Yogesh Singh
The Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI) is the entry point to the Web of Science Core Collection, and a journal gets in on quality alone. Clarivate does not ask an ESCI applicant to prove citation impact. It asks the journal to prove that it is run properly.
That makes ESCI the realistic first Web of Science target for a young, regional or specialist journal. Once accepted, the journal’s articles are indexed, its citations are tracked, and it becomes eligible for the flagship indexes (SCIE, SSCI and AHCI) when it later meets the impact criteria.
This guide covers each requirement in the order Clarivate checks it, the documents to prepare, how to submit, and the mistakes that get journals rejected.
How Clarivate evaluates a journal: 28 criteria, 24 of which matter for ESCI
Clarivate judges every journal against one set of 28 criteria: 24 quality criteria and 4 impact criteria. All new submissions are evaluated on the 24 quality criteria only, and journals that pass are added to ESCI.
The 24 quality criteria are checked in three steps, and each step has its own penalty for failing.
| Step | Criteria | What it decides | If the journal fails |
|---|---|---|---|
| Initial triage | 7 | Can Clarivate identify the journal, read it, and reach its staff? | Resubmit as soon as the gaps are fixed |
| Editorial triage | 9 | Does the journal merit a full evaluation? | First failure: no embargo. Second consecutive failure: 1-year embargo |
| Editorial evaluation (quality) | 8 | Do the board, authors and content match the scope, and is the editorial work rigorous? | Embargo of at least 2 years |
| Editorial evaluation (impact) | 4 | Is the journal among the most influential in its field? | Not applied to new submissions |
The two-year embargo at the third step is the reason to audit first and apply second. An early application that fails on quality costs far more time than a later one that passes.
Source: Clarivate, Journal evaluation process and selection criteria.
Step 1: Initial triage (criteria 1 to 7)
Initial triage confirms that the journal can be identified without doubt and that Clarivate knows whom to contact. These are yes-or-no checks, so there is no excuse for failing them.
| # | Criterion | What Clarivate needs to see |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | ISSN | A registered ISSN that can be verified on the ISSN Portal and is shown the same way on every platform. Give both print and electronic ISSNs if you have both. |
| 2 | Journal title | A distinct title that matches the ISSN record, the stated scope, the published content, and the editors and authors. It must read the same on articles, issues, the journal page and the website. |
| 3 | Journal publisher | A clearly named publisher with a verifiable physical office address. A P.O. Box is not accepted. Any society ownership or affiliation must be stated with verifiable contact details. |
| 4 | URL | The journal URL and full-text access details for current content. |
| 5 | Content access | Full access to published content for Web of Science editors. For subscription or hybrid journals, IP-range access is preferred; a non-expiring username and password also works. |
| 6 | Peer review policy | A clear, easy-to-find statement of commitment to peer review or editorial oversight. Primary research articles must go through external peer review. |
| 7 | Contact details | Direct contacts for the main editorial and production roles. |
Three quick checks catch most problems here. Compare the ISSN and title on your latest PDF with the ISSN Portal record. Confirm the publisher address appears on the journal site, not only on the publisher site. Open the peer review policy from the homepage in two clicks or fewer.
Step 2: Editorial triage (criteria 8 to 16)
In editorial triage, Web of Science editors look at the journal itself and decide whether it deserves a full evaluation. Most of these nine criteria can be checked from your website and your last few issues.
| # | Criterion | What Clarivate needs to see |
|---|---|---|
| 8 | Scholarly content | Mainly original scholarly material, written for graduate, post-doctoral or professional researchers. |
| 9 | English titles and abstracts | An accurate English translation of every article title, whatever the language of the article. Every scholarly article needs an abstract, and the abstract must be in English. |
| 10 | Roman-script bibliographic information | Cited references, author names and affiliations published in Roman script. |
| 11 | Clarity of language | English text that a global readership can follow without effort. |
| 12 | Timeliness and publication volume | A stated frequency, or a clear statement that publication is irregular or continuous, and a record of keeping to it. Enough articles each year to show the journal is sustainable, and enough content across the full scope to be evaluated. |
| 13 | Website functionality | Accurate information and easy navigation to published content, the editorial board, author instructions, the peer review policy and the access model. The journal site and the publisher site must link to each other. |
| 14 | Ethics statements | Clear ethical requirements for authors and published work. If you follow COPE, WAME or the Declaration of Helsinki, show the full text with credit, or give a working link to it. |
| 15 | Editorial affiliation details | Full name, institution and country or region for every member of the editorial team, including guest editors of special issues. ORCID iDs or institutional profile links are optional but useful. |
| 16 | Author affiliation details | Full name, institution and country or region for every author. ORCID iDs are optional but useful. |
A non-English journal can pass this step. What it cannot do is skip English titles and abstracts, or publish references and affiliations only in a non-Roman script.
