Search results

The purpose of this paper is to contribute to a discourse analytical understanding of the political economy. The term “crisis” is an important label in recent discussion in political economy. Yet the genuine discursive dimension of “the crisis” and the multiple linguistic layers of the crisis discourse remains an open issue.

Realist perspectives usually believe in an external reality of crises independent of the language construction; in contrast, constructivist perspectives argue that a crisis is always the result of a socio-linguistic construction process. This contribution follows a critical-constructivist perspective, thereby taking into account powerful discursive actors which are able to “declare” a state in the world as a “crisis”.

From a discourse analytical point of view, this paper examines the rules and logics of crisis management policy, arguing that a new politico-academic elite has appeared which is beyond the classical distinction between “Keynesians” and “neo-liberals”. By taking a position in the discourse of the recent debate on financial regulation, these new elite might be able to manage the crisis for a particular time, as they are constructed as “moderating actors” through academic and political discourses.

From a practical point of view, this analysis cannot offer economic solutions; from an analytical viewpoint, it will not give insights into discursive contexts.

This analysis helps to understand current debates on economic policy and to improve the communicative efficiency of the participants.

This paper combines a discourse analysis with a governmentality perspective and applies this analytical tool onto a political and economic topic currently prevailing in the global political economy.

Despite Max Weber’s assertion that bureaucracy is domination on the basis of knowledge, mainstream public administration literature has paid little attention to the role of experts and expertise in bureaucratic organisations. A particular blind spot concerns the academic professions or disciplines that supply the experts and expert knowledge used in government bureaucracies. It is well known that the educational composition of the civil service varies across countries and over time. However, knowledge about what explains the varying position of expert professions within state bureaucracies is scarce. The chapter examines this issue through a comparative-historical investigation of the role in government of a particular expert profession, namely economists. Focusing on a small set of countries – Norway, Denmark, New Zealand and Ireland – over the period from 1930 to 1990, it poses the question: How can we account for the variation in the position of economists within government bureaucracies across countries and over time? To answer this question, the chapter draws on theory from the sociological literature on professions and historical-institutionalist work on the influence of economic ideas.

The Bureau of Economics in the Federal Trade Commission has a three-part role in the Agency and the strength of its functions changed over time depending on the preferences and ideology of the FTC’s leaders, developments in the field of economics, and the tenor of the times. The over-riding current role is to provide well considered, unbiased economic advice regarding antitrust and consumer protection law enforcement cases to the legal staff and the Commission. The second role, which long ago was primary, is to provide reports on investigations of various industries to the public and public officials. This role was more recently called research or “policy R&D”. A third role is to advocate for competition and markets both domestically and internationally. As a practical matter, the provision of economic advice to the FTC and to the legal staff has required that the economists wear “two hats,” helping the legal staff investigate cases and provide evidence to support law enforcement cases while also providing advice to the legal bureaus and to the Commission on which cases to pursue (thus providing “a second set of eyes” to evaluate cases). There is sometimes a tension in those functions because building a case is not the same as evaluating a case. Economists and the Bureau of Economics have provided such services to the FTC for over 100 years proving that a sub-organization can survive while playing roles that sometimes conflict. Such a life is not, however, always easy or fun.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship between employer’s investments (through job characteristics and managerial support) and employees’ employment opportunities, with employability, conceptualized as perceived up-to-date expertise and willingness to change, as a mediating variable.

Hypotheses are tested using structural equation modeling on survey data collected from 1,626 employees of three Dutch hospitals.

Consistent with the hypotheses, the results indicate that job characteristics and managerial support are indirectly related to employees’ beliefs on employment opportunities, with the relationship mediated by up-to-date expertise and willingness to change. Further, managerial support is directly related to employees’ employment opportunities.

This paper shows that employers, by providing an attractive and challenging job in combination with adequate supervisory support, can enhance their employees’ employability and employment opportunities.

This paper contributes to the literature by elaborating a consistent conceptualization and measurement of employability, by incorporating as antecedents both job characteristics and managerial support, and by examining to what extent employability mediates between these antecedents and employment opportunities. Previous studies refer to the same definition of employability but conceptualize this in different ways, and focus on either job characteristics or managerial support, and so fail to provide a systematic and comprehensive examination.

This paper sets out to document a review of environmental collaborations in the Australian building and construction industry and to identify a number of motivations that appear to drive particular environmental groups and building and construction companies to collaborate on specific projects.

