Search results

In this paper, the authors explore racialisation through human-centric counter-accounts (counter-stories) to bring together critical race theory (CRT) and counter-accounting.

The authors utilise CRT to demonstrate the emancipatory role of counter-stories in (re)telling racialized narratives, specifically the narrative of asylum seekers who arrive by sea and are subjected to the inhumane and oppressive nature of the Australian government's policy of offshore immigration detention.

Counter-stories, as tools of accountability, can make visible oppressive forces and the hidden practices of racialized social practices and norms.

This paper emphasises that we are not in a post-racial world, and racialisation remains a fundamental challenge. We must continue to refute race as an ontological truth and strive to provide a platform for counter-stories that can spark or drive social change. This requires allies, including academics, to give that platform, support their plight, and offer avenues for change.

The authors introduce CRT as a theoretical tool for examining racialisation, opening space for a more critical confluence of accounting and race with potentially wide-reaching implications for our discipline. The paper also contributes to the limited accounting literature concerning asylum seekers, particularly in the use of counter-stories that offer a way of refuting, or challenging, the majoritarian/dominant narratives around asylum-seeking.

The purpose of this study is to identify shared themes and concerns of two local and critical archives by comparing their design and day-to-day practice.

The action research has drawn on the experience of collaboration between a Sydney-based community space (Frontyard) and the Surabaya-based co-working community (C2O) over one year. Each space houses a small physical library of books, which is the focus of this analysis.

Hacking has emerged as a key value of both archives. A hacking approach has shaped the design of each space and the organisation each archive. Hacking frames the analysis of each collection in this study.

Pragmatic and political understanding of such archives have implications for better quality and more authentic exchange between the communities that make use of these libraries in Indonesia and Australia.

While some work on local critical archives has been done in Indonesia and Australia, no research to date has made specific comparisons with the aim of sharing knowledge. Because these archives are often temporary and ephemeral, documenting the work that goes into them, and their practitioners’ perspectives, is urgent, making possible shared knowledge that can inform the ways communities make decisions about their own heritage.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate practices of argumentation on Twitter discussions about climate change.

Conversational threads were collected from the Twitter API. Fundamental concepts from argumentation theory and linking practices were operationalised through a coding schema for content analysis. Tweets were analysed in the context of the discussions and coded according to their argumentative approach, interaction type and argumentation stage. Linked and embedded sources were analysed in order to find how they were used in arguments, the plausibility and soundness of the message, the consistency and trustworthiness of the linked source and its adequacy with the target audience.

Among the interactions between arguers, this study found five typical practices and several patterns involving the dynamics of the conversations, the strategy of the argumentation and the linking practices. Although the rhetorical approach was prominent, the agreement was rarely achieved. The arguers used a variety of sources to justify or support their positions, often embedding non-textual content. These linking practices, together with the strategy adopted and the topics discussed, suggest the involvement of a multiple audience engaged in discussing ad lib scientific artefacts, topics and outputs.

While Twitter has been the focus for many research papers, the conversational threads have been given little attention so far. With the Twitter API making conversations more accessible for research, this paper does not only give insight into multiple audience group argumentation dynamics but also provides a method to study the conversations from an argumentation theory perspective.

This paper aims to study how multinational enterprises (MNEs) can best integrate legitimacy concerns into their new product-launching strategy to successfully introduce high-value hi-tech innovations in emerging countries.

Theoretical constructs on the role and process of legitimacy construction for the introduction of a new product are built upon the existing literature. Then they are validated and refined through the formulation and analysis of case studies of the launch of genetically modified cotton seeds by Monsanto in India and a HIV/AIDS drug cocktail by Merck in Brazil.

Legitimacy construction can serve MNEs to face challenges successfully while launching high-value hi-tech products in emerging countries. Challenges to MNEs are likely to be founded on a combination of four types of uncertainties: technological, commercial, organizational and societal. Expected challengers are public agencies and actors representing civil society. An MNE can prepare itself through legitimacy construction along three dimensions: redesign of technology, revision of marketing strategy and non-market investments. To implement the aforesaid, MNEs can engage in outreach in the form of strategic patience, market transaction, business collaboration, compromise and/or confrontation with diverse carefully chosen stakeholders.

The authors limited ourselves to tracing only the formal interactions of MNEs, while it is well-known that many informal and backdoor activities can also accompany their growth in emerging economies.

Legitimacy construction can help MNEs face challenges successfully while launching high-value hi-tech products in emerging countries. This calls for an evaluation of the systemic uncertainties followed by the formulation of a strategy for legitimacy construction and implementation through outreach to diverse systemic actors. Strategic patience can yield positive returns. Market transactions can serve as economic anchors. Collaboration can be pursued with parties who can share the costs of legitimization construction and/or reduce technological and marketing uncertainties. Confrontation should be the last choice. Compromise is the most probable but not the only outreach strategy possible after a confrontation.

Legitimacy implies product acceptance not only from the targeted consumer but also other societal stakeholders concerned with the safety and equity of the consumption in the emerging country, especially when regulations are not well-defined and/or implemented. The two kinds of societal stakeholders which are likely to monitor MNEs are public agencies and civil society groups. Public agencies will be concerned about the quantity, quality, technology or price of the innovation to be introduced. Civil society and NGOs may help the MNE act as citizen watchdogs for the environment and vulnerable communities.

