• Home

• Preface

• Introduction

• Conference Committee

• Reviewing Committee

• Review Process

• Sponsors & Organisers

• Peer-reviewed Papers

• Research Papers

• Invited Speaker Papers

• Contact

Review Process

The peer-reviewed papers presented in this proceedings have been reviewed by a rigorous double-blind refereeing process, supported by an international panel of international referees.  After the review process, 36 full papers were accepted, and a further 22 were accepted for presentation in the “research in progress” streams.

A ‘Call for Papers’ was issued towards the end of 2003, inviting anyone interested in making a contribution towards the conference by submit a short abstract by the end of March 2004. Abstracts were received and subsequently divided into broad topics by the Organising Committee. The abstracts, within a broad field, were forwarded to a review panel in the field to judge on the possible acceptability of the abstract based upon the scope and depth of the subject matter to the conference as a whole. The authors were then requested to submit full papers by the end of April 2004. These draft papers were “anonomised”, and then forwarded to two independent reviewers, with the request that the full paper should be reviewed and judged according to a number of criteria, including:

• Originality
• Significance
• Technical Quality
• Relevance

The Organising Committee received the reviews from the Reviewers and combined the scores from the reviewers for each paper to determine whether they would be accepted or not. The reviewers’ comments were forwarded to the author with the request to submit a final revised version of the paper by June 2004. Only those papers which were of an acceptable quality as recommended by both Reviewers are included in the Conference Proceedings as Reviewed Papers. The Research Papers did not fully meet the set criteria but is still included in a separate section as part of a capacity building initiative.