Search results

Digital technologies, and the affordances they provide, can shape institutional processes in significant ways. In the last decade, social media and other digital platforms have redefined civic engagement by enabling new ways of connecting, collaborating, and mobilizing. In this article, we examine how technological affordances can both enable and hinder institutional processes through visibilization – which we define as the enactment of technological features to foreground and give voice to particular perspectives and discourses while silencing others. We study such dynamics by examining #SchauHin, an activist campaign initiated in Germany to shine a spotlight on experiences of daily racism. Our findings show how actors and counter-actors differentially leveraged the technological features of two digital platforms to shape the campaign. Our study has implications for understanding the role of digital technologies in institutional processes as well as the interplay between affordances and visibility in efforts to deinstitutionalize discriminatory practices and institutions.

Organizational legitimacy is a central concept in institutional theory and in the more recent stream of communicative institutionalism. Within this scholarship, there exists an elaborated understanding of how macro-level actors, such as news media, influence individual judgments at the micro-level through a top-down communication process. However, little is known about the upward process by which individual propriety judgments influence validity judgments of news media at the macro-level. In this paper, we propose that this upward process of the legitimacy loop is facilitated by the degree to which expressed propriety judgments by individuals create thematic broadness, which bridges stand-alone conversations. Through a study investigating a post-scandal phase in the financial sector, we show how propriety judgments in social media become pre-validated at the meso-level prior to their validation by news media at the macro-level. The presented theoretical framework and empirical insights based on time-series regression analysis provide new knowledge about the multilevel process of organizational legitimacy formation in a digital age and extend our understanding of how a consensus is revealed at the meso-level.

Social entrepreneurship (SE) has become the engine propelling the rapid expansion of the social/environmental sector; thus, the authors need to examine it from different perspectives. First of all, it is vital to understand the concept of SE in an attempt to understand the most basic question: what makes an entrepreneurship social and what makes a social initiative a SE? Second, it is important to know the tools to develop a SE such as the business model canvas and design thinking, among others, which are adapted to SE, as well as tools that are unique to the sector such as impact measurement and impact investing. Third, aspiring SEs have to understand the current ecosystem in order to take advantage of the enormous support that the SE ecosystem has to offer thanks to global players such as Ashoka, the Schwab, and Skoll foundations as well as prominent Latin American players such as New Ventures Group, ANDE, and collective company-driven initiatives such as Momentum led by BBVA Bank that have supported more than 10,000 SE all over the world. Finally, the authors will introduce the case of low-income house builders Hábtiva and a student challenge to ignite aspiring social entrepreneurs. This chapter provides a glimpse of the field SE by focusing in its importance in our current challenging world, its definition, some tools used in the field, the current ecosystem of SE, how to measure social impact, and some cases and challenges.

This chapter presents two examples of misinterpretation of the philosophical term and historical concept of human dignity in contemporary legal theory and practice. Current legal theories (R. Alexy) still introduce Pico’s concept of dignity regarding the human personality and personal (volitional and rational) abilities. The term ‘dignity’ is marginal for Pico and shows the spiritual way to the status of the original Adam. Pico’s concept of dignity is located in the area of spirit (hyperphysics), not metaphysics (soul) or physics (materials). Günter Dürig in his commentary to Grundgesetz also used the Kantian concept of human dignity. Dürig exaggerated this value and used it also for the area of physics (to protect the human being as a personality). For Kant, the term ‘dignity’ was also marginal, and he used it in the area of metaphysics (soul – especially the moral and rational parts), regarding transcendence for homo noumenon, not for homo phaenomenon. In general, it seems to be problematic to use the ideal of the dignity for the law, which regulates the social relations between concrete phenomenal personalities. There are parallels to Pico. The Kantian starting point was different from Pico, because Kant stays in the area of metaphysics (especially the moral and rational parts). Both consider freedom as a condition of dignity. The concept of autonomy of will is significant for both, but each thinks of it in different ways. For both, human being can become master of oneself, but in a different context.

The proceedings of the 17 editions of the conference of the Spanish Association of Scientific Experts in Tourism constitute a valuable archival resource within the research on Spanish tourism. But so far their contents have not been analyzed. The aim of this chapter is to examine the research that has been presented at its conference by means of a bibliometric analysis of the proceedings of 17 editions. The study focuses on the origin of the research (countries, regions, institutions, and authors), as well as its characteristics in terms of themes dealt with, geographical areas researched, methodologies, disciplinary areas, and attitudes toward tourism. Implications for the evolution of the research are discussed in terms of knowledge contributions and the shaping of major tourism research traditions.

In this chapter, we analyze the contribution of two Iberian Foundations to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs; Global Goals). In particular, we studied the case of Eugénio de Almeida Foundation, from Portugal, and Yuste Foundation, from Spain, between 2016 and 2018. To achieve the main objective, three specific objectives were defined: the first one is to understand if sustainability is present in the Foundations Mission, Vision and Values; the second one is to analyze how the activities developed by each Foundations contribute to the SDGs and relate these activities to the SDGs targets and finally to do a comparative analysis of the results of the two foundations. To reach these objectives, we use the case study method based on the analysis of annual reports and websites of the two Foundations and cross-referenced information about the mission, objectives, values and activities developed since 2016 with the specific targets of Global Goals.

This chapter shows that Iberian Foundations contribute to the SDGs, since its mission fits the SDGs as its activities have a strong social nature and aim at sustainable development in the regions where they operate and beyond. However, we do not find the reporting evidence because the Foundations do not provide sustainability reports, nor do they provide sustainability information in their annual reports and accounts, or on their websites.

The study will present contributions at several levels: literature and practice. It makes contributions to the literature on relationships between sustainability practices and sustainability report and the regulation and institutionalization of sustainability practices and reporting for SDGs. Also, our study contributes to a better understanding of the role of Iberian Foundations as partners in achieving the Global Goals and their contribution to the effective, responsible and transparent development of institutions for United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.