RN isn't enumerated in their spec:
http://refman.com/training/ris-format
We should probably import it because EndNote is essentially where they shove things like this before getting around to documenting changes to the spec.

Can you just change it to N1 so that they get imported as notes?

Thanks to karnesky and zuphilip. I've retraced my steps more carefully, and Zotero does in fact upload N1 (Notes) and RN (Research Notes) into separate notes attached to the reference. BUT this works only for Reference Type = BOOK. In other types, much of the citation winds up in an error note (glad I set ignoreUnknown to false).

My legacy references are not properly parsed in EndNote, and I had everything in the Publication field in EN because I couldn't figure out how to untangle the various different ways I entered the publication info over the years. So I am now thinking that I will call every reference a book in EndNote and pass them along to Zotero.

Comments and cautions welcome.

Thanks for taking a look. Here is a sample of the RIS textfile I uploaded:

TY - BOOK
AU - Steering Committee of the State-of-Knowledge Assessment of Standards, Certification.
PB - Washington: Resolve. Available, http://www.resolv.org/site-assessment/towardsustainability/, visited 6/12.
PY - 2012
RN - QUOTES//Steering Committee //Mike Barry//Head of Sustainable Business, Marks & Spencer//Ben Cashore //Professor, Environmental Governance and Political Science; //Director, Governance, Environment and Markets (GEM) Initiative; and //Director, Program on Forest Policy and Governance; Yale University//Jason Clay //Senior Vice President, Market Transformation, World Wildlife Fund//Michael Fernandez //Director of Public Policy and Global Partnerships, Mars, Incorporated//Louis Lebel //Director, Unit for Social and Environmental Research, Chiang Mai University//Tom Lyon //Director, Erb Institute for Global Sustainable Enterprise, University of Michigan//Patrick Mallet (Steering Committee chair) //Director of Credibility, ISEAL Alliance//Kira Matus //Lecturer in Public Policy and Management, //London School of Economics and Political Science//Peter Melchett //Policy Director, Soil Association//Michael Vandenbergh //Professor of Law, Tarkington Chair in Teaching Excellence; //Director, Climate Change Research Network, Vanderbilt University//Jan Kees Vis //Global Director, Sustainable Sourcing Development, Unilever//Tensie Whelan //President, Rainforest Alliance//RESOLVE Staff//Abby Dilley //Vice President of Program Development//Jennifer Peyser //Senior Mediator//Taylor Kennedy //Senior Program Associate
ST - Toward Sustainability: The Roles and Limitations of Certification.
TI - Toward Sustainability: The Roles and Limitations of Certification.
Y2 - 11/11/12
ID - 3761
ER -


TY - JOUR
AU - Sugihara, George
AU - May, Robert
AU - Ye, Hao
AU - Hsieh, Chih-hao
AU - Deyle, Ethan
AU - Fogarty, Michael
AU - Munch, Stephan
KW - complex systems
ecosystems
N1 - NOTES//An ambitious statement about how (long-term) datasets can be analyzed to sort out causality in weakly coupled complex systems--of the kind commonly found in ecosystems. The specific mathematical analysis is for nonseparable nonlinear systems such as those exhibiting chaotic behavior and multiple basins of attraction. This analysis is aimed at going beyond correlation analysis and also looking beyond separable nonlinear systems, which have been studied by Granger in economics. Linear systems are separable, and so are specific examples of nonlinear systems, but, authors argue, most ecosystems are best modeled as nonseparable nonlinear systems.//The approach is formulated in terms of a system with two variables that may be causally related. Because the system is nonlinear, a plot of its behavior maps out a manifold with two or more basins of attraction. The intuition is that two variables are causally connected if nearby points on a manifold where one variable is allowed to range map only nearby points on a manifold where the other variable is allowed to range. This is described in terms of the rising and high correlation coefficient as more and more points (data) are added (convergent cross-mapping, CCM). If they aren't related, or if the two variables are driven by a common environmental forcing variable, the correlations will not rise. In the classic butterfly manifold, authors show that correlations can be positive, negative, or zero (chaotic behavior), so that a correlation observed in a limited dataset can be a mirage. The CCM method is asserted to be a tighter mesh, identifying conditions necessary for causation.//The method is demonstrated with an analysis of the oscillations of abundance in anchovy and sardine in the California Current. The two species are shown to be causally related to long-term variations in sea surface temperature (a proxy for a more complicated environmental forcing mechanism, presumably) but not to be causally related to one another, despite the observation that they appear to alternate in abundance in the historical record. The relationship to temperature is nonlinear, so that a regulation that uses sea surface temperature to set harvest levels will lead to error and surprise.
PY - 2012
ST - Detecting Causality in Complex Systems.
TI - Detecting Causality in Complex Systems.
Y2 - 8/13/15
ID - 3773
ER -


