Search results

This paper is a historical review of the development of private primary and secondary education in Hong Kong from 1841-2012. The purpose of this paper is to examine the evolving relationship between the state and private schools in Hong Kong.

This paper utilizes sources from published official documents, public data available on government websites, archival documents and newspapers. The authors also carried out a few individual interviews with legislators, government officials and principals who were familiar with the history of private education in Hong Kong.

The colonial Hong Kong Government adopted laissez-faire policy in greater part of its rule until 1970s. The year 1978 marked the period of “state control” until the 1990s when privatization and deregulation emerged as a world trend in the governance of education. The role of government changed to that of “supervision” instead of “control.” Further, it is shown that the change of sovereignty did not avert the trend of decentralization, deregulation and privatization in education which is entrenched in the management of public affairs in human societies.

The findings provides an illuminating look into the development of a society and how it grapples with the fundamental questions of the degree of social control and proper use of political power in a colonial setting.

The British North American colonies were the first western economies to rely on legislature-issued paper monies as an important internal media of exchange. This system arose piecemeal. In the absence of banks and treasuries that exchanged paper monies at face value for specie monies on demand, colonial governments experimented with other ways to anchor their paper monies to real values in the economy. These mechanisms included tax-redemption, land-backed loans, sinking funds, interest-bearing notes, and legal tender laws. I assess and explain the structure and performance of these mechanisms. This was monetary experimentation on a grand scale.

Long established and revisionist approaches to European state formation are put to one side in this article and a turn to the imperial domains of early modern states is made. The rise of Atlantic Studies as a new current of history has drawn attention to transatlantic patterns of colonialism. However, historical sociologists and comparativists have yet to grapple with the conclusions of this field of research. This article points to a possible line of argument that could draw historical sociology and Atlantic Studies together. It takes up the argument that early modern polities broke new ground in the formation of territorial institutions when they turned to transcontinental state building. From their inception, the projects of empire produced conflict-driven institutions. Comparative examination of the Spanish, British, Dutch, French and Portuguese empires reveals that, despite the authority accorded to overarching institutions of imperial government, domestic and colonial patterns of institutional formation diverged considerably. The article explores how developments in European territories took one course in each case, while colonial trajectories in the Americas took others and thereby generated distinct kinds of conflict.

The study aims to trace the history of Chinese education in Macao in the first half of the 20th century, emphasizing macro- and meso-level political influences.

The paper reviews published works including official documents, rare books, newspapers, etc. and provides a three-part analysis: first, discussion of the colonial Government's education policy during the early 20th century and the establishment of the Chinese Educators' Association of Macau (CEAM); second, contextualization of the major upset and change in educational policy during the Sino-Japanese War (World War II in Asia); and third, considering the reinstatement of laissez-faire education policies regarding Macao's Chinese community and the CEAM's shifting political loyalties in the post-war period.

The colonial Government created a vacuum into which both the Kuomintang (KMT) and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) muscled, seeking to manipulate education from across the border via control of the CEAM. Mainland China's shifting political landscapes thus significantly altered the political orientation of the CEAM, especially around 1949. Soon afterward, various Catholic and other schools withdrew from the CEAM, primarily separating Chinese schools in Macao into blue (Catholic et al.) and red (pro-CCP) camps.

The paper reviews Macao Chinese education history from 1914 to 1949 while providing better comprehension of an analogous situation in neighboring Hong Kong.

The purpose of this paper is to inquire into the history of government accounting, using a well-grounded periodisation, in order to provide a chronology of government accounting development (GAD) in Indonesia from 1845 to 2015 focusing on development on accounting regulations and systems and practices in local government in Indonesia.

It collects archival data and then uses a descriptive tradition of research to capture mainly regulatory changes affecting GAD from colonial to post-colonial period.

The paper reports major regulatory changes, evolution in local government accounting practice, development of government accounting standards (GASt) and converging GASs with international standards.

This study is important to accounting historians and other academics because it provides a detailed chronicle of accounting regulatory changes in Indonesia which can be used for future research. The limitation(s) of this study is that is data collection which was not easily accessible and as results have to rely on various sources.

The study has an important practical implication. It has produced a time series register of regulatory changes affecting GAD in Indonesia. It can be used as a reference document in the National Library of Indonesia and also by academics for future research.

A times series register, for the first time, is produced which provides a comprehensive chronology of accounting development in Indonesia.

Many scholars would agree that the international status of Hong Kong is one of the crucial factors that contribute to the continued success of Hong Kong. However, few of them explain the origin of Hong Kong’s international status. The purpose of this paper is to fill this literature gap through the case study of Hong Kong’s admission to an international organization – the Asian Development Bank (ADB) – in the late 1960s.

Based on declassified archives, a historical approach has been adopted to trace the origin of Hong Kong’s international status.

The findings suggest that Cold War geopolitics, both local and regional level, explain why Hong Kong, even though remained as a dependent territory of Britain, became a member of an international organization independent from the British influence. While geopolitics at local level incentivized the colonial government to “go out” for external support, geopolitics at the regional level provided an opportunity for Hong Kong to acquire membership of the ADB.

This paper is among the first academic study on the origin of Hong Kong’s international status.

The purpose of this paper is to address some of the implications for methodology and ethics that arise when researchers in Indigenous territories locate their research projects as taking place within Indigenous countries. Centering the argument that ethical research with Indigenous communities must be rooted in upholding the primacy of Indigenous sovereignty, numerous considerations to improve qualitative research practices in Indigenous countries are discussed.

