Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

inForma is an architectural journal published by the School of Architecture at the University of Puerto Rico. Initially conceived as a mainstream architecture magazine from 2001-2015, it has now been reformated as an academic, refereed publication. The journal publishes peer-reviewed and commissioned articles about architecture, urbanism, and spatial theory.

Through its design, themes, and editorial approach, inForma reflects the interdisciplinary interests, aims, and ambitions of the UPR School of Architecture while seeking to generate international conversations. From within its regional, Caribbean specificity, inForma projects itself globally by reaching out to researchers and practitioners outside of the island.

Each issue of inForma has, at its core, the publication of research papers. It also consists of any combination of commissioned essays, invited portfolios, reviews (books, articles and built work), and interviews. It publishes academically rigorous projects, research, and written works that elucidate on relevant and timely topics within contemporary architectural discourse.

Subjects covered include writings about individual architectural designers, historians, and theorists; theoretical texts; spatial theory; design theory; urbanism; spatial practices and cultures; interdisciplinary collaborations; place-based art and performance; emerging currents and patterns; pedagogy; visual culture; technology; sustainability; and emerging forms of place-based cultures. Complimenting these multi-perspective approaches, topics that are welcome include: citizenship, community, user-participation, dynamic and unconventional research methodologies, ethics, time and ephemerality, history and heritage, structural and material innovations, everyday life, and the politics of space.


Section Policies


Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

Process for Reviewing Articles


inForma articles are assessed by two external reviewers, using the double-blind referee process.


  1. Receipt of manuscript and acknowledgement of its receipt to the author.
  2. Identification of possible referees – two – based on the criteria of the Editor in consultation with one or more members of the Editorial Board, or in consultation with the Board.
  3. Sending of the manuscript without the author’s name to two referees.
  4. Referees sends their recommendations based on the evaluation form sent to them beforehand. Their review may be any of the following: Accepted as submitted; Accepted on the condition that the revisions signaled by the evaluator on this sheet are made; Rejected.
  5. If both reviews are negative, the manuscript is not accepted for publication unless the Editorial Board decides to submit it to additional referees.
  6. If there are discrepancies between the assessments of the referees, the manuscript is submitted to a third evaluator who is selected in the same way as the previous ones. The decision to publish is based on the majority opinion of the evaluators.
  7. Sending of a letter to the author with the anonymous evaluations and informing of the decision to publish or not publish according to the evaluations.


Information T