or issue.  We have endeavoured to contact every author and have only been able to upload articles of authors who have agreed to this. We continue to archive all published work on our journal web site.

If you are the author of an article which has not been uploaded, or if you have contact details for an author, please go to Contact Us on the journal web site.

In the unlikely event that Landscape Review is no longer being published, continued access to our content is preserved by electronic backup with the PKP Preservation Network (PKP-PN).

4.   Open Access

Open access is the condition where the copyright holder of a scholarly work grants usage rights to others using an open license (Creative Commons or equivalent) allowing for immediate free access to the work and permitting any user to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of articles, crawl them for indexing, pass as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose.

5.   Funding

Landscape Review does not have article processing charges or submission charges. This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

Landscape Review is currently funded by internal support from Lincoln University Library and the Faculty of Environment, Society and Design in Aotearoa New Zealand. Further funding is generated from editorial work with the Landscape Research Group (LRG), a registered charity (No. 287610) in the UK.

Journals@Lincoln is an open access pathway through which peer-reviewed research outputs can be made publicly available to meet funder requirements when arising from research projects that may be fully or partially funded through government research investment. Data@Lincoln is also an open access repository for publishing research data to comply with funder and publisher requirements.

Future partnerships with other universities, research bodies, philanthropic organisations, government agencies, corporate entities and individual reader donors may be sought to strengthen editorial excellence, innovate and deliver greater engagement with our readership, and monitor the impact of authors’ work beyond our immediate readership. Any future acknowledgements of contributions will remain relevant and unobtrusive.

6.   Editorial Process

Landscape Review is a peer reviewed scholarly journal. The governance and management structure comprises a Chief Editor appointed by the School of Landscape Architecture, two Managing Editors, one drawn from academia and one from professional practice within Oceania, each appointed for a nominal term of three years, and an Editorial Board.

The three editors named on the website collectively exercise editorial control over the content of the journal. They may issue either open or individual invitations to contribute to a particular theme or topic, but editorial decisions are always made only on the merit and relevance of the submitted manuscript.

Landscape Review's Editorial Board members provide a critical component in maintaining oversight of the editorial decision-making process, particularly the selection of reviewers and authors for articles. They are listed on the journal web site with their respective affiliations and relevant expertise. Board members may be asked to advise the editors of potential authors or reviewers for a manuscript or may from time to time take on the reviewer role themselves.

All contributions to this journal (except for report-type or creative-type contributions) will undergo a double-blind review process by at least two reviewers (ideally an academic and a practitioner) based on an initial editorial screening. Some contributions may be editorially reviewed only as agreed by the Editors. We also welcome proposals for special Issues.

Reviewers will be sought from both public and private professional practice and academic staff in tertiary education institutions. We seek to protect the anonymity of authors and reviewers unless an individual specifically requests to have their identity known eg in accordance with Indigenous tikanga (protocols). We would however like to acknowledge and list all our reviewers every three years with their permission.

Reviewers will be invited to review manuscripts, provide feedback for authors and make recommendations that assist the editors in making a decision on publication. Turnaround periods for review vary depending on a reviewer's workload, but we aim to be able to provide a response to authors as soon as possible, based on an online review template.

Landscape Review will be published once or twice a year, as one or two issues in a volume, with up to five contributions per issue. The entire issue will be published online simultaneously (rather than article by article). Readers can register on the Landscape Review web site and receive notifications of the release of new issues.

7.   Guiding Principles

A.      Trust and integrity

This journal is committed to serving the public good and freedom of speech while retaining a respectful, independent, transparent and trustworthy editorial process that fosters trust between our readers and authors. Our guiding principles align with those of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Principles of Transparency and Best Practice Guidelines. COPE is a non-profit organisation dedicated to promoting integrity in research practice and publication.

Generally speaking, authors and reviewers will have attained a research level Masters or PhD, or have equivalent experience with research-based project work in professional practice. The journal will seek diversity in the cultural background, gender, age and geography (where an author is based) of its authors and reviewers.

B.      Conflict of interest

Authors and editors are obligated to disclose any affiliation, grant, financial interest or gifts that may be relevant, or perceived to be relevant, to the topic about which they are writing. This is not intended to prevent publication, but to protect the author’s reputation and the integrity of the journal by declaring the existence of conflicts of interest. Any views expressed in articles are the personal opinions of the experts named. They may not represent the views of the journal.

