Search results

This chapter makes a case for a decolonial, intersectional approach to narrative criminology. It argues that in growing contexts of deepening inequalities, research approaches that humanise people on the margins and that explicitly centre questions of social justice are ever more urgent. This chapter explicates a decolonial, intersectional narrative analysis, working with the data generated in interviews with women sex workers on their experiences of violence outlining how a decolonial, intersectional, narrative analysis may be accomplished to analyse the intersections of power at material, representational and structural levels. The chapter illustrates the importance of an intersectional feminist lens for amplifying the complexity of women sex workers' experiences of gendered violence and for understanding the multiple forms of material, symbolic and institutionalised subordination they experience in increasingly unequal and oppressive contexts. It ends by considering the contributions decolonial, intersectional feminist work can offer narrative criminology, especially the emerging field of narrative victimology.

This paper centers a decolonial and Indigenous methodological approaches to educational history research. This research offers how Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples by Linda Tuhiwai Smith impacts one education historian’s scholarship alongside conversations of historiography concerning the Lumbee people and how their education history becomes contextual and reclaimed through decolonial and Indigenous methodological approaches.

Leaning on epistemological questioning and historical research with decolonial and Indigenous methodologies to provide a needed approach to historical education analysis.

This research demonstrates how history and epistemology work together to decolonize educational histories by understanding the impacts of settler colonization and recenters histories with Indigenous (Lumbee) voices.

This approach to qualitative historical research provides space for Indigenous epistemology and decolonial and Indigenous methodological approaches to education history that critically examines history told from a European/Western epistemological lens as a way forward to center Indigenous communities.

The purpose of this study is to add to the existing research on critical perspectives on diversity management (DM). Specifically, this study examines the narratives of women chief executive officers (CEOs) from different countries of origin to understand how they enact the DM discourse by drawing on their past and present experiences at US multinational corporations (MNCs) located in Mexico.

This study, based on six open-ended interviews with local and expatriate women CEOs who work in MNCs situated in Mexico, used a sensemaking approach to analyze their narratives. The theoretical foundation of the study is based on decolonial feminist theory, which is used to analyze the hierarchical binary between Anglo-Saxon/European woman and the Mexican/Latin American woman with respect to the discourse of DM.

This study found that the dominant discourse used by women CEOs, expats and nationals was a business case for diversity. Female CEOs represent MNCs in favorable terms, compared to those of local companies, despite the nuances in the antagonistic representations in their narratives. This study also found that the women CEOs’ narratives perpetuated a discourse of “otherness” that created a hierarchy between Anglo-Saxons (US/MNCs’ culture) and Latin Americans (Mexican/local companies’ culture).

This study contributes to critical studies on DM by analyzing diverse forms of power involving gender, race/ethnicity and organizational hierarchy. The use of decolonial feminist theory to examine MNCs is a novel approach to understanding women’s identities and the power differences between local/foreign contexts and global/local businesses. This study also discusses the implications of its findings for women in business careers and concludes with a call for more research within the global South (Latin America).

This chapter analyzes the semiotic construction of US claims to sovereignty in Hawai‘i. Building on semiotic theories in sociology and theories within critical Indigenous and settler colonial studies, it presents an interpretive analysis of state, military, and academic discursive strategies. The US empire-state attempts to construct colonial narratives of race and sovereignty that rehistoricize the history of Hawaiians and other Indigenous peoples. In order to make claims to sovereignty, settler-colonists construct narratives that build upon false claims to superiority, advancement, and discovery. Colonial resignification is a process by which signs and symbols of Indigenous communities are conscripted into the myths of empire that maintain such sovereign claims. Yet, for this reason, colonial resignification can be undone through reclaiming such signs and symbols from their use within colonial metanarratives. In this case, efforts toward decolonial resignification enacted alternative metanarratives of peoples' relationships to place. This “flip side” of the synecdoche is a process that unravels the ties that bind layered myths by providing new answers to questions that underpin settler colonial sovereignty.

Implicating myself in Métis scholar Natalie Clark's question “who are you and why do you care?” (2016, p. 48), this chapter traces the theorization of love in the Human Services, with a focus on the field of Child and Youth Care. I explore love as an ethical, political, and necessary force in times of ongoing colonial and state violence against Indigenous and racialized peoples (Ferguson & Toye, 2017). I go on to highlight my graduate research as a Child and Youth Care Masters student and educator, grappling with my own settler identity as a diasporic, queer, ciswoman of color, and questioning my complicity as a settler body on stolen Indigenous lands. The chapter includes vital knowledge from my research with Sisters Rising, an Indigenous-led, community-based, participatory study that uses arts-and-land-based ways of knowing to honor and uphold stories, art, and knowledge from Indigenous and racialized young peoples and communities. By tracing the reflections on decolonial love shared through Sisters Rising, I consider ways that racialized settler practitioners might engage a decolonial love ethic in praxis. Calling upon critical feminist, Indigenous, and postcolonial scholarship and brilliance, this chapter invites other settler practitioners, specifically those who identify as racialized or people of color to reckon with the intricacies of our collective complicity in notions of settler purity and apolitical practice (Shotwell, 2016). Throughout the chapter, I highlight conceptual approaches for loving politicized praxis rooted in movements toward social justice, Indigenous sovereignty-building, and decolonization.

