Get your Environmental Evidence paper right the first time: a ready-made structure with the right abstract and citations, so editors see your science, not formatting slips.
4.5
Authored by Sumalatha Gangadhar | Published on 11 August, 2026
Submitting to Environmental Evidence goes smoothly when your draft already matches the journal's own rules. Editors screen new manuscripts against the Environmental Evidence guide for authors before peer review, so formatting, structure, and required statements should be right on the first draft rather than repaired during upload. This template sets that structure up for you.
It is a manuscript shell aligned to Environmental Evidence. It covers front matter, the abstract the journal expects, a body organized to the journal's article types, and a reference list in the journal's required style. Confirm current scope and article types on the Environmental Evidence journal page before you draft.
Prepare the title, authors, affiliations, and ORCID iDs. Write the abstract to the journal's rule and word limit, organize the body to the article type, and apply the required reference style from the first citation. Complete every declaration (ethics, competing interests, funding, data availability) the Environmental Evidence guide for authors lists, and cite figures and tables in order.
The common failure modes are formatting or reference style that does not match the guide for authors, missing required statements, and an incomplete portal checklist. Clear all three against the Environmental Evidence guide for authors before you submit.
The shell mirrors what editorial staff check first: article-type fit, the abstract rules, required declarations, and the journal's reference style. For more detail see the author resources. When your draft is ready, upload it through the journal's submission system.
| Element | Environ Evidence requirement |
|---|---|
| Abstract | Abstract requirements vary by article type: Systematic Review - max 500 words, structured with 4 mandatory sections: Background (context and purpose of the review, including the review question), Methods (how the review was performed including brief overview of all methodological steps and statistical tests used), Review findings (main findings, including results of search and assessment of evidence base), Conclusions (brief summary and potential implications for policy/management and research). Methodology articles - max 200 words, unstructured, single paragraph summary of major points raised, containing no references. Commentary articles - max 350 words, structured with background, main body of the abstract and short conclusion. All abstracts should minimize use of abbreviations and avoid citing references |
| Main text | Systematic Reviews should normally be no longer than 20,000 words (including references but excluding appendices and additional files). For other article types (Methodology, Commentary, Systematic Map, Rapid Review, etc.), no specific main text word or page limits are stated in the guidelines |
| Declarations | Ethics approval/consent as applicable; competing interests; funding; data availability |
| Figures/tables | Publication-ready; cited in order |
| Supplemental | Upload separately when used |
| Keywords | Three to ten keywords representing the main content of the article. Authors should avoid repeating words that are already in the title |
| References | Vancouver style. References are numbered and cited in sequence. Format includes author names, article title, journal abbreviation (following Index Medicus/MEDLINE), year, volume and page numbers. Web links and URLs should be given a reference number and included in the reference list with full title, URL, and access date. Example format: Smith JJ. The world of science. Am J Sci. 1999;36:234-5 |
| Peer review | Single-anonymous (also called single-blind) peer review. Reviewers are aware of the names and affiliations of the authors, but the reviewer reports provided to authors are anonymous. This is stated explicitly in the journal's peer review policy section |
| Submission | submission.springernature.com/new-submission/13750/3 |
Read the Environmental Evidence guide for authors once before drafting and once before upload. Draft the abstract after results are stable. Set the reference style before adding citations. Keep a cover letter that states your contribution and fit to Environmental Evidence in under a page.
Skim two or three recent Environ Evidence papers to calibrate depth and figure style. Make the novelty clear in the first two pages. Deposit data and code when the policy on the Environmental Evidence journal page requires it. Disclose any preprint or conference version with identifiers in the cover letter.
Do one focused pass against the Environmental Evidence guide for authors: scope, length, reference style, required declarations, and figure quality. Then submit through the journal's submission system.