The schedule criterion is where many young journals fall down. A quarterly journal that publishes its March issue in June has already broken its own stated policy.
Step 3: Editorial evaluation for quality (criteria 17 to 24)
This is the step that carries the two-year embargo, and it is judged on your published articles, not on your policy pages. The editors check whether the title, scope, editorial board, authors and content all fit together, and whether the editorial work is rigorous.
| # | Criterion | What Clarivate needs to see |
|---|---|---|
| 17 | Editorial board composition | Editors whose affiliations, geographic spread and publication records fit the journal’s scope and content. Board size should match the volume and breadth of what you publish. Full-time professional editors are given due consideration. |
| 18 | Validity of statements | Published content that follows the journal’s own declared policies, and a website that is accurate and current. Questionable content or false claims can be investigated. |
| 19 | Peer review | Content that shows effective peer review or editorial oversight. Warning signs include weak rigour or validity, out-of-scope articles and irrelevant citations. |
| 20 | Content relevance | A well-defined scope and purpose, and articles consistent with the title, the scope and the theme of any special issue. |
| 21 | Grant support details | Funding acknowledgements in fields where grant support is common or required. This one is recommended, not mandatory. |
| 22 | Adherence to community standards | Editorial policies in line with recognised best practice such as COPE Core Practices, and articles that follow the standards of the field, for example in organism or chemical nomenclature. |
| 23 | Author distribution | Authors whose affiliations, geographic spread and publication records show they belong to the scholarly community the journal serves. |
| 24 | Appropriate citations to the literature | Articles that properly acknowledge the existing literature on their topic. |
Clarivate holds the publisher and the editorial board accountable for all published content, special issues included. One badly handled special issue can undo years of careful regular issues.
The practical test is simple. Pick ten recent articles at random and ask whether each one is in scope, properly reviewed and properly referenced. If two or three fail, fix the editorial process before you apply.
The four impact criteria: not needed for ESCI
The four impact criteria apply only when a journal is considered for SCIE, SSCI or AHCI. They are comparative citation analysis, author citation analysis, editorial board citation analysis and content significance.
You cannot apply for this upgrade. Clarivate monitors ESCI journals internally and re-evaluates one when its citation activity suggests the impact criteria may be met. The journal is checked on the 24 quality criteria again first, so quality work never stops after acceptance.
What to prepare before you apply
The Publisher Portal submission form asks for specific facts and URLs, so collect them before you start. Every answer should match what is on your website on the day you submit.
| Area | What the form asks for |
|---|---|
| Journal identity | Title, ISSN(s), homepage URL, first year of publication, frequency, journal country, suggested Web of Science category |
| Publisher | Publisher name, country and address; ownership details; name and contact of any partner society |
| People | Editor-in-Chief; primary editorial contact; production contact; the person submitting |
| Policies | URL of the peer review policy; URL of the publication ethics statement; whether articles are checked for plagiarism |
| Content | Number of research and review articles in the last calendar year; most recent issue; journal language, and which elements are in English or Roman script |
| Format and access | Publication model (subscription, open access or hybrid); whether articles carry DOIs, continuous page numbers or article numbers; how Clarivate editors can read the full text |
Beyond the form, keep four things ready because the editors will look for them on your site:
- The full editorial board list, with affiliation and country for each member
- Complete author guidelines and the scope statement
- Ethics, plagiarism and conflict-of-interest policies, with links to the standards you follow
- A record of issues published on schedule over the last two to three years
Source: Clarivate, Web of Science Publisher Portal FAQ.
How to submit, and how long it takes
Submission is free and happens only through the Web of Science Publisher Portal. Only the journal’s publisher can submit. The editor of a self-published journal is treated as its publisher and can get access.
- Request Portal access. Clarivate verifies that you represent the publisher and replies in about four weeks.
- Complete the submission form. The form gives immediate feedback against the initial triage criteria, so basic gaps show up before an editor sees the journal.
- Track the status. The dashboard shows each journal as Pending, Under Evaluation, Accepted or Rejected.
- Watch the editorial contact’s inbox. Clarivate writes to the editorial contact named in the form, not to the person who submitted.
- Pass the technical evaluation. After a positive editorial decision, Clarivate sends a provisional letter and tests your files. PDFs must be unsecured, and every article needs a DOI, an article number or continuous pagination. The final acceptance letter comes only after this check, and slow replies can fail it.
Clarivate does not publish a fixed timeline. Evaluation order depends on the editors’ priorities and workload, not on your submission date. Plan for several months, and treat a year as a sensible budget.
