Search results

Debriefs are a type of workplace meeting that often use after events and critical incidents. Debriefs are used to review performance, promote shared learning and understanding, and improve future team performance. Similarly, reflexivity refers to the extent to which team members reflect upon and openly discuss group processes, procedures, and actions to improve future team performance. In this chapter, the authors review the separate literatures and explore the relationship between debriefs and reflexivity. While the debrief literature does focus on aspects of reflection, what occurs between the aspects of reflection, planning, and action is left unexplored. The concept of reflexivity fits well with the successful use of debriefs, as reflexivity ensures that reflection results in outcomes and moves beyond just an overview or discussion during debriefing. Additionally, important constructs such as psychological safety and sensemaking are relevant to both debriefs and reflexivity such that open and honest discussion as well as developing shared understanding are necessary for effective debriefing and reflection. Using the constructs of psychological safety and sensemaking, the authors propose a model that situates both reflexivity and effective debriefs in the context of team learning. This model integrates team reflexivity with team debriefs, provides a better understanding of how teams can carry out more effective debriefs, and explains how more effective debriefing and greater team reflexivity lead to enhanced learning and improvement in team performance.

This introduction provides an overview of the discourse on alternative agrifood movements (AAMs) to (1) ascertain the degree of convergence and divergence around a common ethos of alterity and (2) context the chapters of the book. AAMs have increased in recent years in response to the growing legitimation crisis of the conventional agrifood system. Some agrifood researchers argue that AAMs represent the vanguard movement of our time, a formidable counter movement to global capitalism. Other authors note a pattern of blunting of the transformative qualities of AAMs due to conventionalization and mainstreaming in the market. The literature on AAMs is organized following a Four Questions in Agrifood Studies (Constance, 2008) framework. The section for each Question ends with a case study to better illustrate the historical dynamics of an AAM. The literature review ends with a summary of the discourse applied to the research question of the book: Are AAMs the vanguard social movement of our time? The last section of this introduction provides a short description of each contributing chapter of the book, which is divided into five sections: Introduction; Theoretical and Conceptual Framings; Food Sovereignty Movements; Alternative Movements in the Global North; and Conclusions.

Academic and popular literatures have addressed growing concerns about the ways we produce, harvest, distribute, and consume food; manage fisheries and inputs to agriculture; and deal with waste. Throughout the 20th century, a series of issue-specific frames emerged that explicitly addressed issues of social justice, the environment, and human health in the food system. During the mid-1990s that comprehensive master frames were established in attempts to bring disparate ideas and actions together into a more inclusive food movement. In this chapter, we explore the development of these collective action frames and turn to Canada as a case study to examine the key moments that have brought together diverse actors through collaborative networks to assert their place within a broader social movement. We argue that recognizing the increasing development of food networks and making these relationships visible opens new theoretical and practical possibilities for food system transformation.

The aim of this chapter is to provide an overview of the student mental health crisis in Higher Education (HE), and how resilience and grit, two important positive psychological constructs, can be beneficial for university students’ success and wellbeing. As part of a discussion around some of the current approaches to intervening in wellbeing in universities, the chapter provides evidence for the use of PPIs for wellbeing in university students, alongside some of the challenges of implementing these in HE. It also provides an overview of the Thriving Students Framework and presents a case for a multicomponent approach to monitoring and improving educational success. In particular, a wellbeing framework that, alongside resilience, also recognises the importance of strengths, persistence in the face of difficulty, a growth mindset, self-control and mental wellbeing; Academic Tenacity. The implications of utilising this framework for educational attainment in university students are discussed. The Bolton Uni-Stride Scale (BUSS), a single short measure of academic tenacity that combines the attributes enabling measurement and intervention to support university students to thrive, is also presented for educators to use.

This chapter reviews work that examines the potential causes of inequality for women in employment in the UK. Amongst developed economies and based on mean hourly earnings, the UK has one of the highest gender pay gaps (ILO, 2018). The UK, therefore, illustrates some of the key theoretical and practical issues associated with greater gender equality that affect other countries to varying degrees. This chapter sets out key theoretical perspectives on gender inequality, summarizes important research, identifies research gaps and provides an agenda for future research. It highlights how there is no simple explanation for the disparities in pay between men and women; these disparities persist in the UK and elsewhere. Theories and empirical analyses, therefore, need to expand to identify other potential causes of gender inequality, extending ‘upwards’ to examine how the nature of firms varies across countries and ‘downwards’ to assess how union representatives influence equal opportunity policies in organizations.

Food movements and organizations are increasingly complementing their longstanding emphasis on environment with a focus on social justice. This conceptual chapter discusses dimensions in which engagements in this arena diverge and converge along a continuum from neoliberalization to opposition/structural change. Categories and visions of social justice vary widely, highlighting certain social categories and locations while eliding others. Gender, in particular, is a social category that is a key factor in the allocation of power and privilege, but that has not been significantly addressed in efforts toward social justice in most food movements.

The topics and categories movements consider most important determine their assignments of energies. These assignments in turn create common understandings of priorities and mechanisms for changing the food system, although they may omit consideration of key axes of oppression. For example, strategic preferences for family farms and food-system localization may not consider legacies and contemporary practices of enslavement, exploitation, and patriarchy.

As movements increase their focus on social justice, they can engage in critical reflection and dialogue to interrogate the nature of conditions of injustice and the causes behind these conditions. This would include examining how practices and discourses of racism, classism, and sexism – along with the ways they intersect – have shaped, reflect, and reproduce the food system. This process must privilege the participation, perspectives, and priorities of those who suffer from injustice. It can then best illuminate strategic definitions and pathways that can move toward transformation of a food system grounded in conditions of social justice.

There are a number of conflicts today involving groups and individuals as regards nature in its various forms. The aim of this article is to examine how these give rise to changes in the forms of critique and justification that underpin them. Based on various points of disagreement as to how nature should be developed, three possibilities of change have been put forward for examination according to the importance of the transformations required: (a) integration of the model into existing orders of justification, (b) development of a new order based on the same model, (c) serious adjustment of the underlying common matrix of orders and the basis it offers for appreciating injustice.

Constructing consumption baskets for the benchmark periods 1745–1754 and 1882–1886, and price indices, we calculate real wages for Japanese unskilled daily laborers in 1741–1913. Matching caloric content and protein contents in our Japanese consumption baskets with those for Europe, we compare Japanese and European urban real wages. Real wages in Kyoto and later Tokyo are about a third London wages but comparable to wages in major Southern and Central European cities for 1700–1900. In Japan, wages are substantially higher in the Meiji period than in the Tokugawa period. These findings have implications for the debate on conditions in Europe and Asia on the eve of the Industrial Revolution.