Search results

This chapter at hand applies and extends Friedland and Alford's model of institutional logics to the case of birth practises focusing on a number of interrelated topics, namely, identity, trust, and ideology. It draws on Giddens's theory of modernity to “bring society back in,” as Friedland and Alford have formulated one major point of critique against existing institutional approaches. In its theoretical discussion, the chapter will focus on two issues: first, the treatment of conflict as a motor of institutional dynamics, and second, the relation between institutions and agency. The empirical data is based on participant observation, qualitative interviews with midwives and obstetricians, and a review of magazines and television material concerning birth and parenting.

The perception and communication of risk for organizations are highly topical and difficult to address in higher education (HE) due to its complexity and variety of structures, processes and identities. The omnipresence of managerialism in HE currently also impacts organizational innovation. This is interrogated in terms of the form and effect of innovation and improvization (Cunha, Neves, Clegg, & Rego, 2015). The development of tools to manage risk perception is discussed alongside perceptions of risk and their potential management through agile processes to enable a university-wide collaboration across services to enable a unified and streamlined proactive management of risk and its corollaries of loss.

The focus of this chapter is on the daily management of operational risks in higher education institutions (HEIs). It considers the causes and impact of drift and competitiveness in organizational processes and their impact on organizational efficiency. This chapter will consider risk perception and contract management across HEIs.

The purpose of this paper is to apply Connolly’s (2003) concept of agonistic respect to develop a typology of agonistic/antagonistic discourses on Twitter. To develop the typology, this study examines 2,236 Tweets containing the hashtag #guncontrol and uses NodeXL (Smith et al., 2010) to create a network map from which the 75 most influential accounts are derived. Using constant-comparative analysis (Glaser and Strauss, 1967), the authors identify seven categories of discourse style based on Connoly’s (2001) notion of ressentiment and “good faith presentations” of opposing arguments: furtive/secretive, cravenly opportunistic, willfully ignorant, irrational sentimental, misunderstanding/misguided, contingently wrong and reciprocal inquiry. The typology provides a useful and unique way to operationalize agonistic democratic theory and serves as the possible basis for training a machine learning classifier to detect antagonistic discourses on social media platforms.

To determine the level of agonism on Twitter, the authors examine tweets that employed the hashtag #guncontrol on March 12, 2018, one month after the shooting at the Marjory Stoneman Douglass High School in Parkland, Florida on February 14. The authors used the NodeXL excel add-on to collect and map 2,236 tweets. Using grounded theory/constant-comparative analysis (Glaser and Strauss, 1967), the authors develop a typology of seven types of discourses ordered from most antagonistic to most agonistic using Connolly’s (1993) concept of agonistic respect.

After examining the top 75 most shared tweets and using constant-comparative analysis to look for patterns of similarity and dissimilarity, the authors identified seven different ways in which individuals present their opponents’ value positions on Twitter on the issue of gun control. The authors were guided by agonistic theory in the authors’ inquiry. The authors looked at how Twitter users expressed their opponent’s faith/value positions, how pluralistic the discourse space was in the comment threads and how much the “talk” was likely to elicit ressentiment from adversaries.

Because the authors intended to engage in theory building, the authors limited the analysis to a selected number of tweets on one particularly salient topic, on one day. The intent of this was to allow for a close reading of the tweets in that specific network for the purposes of creating a useful typology that can be applied to a broader range of cases/issues/platforms.

The authors hope that typology could serve as a potential starting point for Twitter to think about how it could design its algorithms toward agonistic talk. The typology could be used as a classification scheme to differentiate agonistic from antagonistic threads. An algorithm could be trained to spot threads overwhelmingly populated by antagonistic discourse and instructed to insert posts from other threads that represent agonistic responses like “contingently wrong” or “reciprocal inquiry.” While generous presentations or deeper, more nuanced presentations of the opponent’s value position are not a panacea, they could serve to change the orientation by which users engage with policy issues.

Social media platforms like Twitter have up to now been left alone to make markets and establish profitability off of public sphere conversations. The result has been a lack of attention to how discourse on these platforms affects users mental well-being, community health and democratic viability. Recently, Twitter’s CEO has indicated a need to rethink the ways in which it promotes “healthy discourse.” The utilitarian presumption that, left to our own devices, we will trial and error our way to the collective good does not account for the importance of others in refining one’s preferences, arguments and world views. Without an “other” to vet ideas and lead us toward becoming wiser, we are left with a Wyly antagonism that moves discourse further and further away from agonistic respect and toward antagonistic virtual struggle. Platforms that allow antagonistic talk that breeds ressentiment run the risk of irrevocably damaging democracy through poisoning its public sphere.

This paper is unique in providing a typology/framework for thinking about the types of “political talk” that exists on Twitter. By using agonistic political theory as a framework, the authors are able to establish some guiding principles for “good political talk” that acknowledges the incommensurability of value positions on issues like gun control. The typology’s emphasis on agonistic respect, ressentiment and generosity in the presentation of alternative value positions provides a starting point from which to map and catalog discourse on Twitter more generally and offers a normative model for changing algorithmic design.

This paper aims to examines the trade-offs that Small Island Developing States (SIDS) must make in navigating an inappropriate elite-driven global anti-money laundering anti-money laundering/countering the financing of terrorism (AML-CFT) order. This paper examines the case of Samoa, an under-researched Pacific Island nation. It is hoped that this paper will have a wider resonance for policymakers from other developing nations facing similar challenges.

It draws on the latest Samoan domestic source material and Asia/Pacific Group on Money Laundering Mutual Evaluation Reports to highlight the difficult balancing act that SIDS face in complying with complex global norms within their limited regulatory capacity and competing development priorities of financial inclusion and affordable remittance flows.