TY - WEB
AU - Team, Pacific Fishery Management Council. Ecosystem Plan Development
KW - California Current
ecological modeling
N1 - NOTES//A collection of indicators of the state of the California Current (CC), aiming at indicators significant to fisheries--oceanographic trends (ENSO, PDO, North Pacific Gyre Oscillation) that correlate with the productivity of waters in the CC; upwelling indices at different latitudes; dissolved oxygen/hypoxia measures; copepod biomass fluctuations; forage species abundance; salmon (chinook); and groundfish; marine mammals (sea lions); fishery landings; aquaculture; seafood demand; fishing fleet structure; drilling activity, oil wells and other benthic structures; shipping; and nutrient inputs.//The overall picture is one of reasonable stability: most indicators are within 1 standard deviation of long-term means, and the PDO and ENSO suggest some good fishing years ahead. But what is lacking is a context beyond the data themselves. There is no sign, for example, of what should be anticipated from climate changes already committed to. (Are these Biblical fat years to be followed by lean times and crisis?)//The analysts think a proper picture would have many more trends--but a lay person's view is that there are already too many to make sense of without a better framing.
PB - Council docket, Agenda Item k.3.a, Supplemental attachment, November meeting briefing book. Available, http://www.pcouncil.org/resources/archives/briefing-books/november-2012-briefing-book/#ecosystemNov2012, visited 12/12.
PY - 2012
ST - Draft annual state of the California Current ecosystem report.
TI - Draft annual state of the California Current ecosystem report.
ID - 3767
ER -


TY - UNPB
AU - Sanchirico, James
AU - Springborn, Michael R.
AU - Schwartz, Mark W.
AU - Doerr, Angela N.
KW - monitoring
N1 - NOTES//See Sanchirico et al (2011) notecard. Paper has been submitted for publication.
PB - Davis, University of California.
PY - 2012
ST - Maximizing Return on Monitoring Investments. Unpublished working paper (part of a report to the Packard Foundation.)
TI - Maximizing Return on Monitoring Investments. Unpublished working paper (part of a report to the Packard Foundation.)
Y2 - 8/13/15
ID - 3765
ER -


TY - BOOK
AU - Pray, Leslie
AU - Pillsbury, Laura
AU - (rapporteurs), Maria Oria
KW - food
agriculture
N1 - NOTES//Summary of a workshop bringing together experts around the externalities in the food system (including skeptics about the workability of that economic framework in practice). Includes a chapter on ecosystem services. Skimmed for board committee on food & ag, 2013.
PB - Washington: National Academy Press.
PY - 2012
ST - Exploring Health and Environmental Costs of Food. Summary of a workshop, Food and Nutrition Board, Institute of Medicine, and Board on Agriculture and Natural Resources, National Research Council.
TI - Exploring Health and Environmental Costs of Food. Summary of a workshop, Food and Nutrition Board, Institute of Medicine, and Board on Agriculture and Natural Resources, National Research Council.
Y2 - 8/13/15
ID - 3774
ER -

2nd (journal), 3rd (webpage) and 4th (unpublished work).

OK, here's one, an unpublished work:

