Search results

Research on emotion in the context of risk perception has historically focused on negative emotions, and has emphasized the effect of these negative emotions on the perception of risk amongst those who oppose (rather than support) contentious issues. Drawing on theory, the purpose of this paper is to hypothesize that both positive and negative emotions are correlated with risk perceptions regarding contentious public issues and that this occurs amongst supporters and opponents alike.

The paper explores the relationship between emotions and perceived risk through consideration of the highly contentious case of nuclear energy in Saskatchewan, Canada. The analysis uses data from a representative telephone survey of 1,355 residents.

The results suggest that positive emotions, like negative emotions, are related to nuclear energy risk perceptions. Emotions are related to risk perception amongst both supporters and opponents.

The data set’s limited number of emotion measures and single public issue focus, combined with the survey’s cross-sectional design, make this research exploratory in nature. Future research should incorporate multiple positive emotions, explore opposition, and support across a range of contentious public issues, and consider experimental models to assess causal relationships.

The paper offers insights into how public sector managers must be cognizant of the emotional underpinnings of risk perceptions amongst both supporters and opponents of contentious public issues.

This paper builds on and expands previous work by considering both positive and negative emotions and both supporters and opponents of contentious issues.

The purpose of this study is to understand how superintendents leading large, high-profile and politically complex urban districts make sense of their district–community context and advocate for issues of equity.

This qualitative multi-case study took place over the 2017–18 school year and involved superintendents leading large urban districts in the United States, with data derived from semi-structured interviews, observations of school board and other public meetings and document collection.

This article describes how superintendents' sensemaking around equity was situated within the context of interactions with district board members and other stakeholder groups within their communities and influenced by their sense of professional vulnerability of public advocacy. Leaders often felt the need to attenuate their personal sense of equity and act strategically when framing related policies or practices. This study highlights examples by which superintendents were forced to confront instances when community support and prioritization of equity issues did not match their own and subsequently struggled to make sense of how to frame issues that were not in alignment.

Despite their positional authority, relatively little attention has been paid to the experience of school district superintendents in fostering equity. This study provides practical examples of superintendents making sense of complex leadership scenarios and taking strategic action to promote equity in authentic circumstances and has important implications for research and practice.

In this article focused upon the UK context, the authors sought to better understand how political elites shaped public debate to reinforce rather than challenge the hostile policy environment for those seeking asylum.

The authors undertook a political claims analysis (Koopmans and Statham, 1999) focussing on a venue that has been pivotal in shaping the discourse around asylum issues in the UK, namely the print media. This work adopts a theoretical frame informed by the work of Stuart Hall to uncover the extent to which debates on asylum during the key period of the refugee emergency in Europe were shaped by political elites.

The study’s findings reveal the extent to which political elites acted as “primary definers” of the “crisis” and utilised that position to cast those arriving in Europe as a threat to be managed.

This research offers a contemporary worked example of political claims analysis in a topical subject area that colleagues across disciplines and contexts may find informative for their own research agendas.

The purpose of the paper is to identify common ways of dealing with conflict, specifically in C‐level teams, and how to confront them frankly and respectfully.

The author presents his views based on over 30 years' experience as an executive coach.

One of the most important ingredients for success in any business is to hire smart, confident and assertive people. However, it is impossible to put a bunch of smart, assertive people together without them bumping heads. Nothing creative ever happens in boring, non‐confrontational environments. A lack of overt conflict can be a symptom of apathy. In conflict avoidant or passive aggressive teams, conflict shows up in subversive ways, for example back stabbing, or failing to deliver a commitment on the date to which the requesting executive thought his fellow executives had agreed to deliver.

It is imperative for senior teams to be able to work well together and confront conflicts that arise. Rare is the person that is consistently comfortable addressing conflict. Some of the most seasoned CEOs often express sentiments such as “I don't know what it is about X, but it just hard talking to him. I know it's going to be a difficult conversation and find myself putting it off.” This article explains how to do so.

This article provides constructive, usable plans of action for confronting conflict in senior teams.

Presents the recent case of Woodspring District Council v. Bakers of Nailsea Ltd which has highlighted several contentious points of EU legislation for the meat industry, especially the cost of abattoir inspections. EU law states that these inspections should be carried out by official veterinary surgeons thus incurring great cost. Bakers of Nailsea contended that these inspections could have been done by qualified meat inspectors at a greatly reduced cost. Proposes that, although the judge ruled against Bakers of Nailsea, this case has implications for other similar cases. Discusses EU Directives and Regulations concerning food safety and hygiene.

This chapter provides a legal and theoretical overview of environmental PPMs articulated in private standards. It seeks to expand the debate about environmental PPMs, elucidating important dimensions to the issue from the perspective of global governance and international trade law. One of the arguments advanced in this chapter is that a comprehensive analysis of environmental PPMs should consider not only their role in what is regarded as trade barriers (governmental and market driven) but also their significance in global objectives such as the transition towards a green economy and sustainable patterns of consumption and production.

This chapter is based on an extensive literature review and doctrinal legal research.