Samoa and other SIDS in balancing the existential risks of “blacklisting” with the significant regulatory opportunity costs of compliance undertake an expensive form of AML-CFT window-dressing. Policymakers need to be more sensitive to the needs and regulatory opportunity costs of small jurisdictions, particularly when questions about the effectiveness of the AML-CFT remain open.

The author notes Samoa’s offshore center’s role in raising its risk profile. However, owing to this paper's limited scope offshore center (OFCs) will not be explored in depth. Further research is needed in this area.

There is a dearth of contemporary academic research into AML-CFT regulation in the South Pacific and Samoa specifically. This paper presents through its Samoan case study insights into the cost-benefit calculations that small jurisdictions must make in seeking to comply with elite global AML-CFT norms vis-à-vis competing policy goals such as financial inclusion and ready access to remittance flows.

sGiven the topics covered in the first 11 chapters, it seems a tall order to bring such a large number of topics into a cogent summary. Additionally, the book has introduced three distinct views of risk management – the traditional/technical view, enterprise risk management, and an alternative view that is yet-to-be-fully-articulated. The summary is further complicated by the challenges of managing in complex environments. Nevertheless, an effort should be expected.

Here, the framing of public organisation risk management in practice (which will be applicable to risk management in other public contexts), begins with setting sustainable resilience as the central organising idea. From this come several practical principles that will serve to contextualise a range of specific processes and actions that constitute risk management as understood in the book. This requires some consideration of operational issues – programme implementation tactics, defining particular roles, evaluating outcomes, embedding assessment and analysis, and implementing tools. However, it also discussed somewhat more philosophical issues like the development of ‘network schema’, leadership in complexity, and the twin ideas of innovation and adaptation. Recognising that effective risk management always depends on the particular organisation or situation, a general guide to practice is outlined here.

Environmental degradation, economic and political threats along with ideological extremism necessitate a global redirection toward sustainability and well-being. Since the survival of all species (humans, animals, and plants) is wholly dependent on a healthy planet, urgent action at the highest levels to address large-scale interconnected problems is needed to counter the thinking that perpetuates the “folly of a limitless world.” Paralleling critical societal roles played by universities – ancient, medieval, and modern – throughout the millennia, this chapter calls for all universities and higher education institutions (HEIs) generally – estimated at over 28,000 – to take a lead together in tackling the pressing complex and intractable challenges that face us. There are about 250 million students in tertiary education worldwide rising to about 600 million by 2040. Time is not on our side. While much of the groundwork has been done by the United Nations (UN) and civil society, concerns remain over the variable support given to the UN-2030 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), especially in light of the negative impact of global biodiversity loss on achieving the UN-2030 SDGs. Ten propositions for global sustainability, ranging from adopting the SDGs at national and local levels to ensuring peaceful uses of technology and UN reforms in line with global socioeconomic shifts, are provided for consideration by decisionmakers. Proposition #7 calls for the unifying One Health & Well-Being (OHWB) concept to become the cornerstone of our educational systems as well as societal institutions and to underpin the UN-2030 SDGs. Recognizing the need to change our worldview (belief systems) from human-centrism to eco-centrism, and re-building of trust in our institutions, the chapter argues for the re-conceptualization of the university/higher education purpose and scope focusing on the development of an interconnected ecological knowledge system with a concern for the whole Earth – and beyond. The 2019 novel coronavirus has made clear that the challenges facing our world cannot be solved by individual nations alone and that there is an urgency to committing to shared global values that reflect the OHWB concept and approach. By drawing on our collective experience and expertise informed by the UN-2030 SDGs, we will be in a much stronger position to shape and strengthen multilateral strategies to achieve the UN-2030 Transformative Vision – “ending poverty, hunger, inequality and protecting the Earth’s natural resources,” and thereby helping “to save the world from itself.”

This article explores the tension between the concept of a Designated Community (DC) as a foundational element in Trustworthy Digital Repository (TDR) certification and curators' uncertainty about how to interpret and apply this concept in practice.

This research employs a qualitative research design involving in-depth semi-structured interviews with stakeholders in the Trustworthy Digital Repository Audit and Certification (TRAC) process.

The authors' findings indicate that stakeholders in the audit and certification process viewed their uncertainty about how to apply the concept of a DC in the context of an audit as a source of risk for digital repositories and the repositories' collections.

This article brings new insights to digital preservation by applying social theories of risk to trustworthy digital repository audit and certification processes, with an emphasis on the concept of DC.

Organizations are confronted with problems and political risks to which they have to respond, presenting a need to develop tools and frames of understanding requisite to do so. In this article, we argue for the necessity of cultivating “political judgment” with a “sense of reality,” especially in the upper echelons of organizations. This article has two objectives: First to highlight how a number of recent interlinked developments within organizational analysis and practice have contributed to weakening judgment and its accompanying “sense of reality.” Second, to (re)introduce some canonical works that, although less in vogue recently, provide both a source of wisdom and frames of understanding that are key to tackling today’s problems. We begin by mapping the context in which the need for the cultivation of political judgment within organizations has arisen: (i) increasing proliferation of political risks and “wicked problems” to which it is expected that organizations adapt and respond; (ii) a wider historical and contemporary context in which the exercise of judgment has been undermined – a result of a combination of economics-inspired styles of theorizing and an associated obsession with metrics. We also explore the nature of “political judgment” and its accompanying “sense of reality” through the work of authors such as Philip Selznick, Max Weber, Chester Barnard, and Isaiah Berlin. We suggest that these authors have a weighty “sense of reality”; are antithetical to “high,” “abstract,” or “axiomatic” theorizing; and have a profound sense of the burden from exercising political judgment in difficult organizational circumstances.