TY - UNPB
AU - Biber, Eric
KW - monitoring
N1 - NOTES//Why ambient monitoring matters. Essential to adaptive management. Also provides information on compliance, Yet monitoring has proved difficult.//Why ambient monitoring is difficult. Effective monitoring requires continuity (to detect infrequent events) and longevity (to detect trends and to sort out causal relationships from fluctuations). In addition, need to measure right variables, at right scale, at a resolution that can detect the effects of interest. 'Right' depends on decisions to be informed, which is often not thought through. Even if there is clarity, these factors mean that monitoring can be costly (10).//Institutional and legal obstacles to effective monitoring//Effective monitoring requires institutional continuity. It is easy to impair continuity by cutting budgets (myopia from undervaluing future or failure to understand). The technical sophistication required for effective monitoring means that it is hard to tell (including by judges) whether an agency is carrying out its monitoring mandate effectively. The long-term character of monitoring makes it 'unappealing professionally' for well-qualified scientists to pursue or to defend. These factors mean that it is easy for agencies to under-invest in monitoring (myopia), particularly when monitoring data might form a basis for holding an agency to account (on mandates that the agency does not want to fulfill) and reducing its leaders' discretion. The complexity of monitoring means that courts mostly defer to agency judgments and leave it to them to develop the record that comes to court when challenged. All this leads to strategic advantages for regulated industries, so that the independence of monitoring can easily be undermined.//One particularly subtle issue comes in the use of models to integrate information, or in extrapolating from existing data to new operating regimes. Models are structured in particular ways and they need parameters, and the significance of these is often hard to discern by outsiders. Even extrapolation involves assumptions about context. These assumptions are hard to challenge in court, or even to grasp from outside.//The dilemma: 'Making monitoring seem worthwhile enough for politicians to invest in, but not so important that it becomes politically risky' (15).//Possible solutions//Solutions are organized around the problems of continuity and opacity.//The solutions that have been advanced mostly fall into the category of necessary but not sufficient: strong leadership (ephemeral); more, and dedicated, funding (may not be enough to create and sustain effective monitoring); collaboration and interoperability across monitoring entities; citizen science (hard to sustain, limited to technically simple measurements that are readily audited); legal mandates (hard for courts to intervene with enough knowledge).//A more basic approach is to restructure responsibilities so as to create better incentives and institutional arrangements for effective monitoring; there are two major variants. 1) separate monitoring agency (considerable advantages, including incentive to develop a reputation for being independent and unbiased; disadvantage is separation from decision making).//Institutional and legal obstacles to use//Politically powerful constituencies can block use of monitoring, particularly because it is normally ambiguous until there is a crisis. Opponents can also call for more research. Also, burden of proof can be decisive, and this lies usually within the purview of the politically pressed agency.//Even when there is a rough balance of power among divided constituencies, monitoring is often caught up in a continuing struggle over the legitimacy of the program being monitored. This thwarts the articulation of clear goals and of agreement about what constitutes actionable information.//Possible solutions to the failure to use monitoring//Explicit judgments (aired to achieve a measure of consensus) on acceptable levels of uncertainty to guide choices and actions. That is, to recognize the limitations of monitoring to guide choice, and, conversely, to define what knowledge is good enough to use.//Can also try to set ex ante trigger levels to enable action if a predetermined condition is met in monitoring results. This assumes that surprises will not dominate decision making in practice.//Sometimes can empower an independent body to make use of (or raise profile of) monitoring data, to prevent an agency from ignoring information it has collected. Biological opinions under the Endangered Species Act, for example, cannot be ignored, in part because they can be enforced through stakeholder litigation. Opening a decision process in this way raises transaction costs considerably.//These solutions are limited in their ability to handle the root problems of myopia and political conflict among stakeholders. //Headings in October 2012 draft, with some notes://Why ambient monitoring matters// (monitoring can warn of unrecognized problems and surprising connections; monitoring can be used to set standards; monitoring can be part of compliance with established rules)//Why ambient monitoring is difficult// Continuity and longevity// (ability of monitoring to detect surprise and slow change is a result of continuity and longevity, 4-6, though it isn't clear that this is assessed at outset or as use shifts)// Effectiveness//Institutional and legal obstacles to conducting effective monitoring// Scale// External political pressure// Judicial review// Conflicting agency goals// Importance of agency autonomy// Professional culture of scientists//Possible solutions for the failure to collect effective monitoring data// Citizen monitoring// Legal mandates and judicial enforcement// Restructuring agencies// (speculation: regulatory agencies have fewer problems with monitoring than management agencies, 42-43)// (cases of regulatory failure include Canadian cod fishery collapse, attributed in part to refusal to recognize warnings from monitoring, 46-49)//
PY - 2012
RN - QUOTES//Volunteer monitoring seems most plausible when: (a) the monitoring techniques are relatively inexpensive and simple; (b) the effectiveness of the volunteer monitoring program is relatively simple for auditors or outsiders to assess...; (c) the monitoring activity provides non-monetary rewards for the volunteers which encourages[sic] them to participate; (d) continuity of the monitoring program over time is less important. (10/12, 34-35)
ST - institutional challenges to monitoring, untitled drafts, March & October (5th draft).
TI - institutional challenges to monitoring, untitled drafts, March & October (5th draft).
Y2 - 12/8/12
ID - 3751
ER -

So sorry. I think I was confused in what I said. The trouble I am having is this: for reference types that are not book, the publication data does not upload properly. EN assigns it to the code PB in RIS, but it winds up in the error message. Two examples below; the second is misclassified as TY - UNPB, but the first looks right to me.

Thanks!


