Presentation of the paper
Articles should be in English, typed in double spacing (including all notes and references), with pages numbered.
Articles, including abstract, notes and references, should not normally exceed 7,000 words in length. This word count does not include figures and tables. Shorter articles, including research notes and comments, are welcome.
For instructions on book reviews, please refer to the 'Books for review' section below.
Keep textual notes to a minimum, indicate them with superscript numbers, and provide the note text as a list at the end of the article before the references. Please note that the journal uses footnotes.
References should appear at the bottom of the same page in Harvard (name, Initial and date) format. In the text, refer to the author name (without initials, unless there are two authors with the same name) and year of publication. Unpublished data and personal communications should include initials and year. Publications which have not yet appeared are given a probable year of publication.
Since Paterson (1983) has shown that ... This is in results attained later (Kramer, 1984: 16). Results have been reported (Robinson, 1989, personal communication) which suggest ...
Publications by the same author(s) in the same year should be identified with a, b, c (e.g. 1974a, 1990b) closed up to the year. If there are two authors for a publication, put both names separated by 'and' (not &). If there are more than two authors, put the name of the first author followed by et al.
Review articles and book reviews should not list the books under review but should list any other publications referred to in the text. Refer to books under review by their title in italics and to the authors under review by surname. For all other works referred to in the text, refer to the authors surname and year of publication.
In Economy of Esteem Brennan and Pettit develop fully an argument first sketched out in Pettit (1990) and Brennan and Pettit (1991)...
References are placed in alphabetical order of authors. Examples of correct forms of references for alphabetical style:
Paper in journal
Higgott, R. (1998) 'The Asian economic crisis: a study in the politics of resentment', New Political Economy 3(3): 333-336.
Blinder, A.S. and Solow, R.M. (1970) 'Analytical foundations of fiscal policy',Journal of Finance XXV: 47-54.
Bender, J., Bloggs, B. and Swistak, P. (1997) 'The evolutionary stability in cooperation', American Political Science Review 91(3): 290-297.
Paper, Advance Online Publication
Howorth, J. (2010) ‘Sarkozy and the “American Mirage” or Why Gaullist Continuity will Overshadow Transcendence’, European Political Science advance online publication 5 May, doi:10.1057/eps.2010.3.
Giddens, A. (1990) The Consequences of Modernity, Cambridge: Polity.
Kay, J., Mayer, C. and Thompson, D. (1986) Privatization and Regulation, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Brown, C. (ed.) (1994) Political restructuring in Europe: Ethical Perspectives, London: Routledge.
Chapter in book
Hook, G.D. (1998) 'Japanese Business in Triadic Globalization', in H. Hasegawa and G.D. Hook (eds.) Japanese Business Management: Restructuring for Low Growth and Globalization, London: Routledge, pp. 19-38.
Harley, N.H. (1981) 'Radon risk models', in A.R. Knight and B Harrad (eds.) Indoor Air and Human Health, Proceedings of the Seventh Life Sciences Symposium; 29-31 October 1981; Knoxville, USA. Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 69-78.
Zito, A. (1994) 'Epistemic communities in European policy-making' Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Political Science, University of Pittsburgh.
Barber, L. (1993) 'The towering bureaucracy', Financial Times, 21 June.
Food and Drug Administration (2003) Pharmaceutical cGMPs for the 21st Century - A Risk Based Approach, available at http://www.fda.gov/oc/guidance/gmp.html, accessed 8 November 2003.
When quoting directly, double quotation marks should be used. Any quotations over 5 lines in length should remove the quotation marks and be indented both left and right.
Other style notes
Spelling: use UK spelling and punctuation. Use ~ise/~isation/~ising throughout.
Use full points after abbreviations (e.g., i.e., etc.) but not after units of measurement or contractions (kg vols eds).
spell out numbers (whether ordinal or cardinal) below 100. Exceptions: a series of numbers appearing close together; numbers giving exact measurements or with abbreviated units of measurement such as 7 kg, 15.8 mm; in usual cases like 5.00 p.m. (but five o'clock); phrases involving hundreds, thousands, millions etc. where round numbers are given (e.g. two hundred, fifteen thousand); per cent (not percent); use % only in tables.
use the style, 31 January 1984; use 1930s, not thirties, 30s or '30s.
A review of a book should 1) carefully describe the book’s analysis, logic and structure of its argument; 2) assess the book’s contributions to the field; and 3) identify its major shortcomings and/or special contributions.
In the process of selecting potential reviewers, we attempt to maintain the integrity of the review process by excluding from consideration, reviewers who have a potential conflict of interest with the book's author(s). Those who present potential conflicts of interest include PhD supervisors and supervisees, colleagues, former or current co-authors, and those who contributed significantly to the manuscript, reviewed the book for a press or another journal, or have major personal disagreements with the author. EPS may commission a book review and also welcomes enquiries from potential reviewer to review books.
Please note that publishers are increasingly making electronic copies (e-books) only available to reviewers.
Single book reviews: 700 - 800 words
Review essay (of two, maximum three, books on a similar theme): 700 - 800 words per book review (maximum three books). Essay should also include an introduction and conclusion.
Review exchange (authors of two recently published books on a similar theme, review each other’s books and then offer a response to the review of their respective book): 700 – 800 words per book review and 700 – 800 word per response
Review symposium (which consists of two, maximum four reviews of a book and a response by the book's author(s)): each review should be circa 700 - 800 words in length. Depending on the numbers of reviews, the response from the book's author(s) is usually circa 1000-1500 words.