| |
|
Warwick Fox has prepared these notes, really for his own modules. But he says the rest of us are welcome to use them: thanks Warwick.
Referencing can be a confusing business. The main principle you need to observe is to reference at the end of your essay every work you mention in the essay (and only those works) and to do this using a consistent referencing style. There are two main referencing systems in widespread circulation: the “author, date” system, which is often referred to as the Harvard system, and the footnote or endnote system (I will henceforth just speak in terms of endnotes), which is often referred to as the Chicago system. Researchers in the sciences tend to use the former, Harvard system while researchers in the humanities, especially philosophy, tend to use the latter, Chicago system, but there are no hard and fast rules about this. Moreover, even within our department – as well as between departments – you might get slightly different pieces of advice about how to use these systems. You shouldn’t stress too much about this – as I said, referencing can be a confusing business, even for academics. The main thing is that you adopt one of these general styles of referencing (even if you don’t do everything exactly as laid out here) and then use that system consistently in your essay. For those of you who want a model to follow (which, again, may differ slightly from the models that others will offer you – if they offer you any models at all), I offer the following. (The extended examples I give below conform to the endnote and full bibliography forms that I used for a recent book with The MIT Press. I figure that if these forms are good enough for The MIT Press, then they’re probably good enough for your essays, right?) Half an hour spent thoughtfully absorbing this information now and then using this guide to help yourself at essay time can take a lot of the stress out of the confusing business of referencing. Here, then, is a summary of the two main systems of referencing.
In the text of your essay write, e.g., “Fisher (2000) argues that …”
If there are two authors, then you would write, e.g., “Williamson and Radford (2000) argue that …”
If there are more than two authors, then you can either write, e.g., “Wasserman, Sullivan, and Palermo (2000) argue that …” or “Wasserman et al. (2000) argue that …” (et al. is a Latin abbreviation for “and others”).
If you are quoting an author, then you would also give the relevant page number of the book in the following form, e.g., “Fisher (2000: 275) claims that ‘Architecture … has long been viewed as a branch of aesthetics rather than ethics.’” However, you should only give the page number if you are quoting.
If you refer to two publications from Fisher that came out in the same year, then label them Fisher (2000a) and Fisher (2000b).
If you want to reference someone’s work to back up what you are saying but don’t wish/need to use their name in the sentence itself, then you can write, e.g., “The ecological footprint of London is equivalent to approximately 94% of the land productive land area of Britain (Girardet, 2000).” That is, in this case, you’d put both the author’s name and the date in brackets, not just the date.
At the end of the essay you should then reference in alphabetical order all the works you have referred to in your essay, but no others. For example:
Fisher, Thomas. 2000. In the Scheme of Things: Alternative Thinking on the Practice of Architecture. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Fox, Warwick. 2000(a). “Introduction: Ethics and the Built Environment.” In Warwick Fox, ed., Ethics and the Built Environment. London and New York: Routledge, 1-12.
Fox, Warwick. 2000(b). “Towards an Ethics (or at Least a Value Theory) of the Built Environment.” In Warwick Fox, ed., Ethics and the Built Environment. London and New York: Routledge, 207‑221.
Fox, Warwick. 2000(c). “Conclusion: Towards an Agenda for the Ethics of the Built Environment.” In Warwick Fox, ed., Ethics and the Built Environment. London and New York: Routledge, 222‑228.
Fox, Warwick. 2004. “The New Ethics: Ethics in a Gaian Context.” In Fons Elders, ed., Visions of Nature: Studies on the Theory of Gaia and Culture in Ancient and Modern Times. Brussels: VUB Brussels University Press, 38‑49.
Fox, Warwick. 2006(a). “The New Ethics: Ethics in a Gaian Context” (revised and expanded version). In Jules Pretty, ed., Environment Vol. 1: Thinking and Knowing about the Environment and Nature (“Key Issues for the Twenty-First Century” series), London: Sage, 82-95.
Fox, Warwick. 2006(b). A Theory of General Ethics: Human Relationships, Nature, and the Built Environment. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Girardet, Herbert. 2000. “Greening Urban Society.” In Warwick Fox, ed., Ethics and the Built Environment. London and New York: Routledge, 15‑30.
Solomon, W. David. 1995. “Normative Ethics.” In Warren Thomas Reich ed., Encyclopedia of Bioethics, rev. ed. New York: Macmillan and Simon and Schuster Macmillan, 736‑747.
Spector, Tom. 2001. The Ethical Architect: The Dilemma of Contemporary Practice. New York: Princeton Architectural Press.
Spector, Tom. 2006. “Does the Sustainability Movement Sustain a Sustainable Design Ethics for Architecture?” Environmental Ethics 28: 265‑283.
Wasserman, Barry, Patrick Sullivan, and Gregory Palermo. 2000. Ethics and the Practice of Architecture. New York: Wiley.
Williamson, Terry and Antony Radford. 2000. “Building, Global Warming and Ethics.” In Warwick Fox, ed., Ethics and the Built Environment. London and New York: Routledge, 57‑72.
Williamson, Terry, Antony Radford, and Helen Bennetts. 2003. Understanding Sustainable Architecture. London and New York: Spon Press.
Place a superscripted numbered endnote anywhere in the text where you wish to refer to or quote an author.
At the end of the essay provide reference details for each note modelled on the following form. You’ll see from this format that comments are allowable using the endnote system whereas they are not using the “author, date” system described above. Note also that “Ibid.” is a Latin abbreviation for “in the same place” so “ibid.” on its own means “in exactly the same place” (i.e., in the same paper or book or even the same page in the case of a quotation) as the work cited immediately above whereas “ibid., 92” means “in the same work as the work cited immediately above but on p. 92 rather than whatever page was given in the previous citation.” I provide a few explanatory notes in bold below to explain what is going on.
