Friday, 5 July 2013

Congratulations IJMP on 2012 Impact Factors

The 2012 journal impact factors have been announced (MEI Online) and I congratulate Kari Heiskanen and D.R. (Nag) Nagaraj, editors of International Journal of Mineral Processing (IJMP) on their impact factor creeping above that of Minerals Engineering for the first time since 2007.

Of the three Elsevier mineral processing and extractive metallurgy journals, Hydrometallurgy retains its highest ranking, due to its highly specialised nature.

Kari will be at Flotation '13 in November to present one of the keynote lectures, and Nag is co-author of two papers with his colleagues from Cytec, USA.


  1. It appears that Minerals Engineering overstretched a bit in 2011, publishing 227 papers over 170 in the prior year. Seeing the long citation half-life of Min-Eng, this attenuated the two-year impact factor (i.e. denominator grew more than the numerator). I would expect the IF to inch back up next year.

    Another prop for Min-Eng, it is still the largest mineral processing journal (193 papers published in 2012 versus 94 for IJMP), and the most impactful (3978 citations received in 2012 versus 2604 for IJMP).

    KU Leuven

    1. Thanks for your comments Rafael. You will be aware from previous postings that I do not lose much sleep worrying over Impact Factor, which varies annually according to many factors. MEI Conferences are biennial, and so also are the associated special issues. Special issues such as Physical Separation receive relatively few citations, due to a relatively small pool of researchers, whereas anything involving hydrometallurgy, or environmental aspects, tends to boost the impact factor due to a much larger pool of researchers. Because of these factors the IF for Minerals Engineering is cyclic, as can be seen from the figure.

      Much more important to me is ScienceDirect usage, the number of downloads of articles per year, and for Minerals Engineering this is quite staggering. In 2011 there were 366,005 downloads of articles, and in 2012 there were 432,502 downloads, despite a dip in IF.

    2. Good points. I wonder what kind of impact the ACEME special issue will have. It will be a smallish issue, so will only account for about 10% of the papers published in its publication year, but I hope it contributes well to the overall citations.

    3. More importantly, will people make use of (ie download) the papers?


If you have difficulty posting a comment, please email the comment, and any photos that you might like to add, to and I will submit on your behalf