This research shows that environmental PPMs represent a key issue in the context of the trade and environment relationship. For decades such measures have been thought of as being trade distortive and thus incompatible with WTO law. Although it seems clear now that they are not unlawful per se, their legal status remains unsettled. PPMs can be regarded as regulatory choices associated with a wide range of environmental concerns. However, in trade disputes, challenged measures involving policy objectives addressing production issues in the conservation of natural resources tend to focus on fishing/harvesting techniques. On the other hand, an important goal of Global Environmental Governance (GEG) is to incentivise sustainable consumption and production in order to achieve the transition to a green economy. In this sense, it can be argued that what are generally denominated as ‘PPMs’ in the WTO terminology can alternatively be regarded ‘SCPs’ in the language of environmental governance. Environmental PPMs are not only limited to state-based measures, such as import bans, tariff preferences, and governmental labelling schemes. Environmental PPMs may also amount to good corporate practices towards environmental protection and provide the rationale for numerous private environmental standards.

Most academic attention afforded to environmental-PPMs has focused on their impacts on trade or their legality under WTO law. Although legal scholars have already referred to the significance of such measures in the context of environmental governance, this issue has remained almost entirely unexplored. This chapter seeks to fill the gap in the literature in this regard. In particular, it addresses the relevance of environmental PPMs in the context of decentralised governance initiatives such as the UN Global Compact and private environmental standards.

Overall, this chapter assists in the understanding of the significance of environmental PPMs in the context of private environmental standards and other governance initiatives involving goals related to sustainable consumption and production. This chapter adds to the existing body of literature on the subject of PPMs in international trade and environmental governance.

This paper aims to shed light on the emerging position of companies taking stances on sociopolitical issues and the impact this has on consumers.

The paper uses focus groups, interviews and consumer experiments in various countries, to provide insights as to why brands are taking sociopolitical stances.

Consumers expect brands to take a stance on sociopolitical issues. However, to be credible, a stance needs to be rooted in a long-term commitment that aligns with the brand’s strategy and values. Perceived authenticity is key.

Future studies should aim at broader generalizability and should address various industries.

Differentiating a brand through a sociopolitical stance requires a strategic approach. Brand managers need to identify which issues they should support, how to engage with them and the risks and opportunities involved.

While the impact of brands adopting a sociopolitical stance has been discussed in the mainstream media, there has been a lack of empirical evidence to support the arguments. The results of the four studies discussed in the paper provide insights and demonstrate the brand-related opportunities and risks of taking a sociopolitical stance.

The 1997 revised version of the UK Money Laundering Guidance Notes for the financial sector are about to be published. They represent the results of a year's consultation and clearly demonstrate the financial sector's commitment not to be tainted by criminal money. However, the fight against laundering the proceeds of crime has long since moved away from the concept of suitcases full of cash across bank counters, and the self‐regulatory process must now encompass every part of the financial sector, going beyond the requirements of the Regulations themselves. Financial sector businesses have committed significant resources to the fight against crime, but this has not been matched by investment in the investigation, prosecution and confiscation process. As the financial sector requirements become more onerous and involved, questions are being asked whether more than enough is being required of financial sector businesses.

The United States of America is on the verge of a possible revolution in civil-military relations in an era marked by increased defensive alertness stemming from the attacks of 11 September 2001. As we anticipate the normalization of terror as a way of life, we are witnessing a paradigmatic shift from the use of violence towards some political end to the use of violence as an end in itself (Jenkins, 2001). 1 It is tempting to frame our analysis in terms of the broader notion of asymmetric warfare, since the arguments we make in this paper may be applied to a wide range of settings, including those in which vastly unequal forces are pitted against one another and one side may make use of irregular fighters employing unconventional tactics. However, this would serve only to shift the emphasis away from our central argument. Terrorism may be a form of asymmetric warfare, but what distinguishes it is the fact that it intentionally targets civilians, and that among civilians, it is indiscriminate in the devastation it wreaks. Terrorism is important because of the way in which it socializes danger, breaking down the barriers between combatant and noncombatant and subjecting all to the worst of harrowing and potentially lethal attacks. It is this socialization of danger produced by terrorism, in turn, that is critical in assessing whether and how civilian and military authorities elect to treat its use against their own societies not as a crime, but as an act of war. Bioterrorism in turn, as we argue below, has unique attributes that distinguish it from other forms of terrorism.1 And where, for most nations, homeland defense is the primary mission of the armed forces, the United States had to establish a new cabinet-level Department of Homeland Security due to the primarily expeditionary nature of American armed forces for the past half-century. The military has been a unique institution in modern societies. It has acted as the agent for the state’s possession of a monopoly on the means of large-scale organized violence and war-making. The establishment of a second executive agency responsible for homeland security makes the equation more complex. As a result, ever greater attention must be given to the balance of civil-military relations in American society.

To provide a systematic analysis of the contrasts, imbalances and suggestions for corrective action in the present globalized economic system and monetary and financial order in the framework of a conference organized by Webster University, Geneva (Switzerland) dealing with the outlook for international order.

The paper is divided into two parts. The first provides an overview of the general characteristics of the globalized economy, of the interdependence of national and international orders and policy making and the issue of investments, technology transfer and global business. The second part contains a more detailed analysis of the international monetary and financial order, including the evolving role of the International Monetary Fund (IMF). While the paper provides a rigorous analysis of the institutional and policy issues, the analysis and the conclusions are accessible also to the non‐specialized reader.

The paper focuses on the inconsistencies and asymmetries in the working of the international economic and monetary order and of the policies of the principal international organizations with respect to different groups of countries, and in particular the advanced, developed countries, on the one hand, and the developing countries, on the other hand. The corrective measures suggested by the author are in the interests of both groups of countries and thus of the system as a whole.

The paper provides suggestions for improvements in the economic and monetary order of a globalised world on the basis of systematic policy analysis, anchored in economic theory, rather than political rhetoric.