The author starts by introducing his relationship to Indigenous research as a mixed-Indigenous researcher. Moving onto discussing preliminary research considerations for working in Indigenous territories, the author argues that qualitative researchers must become familiarized with the historical and geographical contexts of the Indigenous countries they plan on working in. Using Canadian history as an example, the author argues that settler-colonial nationalisms continue to attempt to erase and replace Indigenous countries both in historical and geographical narratives. Building on Indigenous literature, the author then outlines the necessity of being aware of nation-specific protocols in law, culture, and knowledge production.

Drawing on this discussion, the author proposes a framework for preliminary research that can be used by qualitative researchers looking to ensure their projects are grounded in the best practices for the specific Indigenous countries they want to work with.

The author concludes that researchers should not expect Indigenous knowledge keepers to contribute large amounts of labour towards debunking colonial mythology and proving the existence of Indigenous countries. By doing this work as part of the preliminary research process, researchers create space for better collaborations with Indigenous communities.

The purpose of this paper is to complement and extend accounting studies on gender and post-colonialism by examining the interrelationship between accounting, gender and sexuality within an imperial context.

Archival materials enable the construction of an accounting knowledge of how ideas of masculinity and sexuality shaped both female and male participation in distant British colonies.

By exploring the manner in which accounting may be implicated in micro-practices through which gendered/sexualized relations are produced in societies the paper finds that empire’s colonial project on Indian indentured workers, the constitution of their identities, and the translation of abstract policies into practice were facilitated by accounting instruments for management and control.

Original research based on archival studies of British colonial documents.

Anthropologists have long discussed the ways in which their discipline has been entangled, consciously and unconsciously, with the colonized populations they study. A foundational text in this regard was Michel Leiris' Phantom Africa (L'Afrique fantôme; Leiris, 1934), which described an African ethnographic expedition led by Marcel Griaule as a form of colonial plunder. Leiris criticized anthropologists' focus on the most isolated, rural, and traditional cultures, which could more easily be described as untouched by European influences, and he saw this as a way of disavowing the very existence of colonialism. In 1950, Leiris challenged Europeans' ability even to understand the colonized, writing that “ethnography is closely linked to the colonial fact, whether ethnographers like it or not. In general they work in the colonial or semi-colonial territories dependent on their country of origin, and even if they receive no direct support from the local representatives of their government, they are tolerated by them and more or less identified, by the people they study, as agents of the administration” (Leiris, 1950, p. 358). Similar ideas were discussed by French social scientists throughout the 1950s. Maxime Rodinson argued in the Année sociologique that “colonial conditions make even the most technically sophisticated sociological research singularly unsatisfying, from the standpoint of the desiderata of a scientific sociology” (Rodinson, 1955, p. 373). In a rejoinder to Leiris, Pierre Bourdieu acknowledged in Work and Workers in Algeria (Travail et travailleurs en Algérie) that “no behavior, attitude or ideology can be explained objectively without reference to the existential situation of the colonized as it is determined by the action of economic and social forces characteristic of the colonial system,” but he insisted that the “problems of science” needed to be separated from “the anxieties of conscience” (2003, pp. 13–14). Since Bourdieu had been involved in a study of an incredibly violent redistribution of Algerians by the French colonial army at the height of the anticolonial revolutionary war, he had good reason to be sensitive to Leiris' criticisms (Bourdieu & Sayad, 1964). Rodinson called Bourdieu's critique of Leiris' thesis “excellent’ (1965, p. 360), but Bourdieu later revised his views, noting that the works that had been available to him at the time of his research in Algeria tended “to justify the colonial order” (1990, p. 3). At the 1974 colloquium that gave rise to a book on the connections between anthropology and colonialism, Le mal de voir, Bourdieu called for an analysis of the relatively autonomous field of colonial science (1993a, p. 51). A parallel discussion took place in American anthropology somewhat later, during the 1960s. At the 1965 meetings of the American Anthropological Association, Marshall Sahlins criticized the “enlistment of scholars” in “cold war projects such as Camelot” as “servants of power in a gendarmerie relationship to the Third World.” This constituted a “sycophantic relation to the state unbefitting science or citizenship” (Sahlins, 1967, pp. 72, 76). Sahlins underscored the connections between “scientific functionalism and the natural interest of a leading world power in the status quo” and called attention to the language of contagion and disease in the documents of “Project Camelot,” adding that “waiting on call is the doctor, the US Army, fully prepared for its self-appointed ‘important mission in the positive and constructive aspects of nation-building’” a mission accompanied by “insurgency prophylaxis” (1967, pp. 77–78). At the end of the decade, Current Anthropology published a series of articles on anthropologists’ “social responsibilities,” and Human Organization published a symposium entitled “Decolonizing Applied Social Sciences.” British anthropologists followed suit, as evidenced by Talal Asad's 1973 collection Anthropology and the Colonial Encounter. During the 1980s, authors such as Gothsch (1983) began to address the question of German anthropology's involvement in colonialism. The most recent revival of this discussion was in response to the Pentagon's deployment of “embedded anthropologists” in Afghanistan and elsewhere in the Middle East. The “Network of Concerned Anthropologists” in the AAA asked “researchers to sign an online pledge not to work with the military,” arguing that they “are not all necessarily opposed to other forms of anthropological consulting for the state, or for the military, especially when such cooperation contributes to generally accepted humanitarian objectives … However, work that is covert, work that breaches relations of openness and trust with studied populations, and work that enables the occupation of one country by another violates professional standards” (“Embedded Anthropologists” 2007).³ Other disciplines, notably geography, economics, area studies, and political science, have also started to examine the involvement of their fields with empire.⁴