one-earth

One Earth (one-earth)

Journal positioning

One Earth is a Cell Press journal focused on sustainability science at the intersection of natural systems, social systems, and applied interventions, with an explicit orientation toward solutions and transformative change. It sits in the high-tier sustainability space alongside Nature Sustainability and Nature Climate Change, but with the Cell Press editorial culture: bold framing, solutions-orientation, and a strong preference for interdisciplinary synthesis that proposes or evaluates pathways to a sustainable future. The readership spans environmental scientists, social scientists, engineers, and engaged policymakers worldwide.

This skill is a fit / venue-selection / re-framing tool. It does not replace the journal's current official submission guidelines. Before submitting, re-check the live author instructions on the Cell Press / One Earth site and the submission system.

When to trigger

• The author names One Earth as the target venue.
• A manuscript addresses a sustainability challenge with an explicit solutions, transformation, or policy-pathway dimension and the author is choosing between One Earth, Nature Sustainability, and Nature Climate Change.
• A cross-disciplinary synthesis — combining ecology, social science, economics, and engineering — needs a venue that rewards bold, solutions-driven framing.
• The author wants to understand One Earth's specific desk-reject profile compared with sibling venues.

Scope & topic fit

• Sustainability science with a transformation or solutions angle: assessing the feasibility, co-benefits, or barriers of real-world sustainability interventions.
• Climate change mitigation and adaptation pathways that integrate biophysical constraints with social, economic, or governance dimensions.
• Biodiversity, ecosystem services, and nature-based solutions where evidence is framed around practical application and systemic change.
• Food, water, and land system transitions examined through a coupled human-nature systems lens.
• Energy transitions, circular economy, and low-carbon development with multi-sector or multi-scale analysis.
• Reviews and perspectives that synthesize evidence and articulate actionable insights for sustainability policy and practice.

Method & evidence bar

• Significance must be framed in terms of potential for impact on sustainability outcomes, not disciplinary novelty alone.
• Interdisciplinary integration is core: social, economic, and ecological evidence or models should be synthesized, not placed side-by-side without linkage.
• Quantitative work should include uncertainty characterization and sensitivity to key assumptions; scenario-based modelling must define scenario logic transparently.
• Empirical evidence from interventions or policy evaluations must address counterfactuals, confounders, or effect heterogeneity appropriately.
• Data availability and transparent methods are expected; Cell Press standards require accessible datasets and reproducible analytical workflows where feasible.
• Reviews must be systematic or clearly scoped; narrative reviews lacking evidence mapping may be desk-rejected.

Structure & house style

• Cell Press style: bold, solutions-oriented framing from the title onward; a strong "big picture" statement in the opening paragraph that connects the specific finding to a global sustainability challenge.
• Cell Press summary blurb ("eTOC blurb") and highlights (bullet-point key findings) are part of the submission package; check current requirements.
• STAR Methods (Structured, Transparent, Accessible Reporting) or equivalent methods section is required for primary research; re-check current One Earth specifics for method reporting.
• Figure design should carry the story: conceptual frameworks, integrated system diagrams, and scenario pathway figures are characteristic; each figure should be interpretable independently.
• Reviews and Perspectives carry additional structural requirements; consult current author instructions for format and word-count distinctions.
• Main text is expected to be concise; supplementary material carries full methods, sensitivity analyses, and ancillary data.

Official-submission checklist

• Before giving submission-ready advice, read ../../resources/source-basis.md and ../../resources/official-source-map.md; start from the official source anchors for this journal family, then cite the current journal-specific page you checked.
• Search the live Cell Press site for "One Earth author information" and follow the current version.
• Re-check article type (Article, Review, Perspective, Correspondence), length limits, and abstract format.
• Prepare Cell Press summary blurb, highlights, and graphical abstract per current instructions.
• Confirm STAR Methods or equivalent structured methods reporting.
• Complete data and code availability statements; deposit data where required.
• Check Cell Press competing-interest, author-contribution, and AI-use disclosure requirements.
• Confirm open-access options and licensing.
• If the live official instructions conflict with this skill, the official instructions win.

Pre-submission self-check

• One sentence stating why this sustainability finding is transformative or solutions-relevant at a scale worthy of One Earth.
• Natural-science, social-science, and/or applied components are genuinely synthesized, not parallel sections.
• The framing explicitly addresses what changes as a result of this finding — for policy, practice, or future research.
• Highlights, summary blurb, and graphical abstract are drafted and consistent with the main claim.
• Methods are transparent and reproducible; data/code availability is confirmed.
• Uncertainty, limitations, and conditions for generalizability are clearly stated.

Common desk-reject triggers

• Descriptive environmental study that identifies a problem without proposing or evaluating solutions or pathways.
• Disciplinary silo: a paper that is excellent within one field (ecology, economics, engineering) but makes no cross-disciplinary connection.
• Missing Cell Press submission artifacts (highlights, eTOC blurb, graphical abstract) — check current requirements.
• Incremental empirical advance framed as transformative without evidence of broader impact.
• Narrative review without systematic evidence synthesis or clear scoping rationale.

Re-routing decision

Papers with strong natural-science integration but less solutions emphasis may fit nature-sustainability. Work focused primarily on climate science or policy → nature-climate-change. Environmental mechanism/engineering work without solutions-synthesis framing → environmental-science-and-technology. Broader interdisciplinary sustainability at the Nature family tier → nature-sustainability.

Output format

[Fit] High / Medium / Low (one-line reason)
[Target] One Earth
[Topic tags] <2–3 closest topics>
[Method/evidence] <does the interdisciplinary integration and solutions framing clear the One Earth bar?>
[Top risk] <the single most likely reason for rejection>
[Official items to re-check] <article type / length / highlights / STAR Methods / data-code / disclosures / graphical abstract>
[Re-route suggestion] <if not a fit, a better-matched venue>