Theoretical constructs have been developed in this paper on the sources of challenges in new product introduction, the types of challengers and the components of the firm’s legitimacy construction strategy and its implementation through an outreach strategy.

This chapter presents a broad introduction to women’s varied interactions with drugs and drug markets. It provides a brief overview of the international framework of drug control and the ways in which drug policy enforcement differently impacts women and men. It highlights the negative and disproportionate impacts on women of criminalisation-based approaches and how drug policy serves to reinforce existing problems of structural discrimination. This provides context for the contributions to this edited collection, which are summarised in the introduction. The book situates drug policy reform as a crucial and underlooked feminist issue.

This article argues that truth recovery practices that take place against the backdrop of ongoing settler colonial erasure, as is the case when considering Zionist colonial violence in Palestine, must focus on combating state-sponsored attempts at erasure, rather than solely providing a platform for the expression of settler guilt.

The article analyses existing literature on truth recovery practices that take place in Palestine, including the work of a variety of local NGOs engaged in such praxis, with a view to considering how this form of transitional justice has germinated incrementally in the space. Critical reflection on the work of a variety of grassroots NGOs is situated alongside other forms of transitional justice intervention.

The article argues that in the context of enduring settler colonialism, the truth regarding past Zionist atrocities in historic Palestine must avoid being curated in the present day in such a way as to allow for damage limitation rather than the platforming of conversations around meaningful repair. Truth recovery for recovery's sake serves only to reinforce the settler colonial status quo rather than properly agitate for a full decolonisation, one that demands and facilitates indigenous Palestinian return.

The article challenges prevailing notions of the role of truth recovery practices in spaces of enduring settler colonial value. It makes clear that the role of truth recovery interventions in sites where colonial violence endures must be to actively and meaningfully support activities that reinforce native identity, history and presence on the land. Moreover, by reference to existing grassroots attempts at truth recovery in Palestine, the article provides an original and clear argument that states it is simply not enough to platform the revelation of uncomfortable truths or to provide opportunities for settler violence of the past to be “confessed” in public if it is disassociated from challenging the present-day structures of ongoing oppression.

As we reckon with the #MeToo movement, the gender-based violence that occurred during the 1947 Partition continues to remain forgotten in mainstream discourses and is an emotive and polarising issue within both India and its diaspora. Just like mainstream news in the United States covered the Gabby Petito case, causing a controversy as it led to the realisation that the rape and gender-based violence of missing indigenous women were not covered, it can be suggested that mainstream news channels both within India and in the diaspora construct narratives that privilege the stories of some over others – with issues of shame, izzat (‘honour’) and policing of women's bodies compounding the silence in South Asian communities. In this chapter, I argue that we need to rethink the Partition as a genocide to recognise the gender-based violence that occurred on women's bodies as the cataclysmic event occurred. I discuss the feminist historiographical research led by Urvashi Butalia, Kamla Bhasin and Ritu Menon who interviewed survivors in the aftermath of the 1984 anti-Sikh riots that triggered their research and reminded them of the Partition violence. It is only recently when the 1947 Partition Archives (in 2010) and the Partition Museum (in 2017) that the conversations of Partition are also taking place in academic spaces.

The purpose of this study was to investigate a framework for the implementation of freedom of information (FOI) legislation in South Africa, against Article 19’s nine principles of FOI legislation.

This qualitative study used semi-structured interviews to collect data from six experts selected by means of the snowball sampling technique and content analysis. The study used a modified Delphi design consisting of two rounds of interviews.

The results showed that little effort is made by government officials to demonstrate commitment to the implementation of FOI legislation.

The passing of FOI is expected to reduce corruption, increase public participation, reduce the level of secrecy and increase transparency and openness. This is not the case as the implementation of this socioeconomic right in South Africa is faced by numerous challenges, such as a lack of political will, secrecy laws providing for the opposite of what the FOI legislation seeks to achieve, poor legislative interpretation and a lack of clear policies. The study proposes a framework aimed at addressing these challenges.

The study provides a framework for the implementation of FOI legislation. The framework was developed under the guidance of Article 19 principles of freedom of information legislation.

Democratic countries all over the world are embarking on initiatives to empower citizens through public participation. One of the tools used by countries to promote public participation is the enactment and implementation of freedom of information (FOI) legislation, as it is the case with South Africa and Zimbabwe. Despite having legislation reaffirming the need for people’s right to know, practices in South Africa and Zimbabwe indicate the opposite. The purpose of this study is to explore FOI models in South Africa and Zimbabwe, with a view to recommend ways in which people’s right to know can be promoted.

This qualitative study used interviews to collect the data from 12 FOI experts in South Africa and Zimbabwe, who were selected through the snowball sampling technique. Data collected through interviews were supplemented by the data collected through document analysis.

The study concluded that the key role players need to make efforts to ensure that the right to know, which is associated with FOI, is being realised in both countries. FOI legislation, in both countries, is imprecise and needs to be revised to ensure effective implementation.

The study demonstrates that FOI is a necessary tool for people to be involved in decision-making in government. People’s rights to know can be achieved by successfully implementing FOI legislation.