Journal Menu
► ▼ Journal Menu-
- Energies Home
- Aims & Scope
- Editorial Board
- Reviewer Board
- Topical Advisory Panel
- Instructions for Authors
- Special Issues
- Topics
- Sections & Collections
- Article Processing Charge
- Indexing & Archiving
- Editor’s Choice Articles
- Most Cited & Viewed
- Journal Statistics
- Journal History
- Journal Awards
- Society Collaborations
- Conferences
- Editorial Office
Journal Browser
► ▼ Journal BrowserNeed Help?
Announcements
17 July 2025
Interview with Dr. Bozena Gajdzik—Winner of the Energies Outstanding Reviewer Award
The Outstanding Reviewer Award is given annually in recognition of reviewers who generously contribute their time to reviewing papers and display thoroughness, professionalism, and timeliness in doing so.
We spoke with Dr. Bozena Gajdzik, winner of the Energies 2024 Outstanding Reviewer Award, to hear her opinions and about her experiences with scientific research and awards.
Name: Dr. Bozena Gajdzik
Affiliation: Silesian University of Technology, Gliwice, Poland
Research interests: management; digitalization; Industry 4.0; industrial transformation; sustainability
Below is a short interview with one of the winners—Dr. Bozena Gajdzik:
1. Could you give a brief introduction of yourself to the readers?
My name is Bożena Gajdzik. I am a scientist from Poland; since 2008, I have started engaging with foreign journals (with IF). Two years later (2010), my cooperation with MDPI began, as a reviewer and as an author of scientific publications. In the review preferences, I chose Energies because climate policy has entered a radical era of changes. As a scientist (a steel industry expert in the Polish market), I want to participate in the process of industrial transition to Net Zero (for the good of us all). While reviewing scientific papers for Energies, I was able to learn about many aspects and determinants of the ongoing transformation, not only in Europe, but also outside Europe. They did not always share the same views, due to differences in climate transformation models between continents, but it was worth learning about them. Now, as a scientist, I have a broader view of the world’s energy policy.
2. How was your experience reviewing for Energies?
My experience with Energies is positive. First of all, I appreciate the high quality of scientific publications from all over the world, and in addition, I find the peer review system used by MDPI clear.
3. Do you have any suggestions for improving our review process?
There are no comments regarding the quality of the review system and the procedures used. I recommend that other scientists familiarize themselves with this peer review system and participate in the development of the journal.
4. In your opinion, which research topics will be of particular interest to the research community in the coming years?
In the coming years, energy transformation will continue to be the number one topic. Energy transformation is a complex process that poses numerous challenges to countries (economies, societies and industries). Therefore, we can expect the development of the energy transformation topic. Practitioners and theoreticians of energy transmission still have a lot to say (and write).
5. What motivated you to participate actively in the peer review process, and what do you find most rewarding about it?
My motivation to cooperate with Energies was based on the high quality of scientific papers and their current topics related to the problems of the world. The world faces numerous political, economic, and social challenges due to climate change and energy transformation.
6. How do you manage your time and balance your responsibilities as a researcher and a reviewer?
Time management? We always lack it, but I like the cooperation with Energies because thanks to it I absorb new knowledge published by other scientists, so I can develop scientifically and review at the same time (two in one, so I save time, or so I think).
7. What advice would you give to early career researchers who are starting to participate in peer reviews?
My advice to beginner reviewers is to try to systematically review thematic papers and you will gain additional knowledge for your development.
8. How do you see the role of reviewers evolving with the advancements in artificial intelligence and automated tools in research publishing?
Artificial Intelligence (AI) helps, but it is worth knowing the ethical policies of individual journals and using AI in accordance with the publisher's expectations.
