When authors are submitting papers to the USP, they would have the opportunity to choose how their papers should be evaluated. They have the option of choosing between a "global peer review" and a "regional peer review". And as their names imply, "global peer review" means a paper would be evaluated by experts/scholars from any part of the world; while "regional peer review" means that a paper would be evaluated by scholars from your region/continent. This feature is offered exclusively and implemented digitally on the USP, and it is called "geo-targeting". Hence, the peer review offered on the USP is called "geo-targeted peer review", and is an intrinsic part of our Unified Concept.
You might be wondering why the need for a global and a regional peer review! Well, the answer is simple. If we are to unify the fields, then we should expect to have one global or one international peer review/journal for that field, which sounds good at first. But when you consider that the different continents have different levels of development, and that research is as much localized as it is globalized, then you would realize that one (mega) journal/peer review cannot adequately represent a field for every region. In some cases, a research problem may have more national or regional significance than global; and/or some research findings may have more regional utility than global utility. This is actually not new. Currently, there are International Journals in some fields as well as corresponding European journals and Asian Journals in the same field. Some countries have national journals in some areas as well and some universities publish their own journals in some fields. The multitude of journals in one field fit within my explanation that research have localized and globalized components. And the problem with that multitude of journals is the differing standards of peer review and the lack of defined and established global and regional stratification in peer review. Thus, if we are to unify the fields globally, there must be an allowance for regional unification as well. Hence, our Unified Concept took that into consideration. And we had to devise a way to implement it on our platform, hence the birth of geo-targeted peer review. The birth here refers to the formalization and the digital implementation of global peer review and regional peer review, based on the Unified Concept. Whatever stratification that existed prior was neither formal nor recognized based on the explanation I have put here, and it was not digitally and independently implemented.
So, on the USP, we have successfully unified the peer review for each field, yet stratifying it into global and regional peer reviews to allow for the differing levels of development among continents/regions. So, when authors are submitting their papers and the see "global peer review" and "regional peer review", they should understand what they mean. Take note also that regionally reviewed papers are published in our regional journals while globally reviewed papers are published in the corresponding global journal for that field. You need not worry, the Unified regional journals have as much weight and prestige as the corresponding global journals, and the peer review standard or quality are the same and based on the USP. Finally, one question that I reckon authors would ask is: how do we decide whether a manuscript should get a global or a regional peer review? Well, the answer is simple. Focus on the research question your paper addresses and/or the research findings. Do they have global significance or regional significance? Answer that question and you have your answer. If your work would have more global significance, select the global peer review; if it would have more regional significance, select the regional peer review. Selecting the honest option decreases your chances of getting a rejection. And please take note, since we are just starting out, the regional option would be deactivated until we get sufficient editors and reviewers from all over the world. Then you would be able to choose how your paper should be evaluated. I hope you now understand geo-targeting and the stratification of peer review on the USP.