Search results

While it is generally well known that nonviolent collective action was widely deployed in the US southern civil rights movement, there is still much that we do not know about how that came to be. Drawing on primary data that consist of detailed semistructured interviews with members of the Nashville nonviolent movement during the late 1950s and 1960s, we contribute unique insights about how the nonviolent repertoire was diffused into one movement current that became integral to moving the wider southern movement. Innovating with the concept of serially linked movement schools – locations where the deeply intense work took place, the didactic and dialogical labor of analyzing, experimenting, creatively translating, and resocializing human agents in preparation for dangerous performance – we follow the biographical paths of carriers of the nonviolent Gandhian repertoire as it was learned, debated, transformed, and carried from India to the Fellowship of Reconciliation (FOR) and Howard University to Nashville (TN) and then into multiple movement campaigns across the South. Members of the Nashville movement core cadre – products of the Nashville movement workshop schools – were especially important because they served as bridging leaders by serially linking schools and collective action campaigns. In this way, they played critical roles in bridging structural holes (places where the movement had yet to be successfully established) and were central to diffusing the movement throughout the South. Our theoretical and empirical approach contributes to the development of the dialogical perspective on movement diffusion generally and to knowledge about how the nonviolent repertoire became integral to the US civil rights movement in particular.

At an early stage in the development of Ashridge, it was appreciated that it was not sufficient for a major management development institution solely to pass on knowledge about the practice of management; it was equally important to carry out original research in order to add to this fund of knowledge. Consequently, the Research Unit was set up in 1964 and Philip Sadler was appointed as the first Director of Research. Since that time, the Unit has continued to develop and currently employs twelve full‐time professional staff who are supported by research assistants, secretaries and post‐graduate students seconded by a number of universities in order to gain research experience. In addition, the Unit provides facilities for visiting research fellows. At the present time, for example, there is attached to the Unit an FAO Research Fellow from Budapest, who is carrying out organization studies in the UK food industry and, later in 1976, an Indian industrial relations specialist will spend some months participating in the Unit's research programme. Ashridge is also one of the few independent research institutions in the United Kingdom in which SSRC Senior Research Fellowships are tenable.

In the fall of 1989, SilverPlatter and Human Relations Area Files, Inc. began releasing their new series Cross‐Cultural CD, based on a subset of the Human Relations Area Files. The first disk in the anticipated five‐disk series covers the subjects Human Sexuality and Marriage, and represents two of ten proposed topical databases that are scheduled to be released over the next five years. The other eight databases in the series, to be produced on a total of four additional disks, are to be on the following topics: Family, Crime and Social Problems, Old Age, Death and Dying, Childhood and Adolescence, Socialization and Education, Religious Beliefs, and Religious Practices. An annual “volume” of two databases is currently $1,495, and each volume may be purchased separately. The databases will be issued one time only, one every six months, and are not updated. The second disk in each volume replaces the first disk of that volume, and becomes the property of the purchaser.

How do you bring together in a collaborative and co‐operative framework, the management studies work of three major colleges and some 20 other establishments spread across three counties and very varied in the extent and level of their work?

Interrelations of writings in a complex field such as studies of science, technology and society, turn out to be highly patterned when data on author co‐citations are statistically analysed and mapped. For both authors and specialities, the maps reveal structures of subject matter and intellectual impact, based on the perceptions of hundreds of citers since 1972. A new tool thus is available to historians and others concerned with a field's intellectual development.

Mandeville's Fable of the Bees, ungenerously described by its author as a “rhapsody void of order and method”, actually developed several ideas about the functioning of markets that anticipate some of the concerns of contemporary subjectivist economics such as are expressed in the writings of the modern Austrian School. While it may be too much of an exaggeration to follow F.B. Kaye by declaring Mandeville a “founder” of laissez‐faire economics, it is also quite incorrect to reach the negative verdict of one recent author who concluded that Mandeville “did not advance free‐market economics on any issue”. Mandeville did advance economics in general (and free market economics, incidentally) when he emphasised how patterns of conduct that emerge from the clash of individual egos guided by the flattery of politicians often function to promote some degree of commodious social life that is especially enjoyed by those quick to condemn the conduct as “immoral”. This theme still has its adherents today. I shall group Mandeville's contributions among four overlapping subject headings as follows:

This study contributes to the understanding of the health effects of pesticides exposure and of how pesticides have been and should be regulated.

This study presents literature reviews for the period 2000–2013 on (i) the health effects of pesticides and on (ii) preference valuation of health risks related to pesticides, as well as a discussion of the role of benefit-cost analysis applied to pesticide regulatory measures.

This study indicates that the health literature has focused on individuals with direct exposure to pesticides, i.e. farmers, while the literature on preference valuation has focused on those with indirect exposure, i.e. consumers. The discussion highlights the need to clarify the rationale for regulating pesticides, the role of risk perceptions in benefit-cost analysis, and the importance of inter-disciplinary research in this area.

This study relates findings of different disciplines (health, economics, public policy) regarding pesticides, and identifies gaps for future research.

As a site of contestation among job seekers, workers, and managers, the bureaucratic workplace both reproduces and erodes occupational race segregation and racial status hierarchies. Much sociological research has examined the reproduction of racial inequality at work; however, little research has examined how desegregationist forces, including civil rights movement values, enter and permeate bureaucratic workplaces into the broader polity. Our purpose in this chapter is to introduce and typologize what we refer to as “occupational activism,” defined as socially transformative individual and collective action that is conducted and realized through an occupational role or occupational community. We empirically induce and present a typology from our study of the half-century-long, post-mobilization occupational careers of over 60 veterans of the nonviolent Nashville civil rights movement of the early 1960s. The fourfold typology of occupational activism is framed in the “new” sociology of work, which emphasizes the role of worker agency and activism in determining worker life chances, and in the “varieties of activism” perspective, which treats the typology as a coherent regime of activist roles in the dialogical diffusion of civil rights movement values into, within, and out of workplaces. We conclude with a research agenda on how bureaucratic workplaces nurture and stymie occupational activism as a racially desegregationist force at work and in the broader polity.

This chapter explores the ideas of Alasdair MacIntyre and Vaclav Havel and what these two thinkers can contribute to green political theory.

This chapter includes examination of some of the key works of Havel and MacIntyre and analysis of these works from the point of view of green political theory.

The section ‘Havel and the Imperative to “Live in Truth”: Dissent and Green Politics’ explores Havel’s thought with a particular emphasis on his ethicised notion of political action and critique (‘living in truth’) and his focus on the centrality of dissent (both intellectually and in practice) as central to political critique and action. The section ‘MacIntyre as a Green Thinker: Vulnerability in Political and Moral Theory’ offers an overview of MacIntyre interpreted as a putative green thinker, with a particular emphasis on his ideas of dependence and vulnerability. The Conclusion attempts to draw some common themes together from both thinkers in terms of what they have to offer contemporary green political thought.

What is presented here is introductory, ground clearing and therefore necessarily suggestive (as well as under-developed). That is, it is the start of a new area of exploration rather than an analysis based on any exhaustive and comprehensive knowledge of both thinkers.

This chapter offers some initial lines of exploration for scholars interested in the overlap between green thinking and the work of Havel and MacIntyre.

This is the first exploration of the connections between the works of Havel and MacIntyre and green political theory.