Papers submitted should focus on a range of topics related to research in Post-Pandemic Tourism: Trends and Future Direction. The conference invites papers on either completed research or a preliminary report on “research in progress”. Authors and researchers are encouraged to submit papers describing previously unpublished, original research result, not currently under review by another conference or journal, or case studies of good practices.

We conducted a single-blind review procedure. There will be two reviewers for each paper. All the papers should be able to contribute to and advance our current understanding of tourism post pandemic. More specifically, our review process is as follows:

  1. Initial screening. All submissions are initially screened by the Program Chair for their conformity to conference’s scope and basic submission requirements and checked for plagiarism (Turnitin). Manuscripts that fail to abide by our ethical standards are immediately rejected, as are manuscripts that do not fit within the conference’s scope.
  2. Reviewer assignment. Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are then handed over to Reviewer Coordinator, who will select at least two relevant reviewers and initiate the peer review process.
  3. Peer review. During this stage, a reviewer will assess the content of the manuscript and provide its recommendation to the Conference Chair.
  4. First decision. Once both (or more) reviewers have submitted their recommendations, the manuscript is either rejected, asked for revisions (minor or major), or accepted as is. If it is accepted, the manuscript is returned to the submitting author for proofreading. The final decision to accept the manuscript is made by the Conference Committee based on the recommendation of the Reviewer Coordinator.
  5. Revision. A manuscript that requires revisions is returned to the submitting author, who will have up to four weeks to revise the manuscript. Once the revision is submitted, it is once again assessed by the Reviewer Coordinator to determine whether the changes are adequate and appropriate, as well as whether the author(s) sufficiently responded to the reviewers’ comments and suggestions. If the revisions are deemed to be inadequate, this step is repeated (the manuscript is returned to the submitting author once more for further revision).
  6. Final decision. Finally, the revised manuscript is either accepted or rejected, depending on whether the Reviewer Coordinator has found the manuscript to have been improved to a level worthy of publication. If the author(s) are unable to make the required changes or have done so to a degree below our standards, the manuscript is rejected.

Full Paper must be written according to the guidelines given and submitted inAuthor Guidelines in the website. If you have a problem you can submit it by email to

Papers selected based on submission of completed full papers will be acknowledged accordingly in both conference program and conference proceedings.

  • Each presentation will have a 20 minutes presentation, including 5-10 minutes Q&A session
  • Power point slides 20 pages (maximum)
  • Please email your presentation file to the committee.