This viewpoint adds context and variety to the “decolonizing international business” debate by engaging in a discussion of the decolonial thinking approach and proposing a broader framework for analysing the link between international business (IB) activities on the one hand and colonisation and decolonisation on the other. The purpose of this paper is to inspire a more intensive engagement of IB scholarship with issues related to colonisation and decolonisation.

This paper involves taking a reflexive review on recent calls to decolonise IB, contextualising and extending the decolonisation debate in the academic field of IB.

This paper argues that the current discussion of decolonisation should be extended beyond the decolonial thinking approach and its focus on knowledge and the cultural dimension towards a broader framework that covers both colonisation and decolonisation as well as the respective economic, political, social and cultural dimensions. It introduces the varieties of colonisation and decolonisation approach, which considers the complexities of the phenomenon and covers the economic, social, political and cultural dimensions.

Through its focus on foreign market expansion, international trade, global value chains and formal and informal institutions in the business environment, the academic field of IB provides several starting points for research on the link between IB activities and colonisation and decolonisation. The decolonisation debate can be used to inspire future research in IB, for example, with respect to the role of multinational corporations in colonisation and neo-colonisation processes and the implications of the emerging multipolar world order for IB.

IB scholars will be better informed when engaging in discussions on decolonisation and the decolonise IB project. This paper suggests considering both colonisation and decolonisation processes as well as the respective economic, political, social and cultural dimensions in research and teaching. The varieties of colonisation and decolonisation approach provides a comprehensive and flexible alternative framework to analyse issues related to colonisation and decolonisation.

A balanced view of the implications of colonisation and decolonisation with respect to economic, political, social and cultural dimensions may suitably be incorporated in the field of IB and contribute to tackling grand societal challenges. This applies likewise to past, current and future processes of colonisation and decolonisation.

This paper contextualises and adds a new perspective and variety to the current debate on decolonising IB. This is valuable for engaging in discussions on decolonisation and future conceptual and empirical research on the topic.

The purpose of this paper is to consider how practices of critical theorising directed towards present dilemmas of neoliberalisation might inadvertently participate in the reproduction of colonial power.

The paper adopts a critical theoretical approach, focussing on Wendy Brown’s recent work on neoliberalism in particular.

The paper argues that an alignment with colonial power is evident at a methodological level in Brown’s critique of neoliberalism and that this offers indication of how critical theorising in general might begin to reorient itself in ways that better ally it with the creation/promotion of decolonial possibility in contemporary contexts.

The paper makes original contribution to understanding of how western critical theorising actively participates in the reproduction of colonial power. Its value lies partly in demonstrating how this occurs in Brown’s specific case, and partly in suggesting correctives of more general applicability.

The geopolitical relevance of the region with regard to clandestine and market interests exerting ecological pressures over mangroves and artisanal fishing thus raises awareness with regard to the local disaster's potentially global dimension. Delinking thus suggests divergent visibilization strategies regarding the narratives and framings of the region.

Reflecting on previous ethnographic and quantitative research on the impacted livelihoods in the Canton of Muisne (Ecuador) in the aftermath of the earthquake of April 2016, this article explores some disruptive dimensions of the permanent disaster in the predominantly black Ecuadorian–Colombian border region.

By drawing on decolonial theory, as well as by shifting between a mainstream narrative of the disaster, on the one hand, and a “delinked narrative,” on the other, this article is in line with more recent publications arguing that neither local and time bound accounts of vulnerability, ethnicity and (in)visibility, nor mainstream depictions of a “lack of development” are able to generate the required knowledge to disrupt from this permanently neglected disaster.

In order to understand the disaster beyond its ostensibly local dimension, economic, environmental, as well as the geopolitical considerations are suggested, resulting in a different framing of the disaster.

Race scholars often refer to the colonization of Indigenous peoples in the Americas and the enslavement of Africans as a founding moment in the making of today's racial hierarchies. Yet their narrative of this initial moment often mischaracterizes early European states, erases Indigenous and African states, and naturalizes racial group belonging. Such practices are counterproductive to the antiracist project. Following the lead of decolonial scholarship, much recent work by historians has sought to recover and reconstruct the institutions, social structures, and agency of African and Indigenous peoples, as well as revisit assumptions about European power, institutions, and agency in their historical encounters with their continental “others.” I highlight the potential of this approach for sociologists of “race” by narrating two significant historical events in the making of the modern Atlantic world: the conquest of Tenochtitlán, the capital of the Aztec empire, and the transatlantic enslavement of subjects of the kingdoms of Kongo and Ndongo (in today's Angola) in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. I analyze how particular European, Indigenous, and African actors made decisions in the context of their own and others' historically situated and dynamic political and social structures. I read these historical events through the lens of decolonial scholarship, and sociological literatures on group-making, state formation, and the emergence of capitalism, to make sense of the violent social process that led to the breakup of African, Indigenous, and European political and social structures and the making of colonial and racially hierarchical social structures in the Atlantic world.