Search results

In the 21st century First Global Civilization, there are major forces of constructive global interdependence in all regions of the world and in all civilizational domains, including, political, economic, socio-cultural and religious, ecological and outer-spacial. At the same time, there are often equal and opposite forces for destructive global interdependence in the same areas. This led me to formulate Five Scenarios for the future of the First Global Civilization ranging from a Fragile Future with high degrees of vulnerability in all civilizational domains to a set of Doomsday or Final Futures.

Financial technology (fintech) has emerged as a major player in the global financial system, providing a range of services such as payments, digital currencies, money transfers, loans, crowdsourcing, and insurance. Fintech startups in Arab countries have also gained traction due to economic openness and globalization. However, concerns remain about the safety, durability, and security of traditional financial services, especially with the increasing use of artificial intelligence (AI) and digitization. The Central Bank of Bahrain and other regulatory authorities need to balance risk avoidance with the global trend toward innovation in fintech, as well as ensure that these technologies are not used for fraud, money laundering, piracy, or terrorist financing. The Bahraini government and supervisory authorities must strike a balance between preserving the integrity and robustness of the financial and banking sector and developing innovation. This can be achieved by adjusting the rhythm of comparison, strengthening and enhancing the safety of banks, achieving financial stability, and ensuring compliance with laws and legislation. It is important to address gaps in regulatory rules, information security, and the business environment, and launch financial awareness at the community level before embracing the potential of fintech and its unseen future development at the level of cryptocurrencies and others. The current work examines the impact of Fintech on the Future of banking in Bahrain and the opportunities and challenges.

The purpose of this paper is to examine processes of Eurasian integration and the veritable ‘culture war’ between Russia and the West over it, while contributing to the theoretical paradigm of geopolitical economy. This paradigm invites us to consider the multiple manifestations of an emerging multipolar world order while scrutinising the extent to which previously popular approaches to the study of international political economy were themselves enmeshed in projects, the architects of which aspired to global hegemony.

The paper employs critical historicism, an approach in which cultural difference is seen as the sedimentation of historically constituted material and ideational processes and which eschews cultural essentialism and orientalising tropes. It is through this lens that Russian state attempts at normalising Eurasian integration processes are examined.

I demonstrate that Russian state organs and officials, as well as ‘political technologists’ attempt to de-politicise processes of Eurasian integration by appealing to both the logic of cultural/civilisational compatibility of affected parties, as well as the logic of economic integration. Such portrayals invite scrutiny; however, it is important that we also consider how Eurasian integration initiatives are the product of a post-Soviet struggle over Eurasian space but represent something more than mere neo-Soviet revisionism.

The paper demonstrates its originality by situating ongoing processes of Eurasian integration within the longer post-Soviet conjuncture and amid processes of international contestation. Moreover, it situates Russian officials and political technologists as active contributors to international debates about the emerging multipolar world order.

This chapter opens up a question central to the mission of the business in society field as it has evolved since the formation of division in the Academy of Management (AOM): What are the (future) distinctive competencies of business in society scholarship? We first empirically demonstrate that core topics to the business in society field, as represented by the Social Issues in Management (SIM) Division of the AOM, are now disseminated broadly throughout the management academy, represented by AOM. We call this dissemination the popularity paradox, because it demonstrates that SIM is not well connected with other divisions, that is, sub-disciplines of management despite that they are now regularly dealing with its core questions. Given that SIM’s (and business in society’s) traditional foci are now widely dispersed, the authors argue that it is time for business in society scholars, with SIM as proxy, to begin tackling new core issues that put growing civilizational threats around sustainability and the consequent need for system change and transformation front and center. In a sense, the authors argue that business in society scholars need to return to their roots of seriously questioning the roles and functions of businesses in society through a critical lens that asks and seeks to answer – today’s emerging new and tough questions, though the questions now emphasize the sustainability of human civilization as we know it.

Modern scholars of the history of economic thought recognise that John Bates Clark’s earlier works bear far less formal abstraction and, instead, fervently appeal for economic reforms that are inspired by Protestant ethics and German Historicism. After the violent Haymarket incident in Chicago in 1886, Clark is assumed to have entirely dismissed his preoccupation with social reforms and ethics. We provide a counterpoint to this common understanding by finding out that Clark’s originally ethical impetus persists throughout his writings beyond Haymarket. The striking parallelism of his earlier ideas on moral progress and the role of Protestant ethics herein and his later model of natural evolution and entrepreneurial change allow us to characterise Clark’s economics as persistently reformative in character. Further, his application of marginalism must not be understood as purely deductive analysis. Instead, it shows the ideal of an economy that performs analogously to a coherent organism. Clark’s theory of value and distribution is found to build substantially on his reformative claim that the American economy should be founded on a principle of equal and voluntary exchange. This republican idea of the economy is integrated into an ontological reflection of the very preconditions of social wealth.

Does civic participation, especially in the arts, increase democracy? This chapter extends this neo-Tocquevillian question in three ways. First, to capture broader political and economic transformations, we consider different types of participation; results change by separate participation arenas. Some are declining, but a dramatic finding is the rise of arts and culture. Second, to assess impacts of participation, we include multiple dimensions of democratic politics, including distinct norms of citizenship and their associated political repertoires. Third, by analyzing global International Social Survey Program and World Values Survey data, we identify dramatic subcultural differences: the Tocquevillian model is positive, negative, or zero in seven different subcultures and contexts that we explicate, from class politics and clientelism to Protestant and Orthodox Christian civilizational traditions.

The call for a new paradigm in politics and governance has become a planetary imperative. Humanity is at a critical juncture; unless we mature as a species and become net-positive to nature the human experiment may (soon) end. We have become our own biggest threat. This chapter explores the foundations, as well as systemic barriers, for the shift to a new and life-centred paradigm in politics and governance. Offering a systemic exploration of the root causes of our sustainability crises and how to address this, based on the cosmology and evolutionary principles of complex living systems. Applying Living Systems Protocols from the EARTHwise Constitution for a Planetary Civilization, and its framework of five Future Archetypes, for developing our transformative capacities to address the systemic thrivability barriers of mechanistic systems and worldviews. With case-study examples of new paradigm tools, systems and technologies that enable a decentralization of governance and democratization of ownership. As such empowering the systemic conditions and maturation pathways for a thriving planetary civilization. The chapter completes with a brief practice for developing our future human capacities and inner consciousness shifts for a new paradigm in politics and governance.