Search results

This introduction unpacks the key question that informs the articles in this special issue. How does a social sphere inform regulation and, more specifically, how can the regulatory capacity of a social sphere be harnessed, as an alternative or significant complementary force to state regulation and reliance on the self-regulatory capacity of markets? This question is salient and topical also in light of the search for new regulatory strategies and perspectives in the aftermath of the 2007 financial and subsequent EU sovereign debt crises, which have led to a major realignment of economy and society in a number of countries.

This introduction argues that economic sociology is a crucial reference point for understanding more about the social practices that constitute business behavior. It enables to explore the scope and significance of often interlinked social and legal norms for regulating various transnational risks that economic activity can give rise to. The introduction therefore locates the quest for understanding more about the regulatory capacity of a social sphere in debates that draw on Karl Polanyi’s analysis of the embedding, disembedding, and re-embedding of economic activity into social norms. The introduction highlights one of the key themes developed in this special issue, the idea of society within economy which questions an assumed conceptual distinction between economy and society.

This introduction concludes by specifying how the accounts of risk regulation developed in this special issue chart a path that is different from recent explorations of the role of a social sphere in regulation, which were conducted under the banner of “the sociological citizen,” “regulatory sociability,” and “collaborative governance.”

Purpose – To discuss the rural–urban dichotomy and its far-reaching implications, first and foremost from a rural sociological point of view, and at the same time, to structure the volume and present the individual chapters.

Methodology/approach – Literature review and analysis of scientific discourse.

Findings – The rural–urban dichotomy has been very persistent in demographic and other kinds of rural and urban research despite intense discussions about its shortcomings in nearly half a century. However, there are mounting arguments for alternative conceptions of rural–urban relations, some of which are found in the chapters in this volume.

Originality/value of chapter – This chapter presents some new ideas about the rural–urban dichotomy, and alternative, more realistic conceptions of rural–urban relations, at the same time as it gives an introduction to the volume.

Given that the European Water Framework Directive (WFD) calls for the management of water resources at the river basin level, the German water sector, which has historically been dominated by the federal states and has been organized along administrative borders, is now challenged to be reorganized. The article introduces the German water sector, reviews past experiences with river basin management such as North Rhine–Westphalia's water associations, the river basin organizations of the former German Democratic Republic, and international river commissions, and addresses current challenges in connection with the implementation of WFD.

This chapter discusses the connection between authentic leadership and meta competence, examining whether authentic leadership can be developed or promoted in educational processes. The authors propose the concept of shaping orientation: problem-based learning without a fixed solution but with the generation of a solution-finding approach through the process of holistic action. They posit that training in authentic leadership can be embedded in curricula if learning is problem-based. This proposition poses important research and pedagogical questions for research. Is there evidence that problem-based learning generates the leadership qualities and attitudes that the authors claim? If so, how can this relationship be reliably tested over time?

In recent years, it has become evident that self-regulation plays a central role in human functioning, including learning and achievement in school. Although there are different definitions of self-regulation, there is general consensus that it refers to a multi-component, iterative, self-steering process that targets one's own cognitions, feelings, and actions, as well as features of the environment for modulation in the service of one's own goals (Boekaerts, Maes, & Karoly, 2005). Educational psychologists agree that learning in the classroom involves cognitive and affective processing and is heavily influenced by social processes. This implies that students should be able and willing to regulate their cognitions, motivation, and emotions, as well as to adapt to the social context in order to facilitate their learning. Yet, there is at present neither a uniformly accepted definition of self-regulation nor that of self-regulated learning. Most theorists agree that self-regulation in the classroom is neither an all-or-none process nor a property of the learning system. Rather, it consists of multiple processes and components that interact in complex ways. Definitions have focused either on the structure of self-regulation, describing the different components of the self-regulation process, or on the processes that are involved.

Insurance is a contract whereby one party (the policyholder) promises and makes a payment or series of payments in exchange for the second party’s (the insurance company’s) promise to indemnify the policyholder for losses covered under the terms of the policy. Perhaps it is easier to just think of insurance as a transaction where the policyholder trades small regular losses (the premium paid) for large and irregular gains (claims proceeds).

While it may seem somewhat disproportionate to devote an entire chapter to more detailed treatment of a single risk financing tool, insurance has a very large impact, not only in terms of its intrinsic value, but also in terms of the many ways in which insurance influences risk management thinking and practice. As will be shown, some of this influence is waning and in other cases it could be argued that insurance ‘thinking’ has hindered efforts to respond to facts on the ground and the ability to adapt the role of risk management in organisations.

To provide a useful discussion, this chapter will cover both the products that the insurance industry offers and the structure of the industry itself, along with addressing legal and regulatory matters that were touched upon in Chapter Nine. The chapter concludes with an overview of public sector insurance issues that provides a basis for understanding alternatives to insurance that have emerged in dramatic fashion in recent decades – which in turn provides a basis for considering some of the constraints that insurance imposes on risk management practice.