Search results

The purpose of publishing this viewpoint is to critically analyze the relationship between public health interventions and individual liberties, during recent and potential future pandemics. By exploring the interplay of the right to health, privacy, and autonomy, this viewpoint seeks to highlight the complexities and challenges faced by decision-makers in balancing collective well-being with the protection of individual rights. Through detailed discussions on lockdowns, contact tracing, and international border closures, this paper aims to foster a deeper understanding of how these measures impact fundamental human rights and proposes ways to achieve harmony in future pandemics and crises.

The viewpoint has a qualitative approach, using critical analysis and examination of legal frameworks, scholarly literature, and real-world examples to explore the interplay between public health interventions and individual liberties during pandemics. It draws upon diverse sources, including international declarations, legal instruments, and empirical studies to elucidate the complexities of balancing collective well-being with the protection of fundamental human rights. Through in-depth discussions on lockdowns, contact tracing, and international border closures, this paper aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the challenges and opportunities in harmonizing public health with individual liberties.

The findings of the viewpoint highlight the relationship between public health interventions and individual liberties during pandemics. It underscores the importance of balancing collective well-being with the protection of fundamental human rights, particularly the right to health, privacy, and autonomy. The analysis reveals the shortcomings of certain measures, such as restrictive lockdowns, border closure, and unchecked contact tracing in respecting individual rights. However, it also identifies opportunities for adopting an altruistic approach that upholds both public health imperatives and individual freedoms. Ultimately, the findings emphasize the need for a nuanced understanding and inclusive approach to crisis management.

This analysis predominantly addresses the COVID-19 pandemic, potentially limiting the generalizability of findings to other public health crises. It is limited by its focus primarily on legal frameworks and theoretical analysis, which may not fully capture the practical complexities and nuances of implementing public health measures. Furthermore, while proposing ways to achieve harmony between public health and individual liberties, practical challenges and potential trade-offs in implementation are not extensively explored. Future research could benefit from empirical studies and case analyses to better understand the real-world implications of balancing public health imperatives with individual rights.

The viewpoint underscores the importance of adopting an altruistic approach that respects both public health imperatives and individual rights during pandemics. Practical implications include the need for policymakers to prioritize transparency, accountability, and citizen engagement in implementing public health measures. By fostering trust, ensuring data privacy, and promoting active participation, authorities can mitigate concerns about infringements on individual liberties while effectively managing public health threats. Furthermore, the analysis highlights the importance of considering diverse perspectives and potential trade-offs in decision-making processes to achieve a balanced and inclusive approach to crisis management.

The viewpoint’s social implications lie in building a society where public health measures are implemented with respect for individual rights, fostering trust, and promoting community engagement. By prioritizing transparency, accountability and inclusivity, authorities can mitigate social tensions and promote collective resilience during pandemics. Moreover, upholding principles of equity and fairness in crisis management can help address disparities and ensure that vulnerable populations are not disproportionately affected. Overall, the viewpoint advocates for a societal framework that values both public health and individual liberties, thereby contributing to the development of a more cohesive and resilient society in the face of future health crises.

The originality and value of this viewpoint lie in its comprehensive exploration of the interplay between public health interventions and individual liberties during pandemics. By synthesizing legal frameworks, scholarly literature, and real-world examples, it offers unique insights into the complexities and challenges faced by decision-makers in balancing collective well-being with the protection of fundamental human rights. Additionally, the viewpoint’s proposal of an altruistic approach that respects both public health imperatives and individual freedoms contributes to the discourse on ethical crisis management. Overall, it provides valuable perspectives and recommendations for achieving harmony between public health and individual liberties in future pandemics.

This study explores the relationship between economic freedom and gender ideologies on the allocation of women’s opportunity-to-necessity entrepreneurship across countries. Opportunity entrepreneurship is typically understood as one’s best option for work, whereas necessity entrepreneurship describes the choice as driven by no better option for work. Specifically, we examine how economic freedom (i.e. each country’s policies that facilitate voluntary exchange) and gender ideologies (i.e. each country’s propensity for gendered separate spheres) affect the distribution of women’s opportunity-to-necessity entrepreneurship across countries.

We construct our sample by matching data from the following country-level sources: the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor’s Adult Population Survey (APS), the Fraser Institute’s Economic Freedom Index (EFI), the European/World Value Survey’s Integrated Values Survey (IVS) gender equality index, and other covariates from the IVS, Varieties of Democracy (V-dem) World Bank (WB) databases. Our final sample consists of 729 observations from 109 countries between 2006 and 2018. Entrepreneurial activity motivations are measured by the ratio of the percentage of women’s opportunity-driven total nascent and early-stage entrepreneurship to the percentage of female necessity-driven total nascent and early-stage entrepreneurship at the country level. Due to a first-order autoregressive process and heteroskedastic cross-sectional dependence in our panel, we estimate a fixed-effect regression with robust standard errors clustered by country.

