Search results

This paper aims to explore how historical context influences the content and selection of rhetorical legitimation strategies. Using case study method, this paper will focus on how insurance companies and labor tried to defend their legitimacy in the context of enactment of Medicare in the USA. What factors influenced the strategic (rhetorical) decisions made by insurance companies and labor unions in their institutional work?

The study is empirically grounded in archival research, involving an analysis of over 9,000 pages of congressional hearings on Medicare covering the period 1958–1965.

The authors show that rhetorical legitimation strategies depend significantly on the specific historical circumstances in which those strategies are used. The historical context lent credibility to certain arguments and organizations are forced to decide either to challenge widely held assumptions or take advantage of them. The authors show that organizations face strong incentives to pursue the latter option. Here, both the insurance companies and labor unions tried to show that their positions were consistent with classical liberal ideology, because of high respect of classical liberal principles among different stakeholders (policymakers, voters, etc.).

It is uncertain how much the results of the study could be generalized. More information about the organizations whose use of rhetorics the authors studied could have strengthened our conclusions.

The practical relevancy of the revised paper is that the authors should not expect hegemony challenging rhetorics from organizations, which try to influence legislators (and perhaps the larger public). Perhaps (based on the findings), this kind of rhetorics is not even very effective.

The paper helps to understand better how organizations try to advance their interests and gain acceptance among the stakeholders.

In this paper, the authors show how historical context in practice influence rhetorical arguments organizations select in public debates when their goal is to influence the decision-making of their audience. In particular, the authors show how dominant ideology (or ideologies) limit the options organizations face when they are choosing their strategies and arguments. In terms of the selection of rhetorical justification strategies, the most pressing question is not the “real” broad based support of certain ideologies. Insurance company and labor union representatives clearly believed that they must emphasize liberal values (or liberal ideology) if they wanted to gain legitimacy for their positions. In existing literature, it is often assumed that historical context influence the selection of rhetorical strategies but how this in fact happens is not usually specified. The paper shows how interpretations of historical contexts (including the ideological context) in practice influence the rhetorical strategies organizations choose.

This paper aims to analyse how financial literacy (FL) is conceptualised and operationalised in the Indian context.

A systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) protocol. Thirty-six articles published between 2010 and 2020 were considered for analysis. The FL conceptualisation was examined based on knowledge, ability, skill, attitude and confidence elements. The FL operationalisation was analysed using the modified version of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s (OECD) Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) 2012 model for organising the domain for an assessment framework.

The findings indicate that, despite offering operationalisation details of the FL, 13 out of 36 studies did not include a conceptual definition of FL. Of the 23 studies that mentioned a conceptual definition, 87% are primarily focused on the “knowledge” element and only 39% have combined knowledge, ability/skill and attitude elements in defining FL. As in the developed countries, the Indian studies also preferred investment/saving-related contents in their FL measures. The volume of content focusing on the financial landscape is meagre amongst the FL measures used in India and developed countries. The survey instruments of most studies have been designed in the individuals’ context but have failed to measure the extent to which individuals apply the knowledge in performing their day-to-day financial transactions. Further, it was found that 20 out of 36 studies did not convert the FL level of their target groups into a single indicator or operational value.

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study that explores the FL’s assessment practices in India. Further, this study offers new insights by comparing the contents of FL measures used in Indian studies with those used in developed countries.

Despite the present focus on improving the resilience of homes to flooding in UK flood risk management policy and strategy, a general measurement framework for determining levels of flood resilience in UK homes does not exist. In light of this, the aim of this study was to develop a means to evaluate the levels of resilience in flood-prone homes from the perspective of homeowners'.

A quantitative research methodology was employed, with empirical data obtained through a postal survey of homeowners who had experienced flooding. The responses received were then analysed using a combination of statistical techniques including agreement/reliability tests and multiple regression to develop a model of flood resilience.

A predictive model was developed that allows the resilience of a property to be quantified and measured as perceived by homeowners. The findings indicate that the main factors found to influence the level of flood resilience were: property type (PT), presence of cellar/basement (C/B), property wall type (PWT), property ground floor type (PGFT), kitchen unit type (KU), flood experience (FE), flood source (FS) and flood risk level (FRL).

The resulting model provides unique insights into resilience levels to the benefit of a range of stakeholders including policy makers (such as Defra/Environment Agency), Local Authority flood teams, property professionals, housing associations and homeowners. As a result, homeowners will be in a better position to determine which interventions should be prioritised to ensure better flood protection.

This is the first study of its kind to have rigorously quantified the level of flood resilience for individual homes. This study has quantified the effectiveness of individual resilience measures to derive the first reliable means to measure the overall levels of resilience at the individual property level. This is regarded as a significant contribution to the study of flood risk management through the quantification of resilience within individual UK homes, enabling the prioritisation of interventions and the overall monitoring of resilience.