TY - WEB
AU - Ianelli, James N.
AU - Honkalehto, Taina
AU - Barbeaux, Steve
AU - Kotwicki, Stan
AU - Aydin, Kerim
AU - Williamson, Neal
N1 - NOTES//Reviewed for ecosystem modeling discussion, Feb 2013, as recommended by John Henderschedt.//The stock assessment brings together a wide array of data on the stock under review, one of three managed in U.S. waters. This is a data-rich stock, with data from catch, onboard observers, and scientific trawls and acoustic surveys; some datasets from fishers' acoustic surveys, used to target fish in the water, are also included. The fishery on this stock yields over 1 million tonnes per year, worth several hundred million dollars. The rationale for setting harvest rules and planning scenarios is exclusively biological and ignores economic considerations.//The data are used to constrain a stock-recruitment model whose aim is to reproduce the abundances of pollock at different ages and lengths, as they move through their lifecycles for the period from 1978 (when data were sparse) to the present. The data are approximately internally consistent, as measured by variations in total biomass that vary by +/-20% as additional data sources are incorporated. From these estimates of the stock's demography, recommendations can be developed for total allowable catch, as well as spatial and temporal refinements intended to shape the fishery so as to protect salmon (from bycatch) and marine mammals (which feed on pollock).//The emphasis is on statistical inference from the data available, with the biology and life histories of the fish embodied in the demographic models. To a lay reader, the relationship between the datasets and a biological understanding of the fish species is obscure, although the interpretive comments in the report suggest that the biology (stock-recruitment relationship) is not in question, and inconsistencies are explained in terms of intrusions by other stocks of pollock, unanticipated out-migration to other areas, or to environmental variations. These explanations are qualitative and reflect the judgment of analysts, as informed by findings from the fishery science literature.//The initial entrance of new individuals (age 0) is not needed in this approach, and it is only the appearance of fish in scientific trawls and, later, as recruits of marketable size (at age 3) that matters to the analysis.//Harvest rules are developed from a spectrum of scenarios, including several that are designed to be precautionary (e.g., avoiding overfishing). The scenarios are created from the demographic model, using systematic variations (like a Monte Carlo simulation) in recruitment. Other sources of uncertainty are reflected in the parameters of the model and do not appear to be tested through deliberate sensitivity analysis, at least in this arena.//
PB - In, North Pacific Groundfish Stock Assessments, preliminary draft, prepared for the North Pacific Fishery Management Council. Alaska Fishery Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Service. Available, http://www.afsc.noaa.gov/REFM/stocks/plan_team/draft_assessments.htm, visited 12/12.
PY - 2012
ST - Assessment of the walleye pollock stock in the Eastern Bering Sea.
TI - Assessment of the walleye pollock stock in the Eastern Bering Sea.
ID - 3768
ER -


TY - UNPB
AU - Froese, R
AU - Proelss, A.
KW - certification
fisheries
N1 - NOTES//A multidisciplinary study (RF is a biologist, AP is professor of international law) that provides a careful analysis of the legal definition of overfishing (which is not binding on a voluntary standard system), and then uses it to review the assessments used to support certifications of the Marine Stewardship Council and Friends of the Sea.//Authors propose the FAO finding that 15% of the world's fisheries are not overexploited (B>Bmsy)and not overfished (F<Fmsy) serve as a counterfactual. Their meta-analysis finds that 31% of the fisheries certified by MSC are overexploited and 30% are overfished, based on the evidence reported by MSC assessors. Another 11% have insufficient information to judge their condition. Moreover, in fisheries with management plans that were reviewed, the fishing targets in 21% were above Fmsy--so overfishing was intended in future. (Authors do not comment on the fact that certified fisheries are not a random sample, so one would expect that well-managed fisheries would be substantially overrepresented in the documents reviewed.)//Authors conclude, from a review of 20 certified fisheries, that there is no evidence that certified stocks as a group are rebuilding. Friends of the Sea did worse on the quantitative indicators than MSC.//MSC has suspended the certifications of 4 fisheries, perhaps in response to this article.//Authors observe that certified fisheries are still substantially more likely to be responsibly caught than seafood in general.//The tone of the article is roughly that of the Government Accountability Office in the federal government: skeptical, rigorous, formative as an evaluation.
PB - Marine Policy, online at dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2012.03.017.
PY - 2012
ST - Evaluation and legal assessment of certified seafood.
TI - Evaluation and legal assessment of certified seafood.
Y2 - 4/27/12
ID - 3754
ER -

Yes, that's what I thought. So my solution is to call everything a book, yes? That way I get the data into the Publisher field. It will be a pain to reclassify stuff, but that may bhe best solution available.

Many thanks, in any case.

Thanks. I will think more about this. Appreciate your help!

update your translators ("Update Now" from general tab of preferences) and try again. Should work now.

sorry about that, I forgot a step. Try again.