The research involves a series of in‐depth interviews with individuals from building and construction companies and from environmental groups, and utilises a number of theoretical perspectives to explain the various perspectives being adopted by the interviewees.

The results indicate that corporate managers seek to collaborate with environmental groups as a result of pressures exerted by particular stakeholder groups, particularly government, and by the desire to be aligned with an organisation that has “green credentials” – something that is valuable in enhancing the reputation and legitimacy of the company and the related building project. There was also a related financial motivation for collaborating. The representatives from the environmental groups indicated that motivations for collaboration included developing a project that could be used as a vehicle for “educating” the public, generating positive environmental outcomes, complying with the expectations of their constituents, and setting an example for other building and construction companies to follow.

Little research has been done in the area of environmental collaborations. In this study, environmental collaborations were considered as a vehicle for both the environmental groups and the companies to further meet their organisational objectives and were generally considered as successful initiatives from each organisation's perspective.

The sudden rise of the socio-political importance of security that has marked the twenty-first century entails a commensurate empowerment of the intelligence apparatus. This chapter takes the Investigatory Powers Act 2016 as a vantage point from where to address the political significance of this development. It provides an account of the powers the Act grants intelligence agencies, concluding that it effectively legalizes their operational paradigm. Further, the socio-legal dynamics that informed the Act lead the chapter to conclude that Intelligence has become a dominant apparatus within the state. This chapter pivots at this point. It seeks to identify, first, the reasons of this empowerment; and, second, its effects on liberal-democratic forms, including the rule of law. The key reason for intelligence empowerment is the adoption of a pre-emptive security strategy, geared toward neutralizing threats that are yet unformed. Regarding its effects on liberal democracy, the chapter notes the incompatibility of the logic of intelligence with the rule of law. It further argues that the empowerment of intelligence pertains to the rise of a new threat-based governmental logic. It outlines the core premises of this logic to argue that they strengthen the anti-democratic elements in liberalism, but in a manner that liberalism is overcome.

Innovation in technology is nothing new. However, a strong surge of inventions centered on digital apps and platforms has emerged over the past decade and has come to be associated with the tech sectors. The purpose of this research is to know whether deep-tech can be unlocked in startups for their long-term success.

Papers and websites that included the term deep-tech startups were considered for this study.

The authors have seen no explanation why India cannot develop several global deep-tech firms in the coming five years, similar to what China did in the previous 10 years, if Indian deep-tech entrepreneurs receive solid support from domestic industry giants, supportive regulatory changes and prompt access to finance. The authors think that the epidemic has made conditions for this to pick up speed that is highly favorable.

This research is limited to a few numbers of papers and websites.

Due to the unanticipated disruption, the pandemic caused, clever robotics and hands-free technology were urgently needed. The development of smart, self-monitoring, simple, tailored and potential on-the-go improvement solutions are the talk of the day. Deep-tech solutions have the ability to provide limitless benefits in a variety of fields to the world's 1.3 billion inhabitants.

This research will help startups to know more about deep-tech and implement them to be the first-mover advantage in this competitive and turbulent environment.

The novelty of this research is based on its presentation of an organized and thorough evaluation, which defines the current state of the art with regard to deep-tech startups. Not many studies have been performed in the area of deep-tech startups. In order to create a sustainable startup, a thorough study on how deep-tech can be unlocked in startups and its opportunities, challenges and funding is presented.

The purpose of this paper is to advance our understanding of the links between the representativeness of the local community by those drafting and elaborating the specification of the geographical indication (GI), the market access and the use of the GI.

The present study followed a comparative research design, building upon primary data from the field works dealing with the elaboration and development of GIs worldwide, from legislations on the protection of GIs and from secondary data, i.e. literature dealing with the elaboration of the GI specifications at case level or national/international level.

The GI is permeable to a multitude of objectives and the management of controversies represent the “price of participatory democracy”, which still needs to be under the umbrella of the justice of peace, the State authority. Representativeness does not necessarily conduct to equity and fairness. It depends on the heterogeneity of the value chain, which might lead to the dilution of the GI specificity. Mandatory membership might not be always the best option Transparency to guarantee the producer’s group works for the common good is essential.

The controversies in the elaboration of the GI product specification are directly induced by the controversies in the management of the GI either by the collective organisation of producers or by the public authority. Issues such as representativeness, mandatory membership, transparency and heterogeneity of the value chain are deeply analysed to understand the functioning of GI producers associations and their limits. The state intervention as justice of the peace appears necessary.

Most of us believe that entrepreneurs are special. We do this because both scholars and practitioners tell us so.