After controlling for multiple macro-level factors, we find two interesting findings. First, economic freedom positively affects the ratio of women’s opportunity-to-necessity entrepreneurship. We find that the size of government, sound money, and business and credit regulations play the most important role in shaping the distribution of contextual motivations over time and between countries. However, this effect appears to benefit efficiency and innovation economies more than factor economies in our sub-sample analysis. Second, gender ideologies of political equality positively affect the ratio of women’s opportunity-to-necessity entrepreneurship, and this effect is most pronounced for efficiency economies.

This study offers one critical contribution to the entrepreneurship literature by demonstrating how economic freedom and gender ideologies shape the distribution of contextual motivation for women’s entrepreneurship cross-culturally. We answer calls to better understand the variation within women’s entrepreneurship instead of comparing women’s and men’s entrepreneurial activity. As a result, our study sheds light on how structural aspects of societies shape the allocation of women’s entrepreneurial motivations through their institutional arrangements.

General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) of the European Union (EU) was passed to protect data privacy. Though the GDPR intended to address issues related to data privacy in the EU, it created an extra-territorial effect through Articles 3, 45 and 46. Extra-territorial effect refers to the application or the effect of local laws and regulations in another country. Lawmakers around the globe passed or intensified their efforts to pass laws to have personal data privacy covered so that they meet the adequacy requirement under Articles 45–46 of GDPR while providing comprehensive legislation locally. This study aims to analyze the Malaysian and Saudi Arabian legislation on health data privacy and their adequacy in meeting GDPR data privacy protection requirements.

The research used a systematic literature review, legal content analysis and comparative analysis to critically analyze the health data protection in Malaysia and Saudi Arabia in comparison with GDPR and to see the adequacy of health data protection that could meet the requirement of EU data transfer requirement.

The finding suggested that the private sector is better regulated in Malaysia than the public sector. Saudi Arabia has some general laws to cover health data privacy in both public and private sector organizations until the newly passed data protection law is implemented in 2024. The finding also suggested that the Personal Data Protection Act 2010 of Malaysia and the Personal Data Protection Law 2022 of Saudi Arabia could be considered “adequate” under GDPR.

The research would be able to identify the key principles that could identify the adequacy of the laws about health data in Malaysia and Saudi Arabia as there is a dearth of literature in this area. This will help to propose suggestions to improve the laws concerning health data protection so that various stakeholders can benefit from it.

This article conceptualizes and constructs a comprehensive framework that can better help to answer that question – Who is accountable for social and public problems? – theoretically and practically.

Tracing the drivers behind two phenomena “accountability hole” and “accountability black hole”, stemming from “pushing power game” and “pulling power game”, respectively, this study considers (1) the three actors of society: citizens (civil society), corporations (market) and civil servants (government), and (2) the principal-agent relationship between the three actors in the face of social and public problems. As a result, the 4CAs framework that contains the three actors’ collaborative accountabilities to one another is presented.

The 4CAs model emphasizes (1) all three actors function as agents that are accountable to one another, (2) collaborative accountability beyond collaborative governance and (3) repowering citizens and corporations beyond just empowering them, i.e. returning their inherent rights and obligations to serve one another.

The 4CAs model may function as a descriptive and prescriptive lens through which the trilemma between market failure, government failure and citizen failure can be re-assessed and balanced. The model can also be used as a set of indicators for assessing and helping a society to better resolve the social and public problems collectively.

This paper aims to investigate the relationships amongst career patterns, neutrality of the state civil apparatus, and organizational performance of the local government in South Konawe District, Southeast Sulawesi Province in Indonesia.

Data were analyzed using Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) to investigate the relationships between variables through direct and indirect influence testing.

The findings reveal that career patterns influence neutrality and organizational performance. Neutrality of the state civil apparatus in politics mediates career patterns and local government organizational performance. The findings indicate that, first, promotions most significantly influence the organization’s neutrality and performance. Second, demotions have the least influence on the organization’s robustness and performance.

This paper is among the first to examine the relationships amongst career patterns, neutrality, and organizational performance. Recommendations are provided to improve neutrality and organizational performance, that is, the need to increase promotions and reduce demotions.

This paper aims to investigate how emerging market multinational enterprises (EMNEs) are integrating and expanding into other emerging market host countries, focusing on Chinese mining companies in Peru.

Adopting a qualitative approach, an in-depth analysis of two Chinese state-owned enterprises’ strategies was conducted, building on stakeholder theory and the business ecosystem perspective.

This study reveals a reliance on high-level political lobbying rather than localized engagement strategies. However, findings point to increasing grassroots resistance among local stakeholders, undermining EMNEs’ bargaining power.

