Review

REVIEW

AE                                                    Agrarian EconomY

TITLE OF THE ARTICLE …………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

1. General value of the article

a) includes a sufficient scientific novelty

b) substantially contributes to the science

c) argues the existing results

d) does not correspond to the Journal specification

2. Methods of the research

a) correspond to needs of the article

b) are represented in inappropriate way

c) do not correspond to the article needs

3. Basic data

a) sufficient

b) insufficient

4. Statistical researches

a) sufficient

b) may be accepted after consideration of the reviewer’s remarks

c) insufficient

5. Illustrations

a) appropriate in quality and quantity

b) quality of illustration № …………………….. is inadequate

c) can be corrected

d) inappropriate

6. Tables and figures

a) appropriate

b) needimprovement

c) inappropriate or improper

7. Interpretation of the research results

a) appropriate

b) may be accepted after consideration of the reviewer’s remarks

c) improper or incomprehensive

d) inconclusive

8. References

a) appropriate in quality and quantity

b) improperbecause of insufficient number

c) inappropriate because of low quality (old, designed with no correspondence to the requirements, etc.)

d) lack of widely known (classical) sources on the topic of the article

9. Unit of measure

a) appropriate

b) inappropriate

10. Summary

a) correct

b) doesnot (completely) revealessence of the article

c) needs radical correction

11. Linguistic estimation of the work

a) good

b) needs improvement

c) needs radical correction

12. General estimation and proposals as to the article publishing

a) very good - may be accepted and published

b) good – may be accepted and published after consideration of the reviewer’s remarks

c) may be accepted and published after radical improvement

d) may not be published in “Agrarian Economics”

Commentsof the reviewer as to the article estimates

signature of the reviewer

Scientific degree, academic title and full name of the reviewer