The New Walford: Guide to Reference Resources Volume 2: Social Sciences

Citation

Hannabuss, S. (2009), "The New Walford: Guide to Reference Resources Volume 2: Social Sciences", Library Review, Vol. 58 No. 2, pp. 151-154. https://doi.org/10.1108/00242530910937050

The Walford family of guides to reference material have been going since the 1950s and are landmarks, icons, and part of the furniture of the reference world. What is now called the New Walford started life with volume 1, covering science and technology and medicine, published by Facet in 2005 under its editor‐in‐chief Ray Lester. Volume 2, covering the social sciences (psychology, sociology and social work, politics and government and law, finance and industry and business, education and sport and media and information) appeared in 2008, coordinated by Ray Lester and Peter Clinch and others, and is the work under review here. The Facet Publishing website forecasts volume 3, covering arts and humanities and general reference, for December 2009.

At a time when so many reference works are appearing in electronic/digital format, where wikis of one kind and another are increasing assuming the status of one‐stop‐shop among lay reference searchers, and where e‐reference and database publishing and aggregation is more and more an alternative (think of the Routledge stable of encyclopedias, for instance) or the only available format (above all in law), an explanation for a print‐on‐paper edition of the social sciences Walford (and indeed the others) is needed, and Lester provides it. In his preface he states that the main reason is “that we believe in the value of books to portray the richness and complexity of a subject's information landscape; and, more importantly still, to encourage the reader to pause and reflect”, something unique, he contends, from an easily‐browsable reference book such as this/these. That said, Walford 2 tries to include both print and online material, “each genre complementing the other”.

Another familiar presupposition people bring to books like these is that they aim to be as comprehensive and up‐to‐date (and as updateable) as possible. But, as well‐established users of the Walfords know, they aim more to provide reliable snapshots of what is on offer at a particular time (in this case, mid‐2007), for readers “wanting an entrée” into the literature. Alert to other resources – not least of all Google! – able to provide generic web‐based searches, and because there are not enough experts or time to make reference tools perfect, Walford 2 sets out to identify both key and representative resources, offer a logical and coherent and helpful structure for displaying and locating them, provide conscientiously edited bibliographical details about them, and give readers an objective critical evaluation of their strengths and shortcomings (and how they sit with rivals). The rationale is understandable and realistic, in line in fact with the most effective information search strategies that aim to demonstrate not merely the skills of gathering but also of selecting and advising.

Reviewing any Walford is an intimidating job because there are at least two major constituencies – people who know them, would get them, and do not want reviews about them because they can make up their own minds; and others, newcomers, perhaps in small libraries strapped for cash, wondering whether to buy them (buy one get the lot has marketing momentum) and wondering whether they will then merely tantalize users of the library with further resources beyond their reach. Reviewing Walfords is difficult for another reason: anyone, but anyone, can identify works that might or should have gone in instead, everyone has a favourite, and everyone wants to display their own knowledge. The downside of being a professional replete with experts is that it is also full of pedants.

One of the strengths of the Walfords has always been how the information is chosen, structured, and presented, and this comes across well here. Less‐experienced users have been taken into account in the New Walford, and there is a shift from the UDC classification (of earlier versions) to a simpler scheme (of subject parts, subject groupings, and subject fields – examples are “media and information”, “information and library sciences”, “information policy”, respectively (from a helpful quick‐start guide sheet at the beginning). The New Walford has emphasized a wider range of resources than before, reduced the number of resource categories, and provided short essays introducing each section.

Inevitably, as we drill down into the detail, we look out for intellectually and bibliographical convincing structure and content. Government, for example, has an overall geographical shape, with break‐downs (such as official bodies, research centres, print/electronic resources, handbooks/manuals under “United Kingdom”) under each region. Law, for example, begins with terms and codes and standards, moves on to encyclopedias and directories, goes through jurisprudence and comparative law to systems of law (civil, common, public international), international organizations and relations, law in particular areas like maritime and space, human rights and private and business and trade law, and national jurisdictions.

Within these come entries on, say, laws/standards/codes, within which reference 2,766 to LexisNexis Butterworths typically provides about 100 words about it (in this case, that it is a large full‐text legal database of UK statutory and case law plus a newspaper database from 1990 onwards, a rival to Westlaw). For familiar material (and for material already held generously by your own library), we tend to look for confirmation that good/useful things are there (in the book and on the shelf/on access) and that we have not got important gaps; for unfamiliar material (say for the researcher moving on to new ground, say, checking up on legal material in Ireland where the researcher has no direct experience, then the section on law in the Irish Republic will be an excellent starting point. You get a strong sense that the compilers (over 12 subject experts at least) know and use such sources regularly and have not just guessed at them or succumbed to the marketing‐speak and puffery of the publishers. That said, we all know that, within any reference field, there are major players (Blackwells, Sage, Routledge, Gale/Thomson, Wiley, OUP and CUP and others come to mind instantly) and these tend to dominate output in them.

What does come across clearly to anyone reading and using Walford 2 is the wealth on online sources that now exist. This reflects the changing profile in the field picked up by reviewing journals like Reference Reviews (Emerald) that specialize in monitoring it. Turning to sport, for instance, websites for organizations and information sources abound (where they are fee‐based, it is noted), and examples include Sport England, BBC Sport, ongoing annotated bibliographies, information for professionals and for everyone, Cricinfo on cricket, and the Motorsport Knowledge Exchange. Useful sections too on growing areas like sports law and nutrition.

Library and information practitioners, wearing their own hat (as opposed to looking for suitable resources for other people), will find the section on the information and library sciences of professional value. Portals and stuff on and about the internet, directories, journals like Ariadne and series like Annual review of Information Science and Technology, policy and copyright (e.g. the useful Yale Liblicense website), knowledge management, cataloguing and e‐journals, wireless networking and Open Source systems. A final section covers tools for information professionals (things on careers, ISBNs, the Internet Public Library, ProQuest for dissertations, and directories of grant support, charities, and museums and writing for publication). A topic index (e.g. biotechnology, cold war, leadership training, social inequality) and a title‐author index (some 60 pages) complete Walford 2.

Yet the value of the Walford family is that they are reference sources for everyone. Users can check up on, say, marketing sources in the business and management section, or on advertising and branding and public relations there. There is a wealth of mainstream published sources on accountancy, portfolio investment, banking and finance, all in the finance, accountancy and taxation section. It has, then, that wider relevance to the research process, for students and everyone else, demonstrating the familiar argument put by information professionals that Googling or Wikipedia‐ing your way to knowledge is by no means the only way to do it (and may not be the best). Google is not in the index, by the way, nor is Wikipedia, although entry 5,565 notes Klobas's useful guide to wikis (from Chandos, 2006) and entry 5,564 notes Clyde's equally useful guide to weblogs (Chandos, 2004).

You get opinions about the items – thesaurus X is clearly written and well‐laid‐out, organization Y is a non‐partisan player in media blogging, research centre Z disseminates government policy, caution should be used checking statutory instruments because they always change, database Q is subscriber‐only, reference work R is one of a reliable series, bibliographies are on offer for such‐and‐such encyclopedia. Unlike the usual review column, where the task may well be as much to alert readers as to what to avoid as to acquire, Walford 2 deals with stuff it is confident to recommend, stuff worth getting for stock, stuff the compilers have found useful. This is the kind of reliable advice you expert from a garden centre and it is a real strength. If we accept the adage that 90 per cent of everything is dross, then having the Walford family is reassuring because it represents what it is like when we look at the remaining 10 per cent. In a way, that is what good library and information work is all about.