Search results

The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of anarchist accounting (AA) on stakeholder relationship capability (SRC) in the context of Iranian capital market companies.

This study is based on a descriptive survey-correlation data collection method. As this study is on (AA) and (SRC) in Iran, the population of the study is made up of all financial managers and heads of the accounting department of capital market companies in Iran. Among 185 companies (Tehran Stock Exchange [TSE]), 100 companies were selected as samples which are all in the TSE. As suggested by Niles (2006), a minimum sample size of 10% of the population is generally acceptable. A questionnaire survey was adopted in obtaining primary data for this study. Thus, based on Cochran sampling techniques, 395 questionnaires were returned and became the basis of analysis. Also, partial least square was used to test the research hypothesis.

The statistical findings indicate the fit of the structural desirability of the factor load and according to the standardized coefficient (path coefficient), the dimensions of AA have a negative and significant effect on SRC, because the path coefficient is positive.

Theoretically, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first research that tries to examine the stakeholder relationship capability through the link between social/political approaches with accounting procedures, an issue that has not been considered in any prior study. Also, conducting the present study in the conditions of social distrust in the Iranian capital market can be important, because the expansion of anarchist accounting helps to create a level of symmetry and equality in information disclosure and it can create value for shareholders.

This chapter on animal ethics, animal rights, and animal welfare is a logical sequence to and ontological consequence of the arguments in earlier chapters. By respecting Mother Nature in all her ecosystems and biodiversity levels, especially by recognizing animal rights and their uniqueness, autonomy, and intrinsicality, we actively contribute to natural sustainability and animal welfare. Our anthropocentric economic models that are profoundly insensitive to the complex interdependencies between human and nonhuman behavior systems and their irreversible environmental challenges endanger both animal rights and global sustainability. Philosophically, we confront epistemological and anthropocentric structures that uncritically privilege humans disproportionately to nonhumans and unwittingly rationalize, moralize, and commodify meat production and consumption such that animal rights and welfare get seriously compromised. To achieve animal welfare, however, we need to seriously rescale Nature's hierarchies first by dethroning ourselves from self-appointed and self-serving, uncontested and critically unexamined presumed human superiority over the nonhuman world and restoring global equality of being an opportunity for all.

The visible ill-effects of the developmental enterprises in the ex-colonies and the tendency towards technocratic totalitarianism, in many ways, have altered the way modern humans perceived the idea of “progress” and “development” historically since the Cold War. This paper presents a deconstructive-transdisciplinary critique of the pervasive ideology by focusing on three nodal points in the stages of “development”: (1) the rise of technocratic modern science; (2) the making of the Third World; and (3) de-legitimisation of its indigenous knowledge paradigms.

Drawing on the first-hand accounts of the researchers, social scientists, activists and environmentalists, this paper presents an extensive critique of the violence involved in the development enterprises and recommends possible ways to move beyond the developmental hegemony. This paper is a theoretical investigation that adopts an interpretative, pluralistic, transdisciplinary approach, in order to deconstruct the development ideology and analyse the ramifications of the developmental propaganda and practice as they unfolded in the Global South.

This paper highlights the need to decondition the social imaginary from the hegemony of developmentalism and its by-product scientism and “technological rationality” for an inclusive, pluralistic, democratic social order.

The focal area of this work is India in particular and Global South in general. It studies the era between the 1950s and 1980s when the major development enterprises took place and studies the consequences they entailed.

The scope of this paper encompasses every socio-economic, ecological and epistemological domain affected by the detrimental effects of the developmental enterprises in the Global South.

The originality of this work lies in its transdisciplinary approach. The scope of this paper is extensive and covers nearly every domain of human existence that has been affected by the development debacle and technocratic totalitarianism in the post-War era.

In this chapter, we draw on trans-informed theoretical frameworks to provide insights into gender justice and gender democratization in Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC). Our purpose is to illuminate the systemic impact of cisgenderist and cissexist beliefs which refer to the legitimation of birth-assigned gender identity and what this means for embracing a critical project of gender expansiveness in the ECEC classroom. More broadly, we explicate how our engagement with trans studies informs a critique of existing debates about masculinities, boys and male teachers in the early years. We draw on the work of trans scholars in the first part of this chapter to ground an epistemological basis for our understanding of gender expansiveness and masculinities that challenges a cisnormative framing of gender justice in ECEC. In the second part, we draw specifically on scholars in the field who have been pivotal in elaborating what we understand to be gender expansive identities and what this means for thinking about gender justice in the early childhood classroom. In the third part, we reflect on the pedagogical implications of boyhood sissiness through a trans-informed lens and explicate its implications for understanding boys and masculinities in the early years. Finally, we draw on transgender studies-informed perspectives on masculinity which call for ‘de-essentializ[ing] masculinity as grounded in a cis-male body’ (Gottzén & Straube, 2016, p. 217) and explore their implications for re-envisioning masculinities as a gender-transformative project in ECEC.

The question of “why we are in disaster studies” can be essential to reflect on discourses and practices – as students, researchers and professors – in constituting an oppressive disaster science and finding ways to liberate from it.

This paper is based on autobiographical research and institutional ethnography to observe and analyze the discourses and practices about career trajectories as students, researchers and professors in disaster studies.

The paper provides some categories, concepts, theoretical approaches and lived experiences helpful for discussing ways of liberating disaster studies, such as public sociology of disaster.

Few papers have focused on professional trajectories in disaster studies, bringing insights from public sociology and questioning oppressive disaster science.

Specialists of all pundits and ideologies held the thesis that tourism safety and security is a cornerstone for the evolution and development of tourism. Tourists very well occupy a central position in the engineering of the tourist system. For decades, the discipline was influenced by what experts dubbed as the bubble model which means that tourists should be physically isolated from the interaction with local people. This happens because local people tend to attack or harm high-purchasing power tourists. Some studies have overtly alerted on the risks of enclave tourism for the local economy and society. At the end of the 20th century, this paradigm set the pace for other theories that focused mainly on terrorism, political violence, and local crime. Even Embassies report to their citizens alerting them on what are the safe and unsafe zones to be visited or avoided. Having said this, the literature is not contemplating a new global phenomenon mainly marked by homeless people and their contact with tourist zones. Some works allude to the term homeless tours to denote the complex relationships between foreign tourists, the local government, and homeless young people. This chapter fills the gap while discussing in depth this slippery matter.