1. Peter Singer, “Famine, Affluence, and Morality,” reprinted in Hugh LaFollette, ed., Ethics in Practice: An Anthology, 2nd ed. (Malden, MA, and Oxford: Blackwell, 2002), 572‑581, at 573. [These page numbers indicate the page range of the paper and the fact that I have quoted from p. 573 in particular.]
2. Ibid. [This is a second reference to the same paper and/or page.]
3. Peter Singer, Animal Liberation, 2nd ed. (London: Jonathan Cape, 1990); Tom Regan, The Case for Animal Rights (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1983); Tom Regan, Animal Rights, Human Wrongs: An Introduction to Moral Philosophy (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2003). [These references indicate that I am simply referring in general to these works; I am not quoting from them, hence, no page numbers.]
4. Richard Ryder, Animal Revolution: Changing Attitudes towards Speciesism (Oxford and New York: Berg, 2000); Richard Ryder, Painism: A Modern Morality (London: Centaur Press, 2001).
5. Singer, Animal Liberation, 171. [Here I am indicating that I am quoting from p. 171 of Singer’s Animal Liberation. The fact that I have given the full details for this reference above means that I can here just indicate the reference in an abbreviated way by giving the surname of the author and the title of the work – even an abbreviated title of the work if it were a longer title.]
6. Mark Sagoff, “Animal Liberation and Environmental Ethics: Bad Marriage, Quick Divorce,” reprinted in Michael Zimmerman, gen. ed., Environmental Philosophy: From Animal Rights to Radical Ecology, 3rd ed. (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2001), 87‑96, at 91. [Now you’re on your own. The rest should be obvious from the notes I’ve given in bold to this point.]
7. Ibid., 92.
8. Ibid.
9. J. Baird Callicott, Review of Tom Regan, The Case for Animal Rights, Environmental Ethics 7 (1985): 365‑372, at 371.
10. Callicott, ibid.; Steve Sapontzis, “Predation,” in
Marc Bekoff, ed., Encyclopedia of Animal Rights and Animal Welfare (London
and Chicago: Fitzroy Dearborn, 1998), 275‑77.
11. Sapontzis, ibid., 276.
12. Callicott, Review of The Case for Animal Rights, 370.
13. Tyler Cowen, “Policing Nature,” Environmental Ethics 25 (2003): 169‑182, at 170.
14. Bob Holmes, “Day of the Sparrow,” New Scientist, 27 June 1998, 32‑35; Chris Bright, Life Out of Bounds: Bioinvasion in a Borderless World (London: Earthscan, 1999).
15. Sagoff, “Animal Liberation and Environmental Ethics,” 92.
Just because some of the sources you might draw on in your essay are on the WebCT notes for the module doesn’t mean that you get home free in regard to referencing them. Students can sometimes draw on their tutor’s notes as if the tutor doesn’t exist and is not themselves an active researcher in the field. This is not on. You should reference everything you draw on – including material written by your module tutor.
In the case of WebCT notes that I have written, then I suggest that you refer to them in the text as Fox (2006) if you use the “author,date” system or else number note them in the text as you would with any other reference if you use the endnote system. Then, if they are just part of the general notes for, say, Session 2, reference them at the end as:
Warwick Fox. 2006. WebCT Notes for Environmental Ethics, Session 2.
Alternatively, if you’re drawing on manuscript material of mine that I’ve made available on WebCT and that I’ve given a title to, then reference it as:
Warwick Fox. 2006. “Title”. WebCT Paper for Environmental Ethics, Session 2.
The endnote equivalent of these would be:
1. Warwick Fox, WebCT Notes for Environmental Ethics, Session 2 (2006).
2. Warwick Fox, “Title”, WebCT Paper for Environmental Ethics, Session 2 (2006).
Remember also to cite where relevant (i.e., if you’ve quoted) the page numbers of WebCT material if this material consists of numbered pages.
However, if the WebCT material you are using is in the form of a pdf file, then this is exactly the same as working from the original paper and you should therefore cite the full publication details of the original paper. Thus, in the case of pdf files you may not simply write, for example:
Stephen Gardiner, “A Perfect Moral Storm: Climate Change, Intergenerational Ethics and the Problem of Moral Corruption”, WebCT Paper for Environmental Ethics, Session 10 (2006).
Rather, you must write:
Stephen Gardiner, “A Perfect Moral Storm: Climate Change, Intergenerational Ethics and the Problem of Moral Corruption”, Environmental Values 15 (2006): 397‑413.
And you must provide the page numbers of any quotations from that paper as shown in the pdf version of that paper.
* * *
Finally, you should note that the referencing styles that I use in my WebCT notes for this module may themselves vary. This is because I have taken/adapted some of these notes from various publications of mine and so have simply preserved the referencing formats that I was obliged to use for the original publications. (For the same reason, the more astute writers among you will notice that I sometimes use US rather than UK spelling and punctuation. These apparent oddities to a UK reader are not mistakes but rather simply reflect the different conventions governing the writing style of the country that one publishes in. If anyone wants to know more about the differences between US and UK spelling and punctuation – incidentally, I generally prefer the US conventions – then feel free to ask me.) However, although the referencing formats that I use in my WebCT notes will vary from one piece to another, you will find that they are consistent within each piece – and that, when all is said and done, is the main thing.
Warwick Fox
This page last revised 06:12:08 Text by Warwick Fox Center for Professional Ethics | University of Central Lancashire |