Two limits are worth knowing. Print-only journals are not being accepted for evaluation at present. There is no minimum number of articles, but the journal must have published enough to represent its full scope.
Sources: Publisher Portal FAQ, Requesting Publisher Portal access and Content collection and indexing process, all Clarivate.
Common reasons journals get rejected
Journals fail for a short list of repeat reasons, and the ones found at the quality step cost the most because of the two-year embargo. Each has a direct fix.
| Problem | Where it surfaces | Fix |
|---|---|---|
| ISSN or title shown differently on the site, the PDFs and the ISSN record | Initial triage | Align every instance with the ISSN Portal record |
| No verifiable physical publisher address | Initial triage | Publish a full office address on both the journal and publisher sites |
| Peer review policy missing, vague or buried | Initial triage | One dedicated page stating the review model, number of reviewers, timeline and decision process |
| Late or irregular issues | Editorial triage | Publish on the stated dates for several issues in a row, or move to a frequency you can keep |
| Poor English in titles and abstracts | Editorial triage | Language-edit every title and abstract before publication |
| Incomplete editor or author details | Editorial triage | Full name, institution and country for every person; add ORCID iDs where possible |
| Outdated or hard-to-navigate website | Editorial triage | Put the board, author guidelines, peer review, ethics and access model in the main menu, and remove stale pages |
| Articles outside the stated scope | Quality evaluation | Tighten the scope statement and desk-reject off-topic submissions |
| Signs of weak peer review | Quality evaluation | Use at least two external reviewers for research articles and keep the reports and decision records |
| Editorial board that does not fit the scope | Quality evaluation | Recruit active researchers in the field from more than one country, and remove inactive names |
| Policies the published articles do not follow | Quality evaluation | Declare only what you practise, and audit recent issues against each policy |
| Secured PDFs or no article identifiers | Technical evaluation | Supply unsecured PDFs and register a DOI for every article |
What acceptance gets you
An ESCI journal is a full member of the Web of Science Core Collection, with its articles searchable and its citations counted. Four benefits follow.
- A Journal Impact Factor. ESCI journals receive a JIF and a Journal Citation Indicator (JCI), and are ranked in the same category tables as SCIE and SSCI journals.
- Article-level citation tracking across the Web of Science network.
- Visibility with authors and institutions that look for Web of Science indexed journals.
- A route to SCIE, SSCI or AHCI once citation activity shows the impact criteria may be met.
Timing matters for the first Impact Factor. A journal accepted before 1 January, and still covered when Journal Citation Reports production starts in March, is eligible for the June release of that year.
Acceptance is not permanent. Any journal that stops meeting the 24 quality criteria is removed from the Core Collection. You must also tell Clarivate about changes to the title, publisher, URL or frequency, because failing to do so can lead to delisting.
Frequently asked questions
Is there a fee to apply for ESCI?
No. The Publisher Portal account and the journal evaluation are both free.
Can an editor apply directly?
Only publishers can submit. If the journal is self-published, the editor or primary contact can request Portal access. Otherwise, ask your publisher to submit.
How many articles do we need before applying?
There is no minimum number. The journal must have published enough to represent its full scope and to show that it publishes on schedule.
Does an ESCI journal get an Impact Factor?
Yes. ESCI journals receive a Journal Impact Factor and are ranked alongside SCIE and SSCI journals in their category.
Are DOIs mandatory?
Every article must carry a unique identifier, which can be a DOI, an article number or continuous pagination. We recommend a Crossref DOI for every article.
Can a non-English journal be accepted?
Yes, if it provides English titles and abstracts, and publishes references, author names and affiliations in Roman script.
Can we ask to move from ESCI to SCIE or SSCI?
No. Clarivate re-evaluates ESCI journals for impact through its own monitoring and does not accept requests from publishers.
What happens if the journal is rejected?
It depends on the step. Initial triage and a first editorial triage failure carry no embargo. A second consecutive editorial triage failure means a one-year wait, and a quality evaluation failure means at least two years.
Your next steps, and how DigitalBisht can help
ESCI rewards journals that are run properly, so treat the application as an audit first and a form second.
- Audit the journal against all 24 quality criteria and list the gaps.
- Fix peer review first. Document the process and make sure recent articles show it.
- Bring the website, policies and editorial board in line with what you actually do.
- Request Publisher Portal access early, since verification takes about four weeks.
- Submit only when the audit is clean, then answer Clarivate’s emails quickly.
DigitalBisht works with journal owners and editors on exactly this: indexing readiness audits, policy and guideline pages, OJS setup, and Crossref DOI registration. We have launched more than 100 journals, and over 30 of them are now indexed in Scopus.
To have your journal checked against the 24 ESCI criteria before you apply, write to info@digitalbisht.com or visit digitalbisht.com.