This paper argues for a paradigm shift toward inclusive, cooperative “translocal governance” approaches as empowered communities gain voice. Key contributions include advancing theoretical understanding of changing stakeholder relationships and power configurations in emerging countries, underscoring the rising significance of microlevel sociocultural embeddedness for MNE success and highlighting practical imperatives for EMNEs to embark on rapid localization strategies in Latin America. By elucidating multilayered integration realities in Peru, this interdisciplinary study yields contextualized insights and enriches perspective on the conditions and pathways for EMNEs to build sustainability in Global South emerging market environments.

This study explores a hegemonic alliance and the role of relational forms of accounting and accountablity in the making of contemporary capitalism.

We use the WikiLeaks “Cablegate” documents to provide an account of the detailed machinations between interest groups (corporations and the state) that are constitutive of hegemonic activity.

Our analysis of the “Cablegate” documents shows that the US and Chevron were crafting a central role for Turkmenistan and its president on the global political stage as early as 2007, despite offical reporting beginning only in 2009. The documents exemplify how “accountability gaps” occlude the understanding of interdependence between capital and the state.

The study contributes to a growing idea that official accounts offer a fictionalized narrative of corporations as existing independently, and thus expands the boundaries associated with studying multinational corporate activities to include their interdependencies with the modern state.

The study traces how global capitalism extends into new territories through diplomatic channels, as a strategic initiative between powerful state and capital interests, arguing that the outcome is the empowerment of authoritarian states at the cost of democracy.

The study argues that previous accounting and accountability research has overlooked the larger picture of how capital and the state work together to secure a mutual hegemonic interest. We advocate for a more complete account of these activities that circumvents official, often restricted, views of global capitalism.

Political Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), based on ideas about deliberative democracy, have been criticised for increasing corporate power and democratic deficits. Yet, deliberative ideals are flourishing in the corporate world in the form of dialogues with a broad set of stakeholders and engagement in wider societal issues. Extractive industry areas, with extensive corporate interventions in weak regulatory environments, are particularly vulnerable to asymmetrical power relations when businesses engage with society. This paper aims to illustrate in what way deliberative CSR practices in such contexts risk enhancing corporate power at the expense of community interests.

This paper is based on a retrospective qualitative study of a Canadian oil company, operating in an Albanian oilfield between 2009 and 2016. Through a study of three different deliberative CSR practices – market-based land acquisition, a grievance redress mechanism and dialogue groups – it highlights how these practices in various ways enforced corporate interests and prevented further community mobilisation.

By applying Laclau and Mouffe’s theory of hegemony, the analysis highlights how deliberative CSR activities isolated and silenced community demands, moved some community members into the corporate alliance and prevented alternative visions of the area to be articulated. In particular, the close connection between deliberative practices and monetary compensation flows is underlined in this dynamic.

The paper contributes to critical scholarship on political CSR by highlighting in what way deliberative practices, linked to monetary compensation schemes, enforce corporate hegemony by moving community members over to the corporate alliance.

Existing research has examined the results of women’s political leadership participation (WPLP) and the reasons for the lack of advancement of women to management positions. However, little research has been adopting a more comprehensive framework and configuration perspective to investigate the determinants of WPLP. By integrating institutional theory and institutional complementarities theory, this study aims to construct an institution–culture–structure framework to investigate the multiple driving mechanisms of WPLP.

Drawing on the fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis method and a sample of 66 countries, the authors identify multiple equifinal combinations of conditions related to high and not-high levels of WPLP.

According to the results, the authors summarize five pathways influencing WPLP. These pathways include education and culture-driven pattern, political institutions-driven pattern, political institutions and structure-driven pattern, integrated-driven pattern and political institutions and culture restrictive pattern.

The authors shed new light on the driving mechanism of WPLP and contribute to research on making full out of women’s leadership.

The purpose of this conceptual article is to examine the role of villainification and heroification in social studies through critically analyzing the author’s place-based encounters with three civil war narratives.

The article describes the author’s critical reflections on three narratives involving confederate figures and examines theoretical and pedagogical implications.

The article introduces a spectrum of ethical judgments which plots villainification and heroification on opposing ends. The author advocates for more nuanced ethical judgments that contextualize decisions as understandable or defensible based on evidence. The term understandable reflects a concept of being able to explain (i.e. demonstrate understanding) why a curricular figure made certain choices without agreeing with or supporting those choices. The term defensible denotes the existence of evidence that provides a rationale for a choice such that the person making the ethical judgment would feel comfortable making (i.e. defending) the same choice.

The article introduces a theory of nuanced ethical judgments in social studies that maps onto existing literature on heroification, villainification and place-based education. Pedagogical implications for social studies education are also identified.