Search results

This paper aims to examine the USA's policy toward Myanmar or Burma, analyzing the bilateral relationship between the two countries from the pre-colonial period to the present day. It highlights the implications of political shifts in the system of government in Myanmar for the bilateral relationship with the USA, particularly after the 1962 coup and the emergence of rising regional powers like China. The paper also shows how the economic role of Myanmar has increased, leading to more equal relations with the United States of America.

This paper employs a qualitative research design, analyzing data from both primary and secondary sources. The methodology includes a literature review and document analysis to gain a comprehensive understanding of the USA–Myanmar bilateral relationship. The research also analyzes political and economic developments in Myanmar and the region, placing the USA policy in a broader context.

The research finds that the USA has been an influential player in Myanmar's politics and economy. However, with Myanmar's integration into the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative and its accession to Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), its economic role has become more significant, leading to a more balanced relationship with the USA. The paper also shows that the USA's policy toward Myanmar has undergone significant changes, particularly after the 2011 easing of sanctions by former President Barack Obama.

Although many works have traced the history of USA–Myanmar ties, this study provides a fresh perspective by setting past events against the backdrop of contemporary geopolitical upheavals, therefore highlighting the complex evolution of their bilateral dynamics. The paper contributes to the literature on the USA–Myanmar bilateral relationship by providing a comprehensive analysis of the relationship from a historical perspective. The research also adds to the discussion of the implications of political and economic developments in Myanmar for the bilateral relationship with the USA. The findings of this study have important implications for policymakers and scholars interested in the USA's role in Southeast Asia and its relations with rising regional powers like China.

This paper aims to study the origin story of Harvard Business School’s involvement with the Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad to study the reasons for the spread of American management education. It introduces both the explicit influence of Cold War politics and Indian development imaginaries to the export of American management thought in the early 1960s.

This paper relies on archival research for its primary source material, drawing upon rich archives of documents found at the Baker Library of Harvard Business School.

Harvard’s role in Ahmedabad was explicitly influenced by the Cold War anti-communist foreign policy of the USA, but did so opportunistically and contrary to the Ford Foundation’s (FF) original plans. Vikram Sarabhai, who was a key player in the Indian national imaginary of development, invited Harvard on his own initiative and forced the foundation to follow his interests rather than being a mere “subaltern.”

This paper could additionally add to the historical debate about the scope and periodization of the Cold War and the role of non-state actors.

This paper covers new ground in exploring the early connection between the Indian development imaginary and business education. It concludes that the export of hegemonic US management education was not successful during Cold War, and the FF was not as dominant as it was made out to be.

The study aims to investigate market reactions associated with the JUST 100 rankings published by JUST Capital, a non-profit organization, as well as differences in financial reporting quality and performance between selected firms and their industry peers.

This study uses a sample of 431 firms selected as the 100 America’s Most Just Companies between 2016 and 2020 by JUST Capital. This study performs both an event study to determine whether the rankings are useful to investors and cross-sectional regression analyses on the characteristics of selected firms compared to their peers.

This study finds that investors react positively to selected firms around the time of the release of the JUST 100 rankings, suggesting that the rankings are decision-useful. This study also finds that selected firms exhibit higher accounting quality and financial performance than their peers.

Rankings may not be free from bias because of JUST Capital’s ownership of an exchange-traded fund.

The findings validate the rankings as well as the methodology used by JUST Capital, as they show market participants value firms that engage in socially responsible actions through their commitment to positively impact five key stakeholder groups: employees, customers, communities, environment and shareholders.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study that shows the importance of the JUST 100 rankings for investment decisions. Considering the growing push for companies to disclose environmental, social and governance (ESG) activities, this study provides evidence to support ESG disclosure regulations.