C.       Post-publication mistakes and inaccuracies

Landscape Review welcomes post-publication commentary and discussion by our readers via letters to the Editor or via online publications or social media channels that post notices of new issues. If a mistake is made, we will correct it as soon as possible. We strive for fairness and accuracy at all times and encourage readers to advise us of any significant errors. A correction or retraction notice, linked to the original article, will be issued to clearly state which part(s) of the article are incorrect, inaccurate or unreliable. We will be consulting the retraction guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) in determining whether a retraction notice is required. A full removal of a contribution will be done as a last resort when:

  1. there is a legal requirement to do so;
  2. major flaws, inaccuracies or breaches of community standards renders the work unsalvageable; or
  3. the internal editorial process was somehow compromised.

D.      Ethics and malpractice

Where applicable, authors are expected to follow their institutional policies for research ethics where humans or animals may be involved. At the very least, informed consent to participate in a study should be obtained from participants (or their parent or guardian in the case of children under 18).

Authors should include a statement within the article text detailing the approval granted by their institutional ethics committee to carry out the study, including the name of the ethics committee and reference number of the approval.  Peer reviewers are asked to comment on any ethical issues that have not been clarified in a submission.

E.      Complaints of misconduct

Complaints should be emailed to the Editor at Contact Us on the journal web site. The Editor responsible for the article will assess the complaint and discuss it with the author. If the Editor and author agree there is a factual error, a correction will be published. If the author and Editor find no significant error worthy of correction, the complaint will be rejected. The complainant will be notified of the outcome of the complaint.

If a complainant is not satisfied with the outcome of a complaint, they may contact the Editor, who will attempt to resolve the issue to the satisfaction of all parties. If this fails, the Editor may refer the complaint to the Editorial Board and the complainant will be invited to make a further submission, if required.

If there is an allegation of misconduct by an Editor, the complainant should email members of the Editorial Board to resolve the issue to the satisfaction of all parties. If the allegation of misconduct is proven, the Editor will be asked to step down from their role and the Editorial Board will aim to find a suitable replacement.

F.      Licencing and intellectual property

We believe in the free flow of information so authors retain their copyright and IP but allow the publisher to publish their work under a Creative Commons license. This means readers may republish our contributions for free according to certain guidelines under the Creative Commons - Attribution license. Please use the DOI reference provided for each article when republishing or citing the work.

G.      Authorship and contributorship

Articles should list the names of all those who contributed to the published work. Individuals or organisations who have contributed to the article but do not meet the criteria for authorship, should be credited by name and affiliation in the 'Aknowledgements' section.

Authors are permitted to use the CRediT (Contributor Role Taxonomy) system to acknowledge different modes of contribution but this is not a requirement.

H.      Data Sharing

Authors are encouraged to:

  •  share your research data in a relevant public data repository such as Data@Lincoln;
  •  include a data availability statement linking to your data and if it is not possible to share your data, use the statement to confirm why it cannot be shared; 
  •  cite this data in your research.

I.      Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI)

Authors:   We understand that AI assisted writing has become more commonplace as the technology becomes increasingly accessible. AI tools that make suggestions to improve or enhance your own work, such as improving your language, grammar or structure, are considered Assistive AI tools and do not require disclosure by authors. However, authors remain responsible for ensuring their submission is accurate and meets the highest standards of scholarship.

Generative AI tools can produce content such as generating references, text, images or any other form of content and must be disclosed when used by authors. Authors should cite original sources, rather than use Generative AI tools as primary sources within the references. It is not acceptable to enhance, obscure, move, remove, or introduce a specific feature within an image. Adjustments of brightness, contrast, or colour balance are acceptable if and as long as they do not obscure or eliminate any information present in the original.

If your submission was primarily or partially generated using AI, this must be disclosed upon submission so the editorial team can evaluate the content generated. You should clearly indicate the AI model used, reason for use, verify the reliability of the generated content and correct any errors, check the original sources of the generated content to be sure that someone else’s work has not been plagiarised, verify any claims made prior to submission to avoid fabrication and/or false content, and not list AI bots as authors.

Reviewers:   We recognise that reviewers may wish to use Assistive AI to improve the quality of the language in their review. If you do so, you should make this known to the Editor and remain responsible for the content, accuracy and constructive feedback within your review.

Reviewers suspecting any inappropriate (errors, plagiarism, fabrication) or undisclosed use of Generative AI in a submission should flag their concerns with the journal Editors. If Editors suspect the use of Generative AI in a submitted manuscript or a submitted review, they will consider this in undertaking an editorial assessment of the author’s submission and/or the reviewer’s feedback. The Editor will then discuss any concerns with the author or reviewer and resolve the issue.