Search results

This chapter focuses on critical thinking as a new, powerful, and specialized tool and technique for understanding and analyzing the subtle operations of the free enterprise capitalist market system and its ethics and morality. Everything in the world of consumers and market enterprise systems are determined by our supply–demand system that in turn are determined by our presumed limitless production–distribution and consumption (LDPC) systems. From a critical thinking viewpoint, we study the free enterprise capitalist system (FECS) as a dynamic, interconnected organic system and not as a discrete or compartmentalized body of disaggregate parts. Systems thinking with critical thinking calls for a shift of our mindset from seeing just parts to seeing the whole reality in its structured dynamic unity; both mandate that we see ourselves as active participators or partners of FECS and not as mere cogs in its wheels or as mere factors of its production processes. Critical thinking seeks to identify the “structures” that underlie complex situations in FECS with those that bring about high- versus low-leveraged changes in various versions of capitalism. Specifically, this chapter applies critical thinking to FECS as defined by its founder, Adam Smith, in 1776 to its fundamental and structural assumptions, and as supported or critiqued by serious scholars such as Karl Marx, Maynard Keynes, C. K. Prahalad and Allen Hammond (inclusive capitalism), John Mackey and Rajendra Sisodia (conscious capitalism), and others.

Expanding and developing the theoretical implications of socialist market economy with China’s experience.

In the course of exploring the development of a market economy, China has given full play to the advantages of the socialist system, which has distinguished itself from the Western countries and some of its developing peers. China's market economy is not directly transplanted and copied from the West. China not only insists on growing its market economy but also unswervingly sticks to the socialist orientation of its market economy.

So far, the socialist market economy has proved to be more effective than the conventional one-sided, planned economy and also outperforms the capitalist market economy.

The socialist market economy has surpassed the conventional planned economy and the capitalist market economy – it is a reconstructed and reshaped mechanism and system as well as a successful and new path of market economy explored by China through reform and opening up, rather than a counterpart of Western market economy or the simple combination of socialism and market economy.

This paper aims to determine the status of the socialist market economy through a logical analysis of the evolution of economic systems in human society.

This paper presents an analysis of uncertainty and the functions performed by different economic systems in managing and resolving it, thereby explaining the evolutionary rationale behind economic system evolution.

Firstly, the socialist market economy empowers the market to play a decisive role in resource allocation, which serves as the foundation for activating individuals' motivation to engage in economic activities. Secondly, the socialist market economy adheres to the basic socialist economic system, which is the basis for the socialist market economy to stabilize the economy and society or to address the risk of economic uncertainty that may trigger macro-level inconsistencies in economic operations. Thirdly, the advantages of a socialist market economy in adapting to economic uncertainties do not arise spontaneously and must be exerted through continuous improvement of the socialist market economy.

The innovation of this paper lies in introducing uncertainty to clarify the logic behind the evolution of economic systems in human society and explaining the typical significance of the socialist market economy and its advantages in accommodating and resolving uncertainty.

The COVID-19 pandemic highlights the influence that nation-states can have on the engagement of international marketing activities. The purpose of this study is to understand the influence of the institutional response to the COVID-19 pandemic on international marketing activities and to highlight the need to formally incorporate institutional economics into the study of international marketing phenomena.

The paper uses institutional economics as the environmental element of the general theory of competitive rationality to present a foundation for understanding how state actions influence marketing and international marketing activities. Data are presented and empirically tested, demonstrating the heterogeneity of government influence on personal and economic freedoms during the pandemic, both of which influenced international marketing activities. To broaden the implications of this work, we also provide anecdotal illustrations unrelated to the COVID-19 pandemic to demonstrate the breadth of nation-state influence on international marketing activities.

Heterogeneity in nation-state formal and informal institutional elements influence international marketing activities during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, other incidents, unrelated to the COVID-19 pandemic, demonstrate the importance of contextualizing international marketing activities under a holistic institutional framework.

The paper employs the general theory of competitive rationality along with institutional economics to provide a theoretical foundation to better understand the differential impact on international marketing as a result of formal and informal institutional influences. This general framework can be employed to provide a holistic understanding of both international and cross-national marketing activities.

CSR, as a social and political movement, misunderstands the modern market economy. The purpose of corporations or publicly traded companies is not to reduce risk or liability but to promote risk. CSR distorts the role of corporate officers (not the distribution of company assets). It misunderstands the role of capital markets, promotes illegal and irresponsible behaviour on the part of some corporations, destabilises national and world economies, promotes the growth of the deep bureaucratic state and leads to crony capitalism. It encourages the false belief in a utopian social technology; inhibits economic and scientific growth; and misplaces the responsibility for failed states and cultural retardation.

Do digital technologies of early 21st century capitalism promote or reduce consumer sovereignty? This chapter addresses this question by examining John Kenneth Galbraith’s critique of consumer sovereignty during the post-war period of industrial society and looks at the insights he provides to understand the impact of platform capitalism on consumer sovereignty today. This chapter has the following sections: (1) I review the main postulates of Galbraith’s theory; (2) I highlight the main differences between traditional advertising and online behavioral advertising; (3) I explain how online behavioral advertisement strengthens Galbraith’s dependence effect and revised sequence theories; (4) I then discuss normative challenges raised by digital platform corporations to individual sovereignty; and (5) finally, I argue that platform capitalism is a mature form of Galbraith’s “new industrial state.”

Purpose: Process innovations are becoming increasingly significant in a changing digital society. The goal of this study is to focus on the service industry, particularly on how this sector has lately been influenced by sustainable development and digitalisation. The main focus will be on education. The cohabitation of three aspects (innovation, digitalisation, and sustainability) is declared as a fact in the competitive landscape.

Methodology: This study uses a multi-case approach emphasising the new system of processes in educational institutions in Canada, Ontario. These case studies are relevant to exceptional results consistently produced by various educational institutions.

Findings: The Waterloo region is known as a digitalisation triangle in Canada. Personal experiences and research findings serve as an example of the value of the global digitalised economy as a partnership principle in the educational and entrepreneurship fields.

Significance: The obtained experience and the attempt to share the knowledge and results of this work and research will be useful in future for other academic environments, cities, and countries.

Practical Implications: Cohesion between the purpose of this study and practice is explained as a need to see educational institutions as an important factor of innovation and economic development. In this case, the author shows how this successful case of Ontario, Canada created a stronger base for competitiveness and economic growth.

This chapter aims to explore the novelty and utility of political economy discourse, termed “neo-statism,” as an analytical lens for comparative research in higher education. Analysis is framed within the context of Hong Kong’s transition from a British colony to a Special Administrative Region under China’s sovereignty, and its shifting academic paradigms from a more or less spontaneous philosophy rooted in liberal capitalist economy to embracing neo-statism, which involves market-conforming and state-sponsored approaches to economic and social restructuring whereby the state regulates higher education in support of national integration and global power projection. The statist regulation depends heavily on its deployment of discursive legitimacy, strategic distribution of resources, organizational synergy, and elite cohesion articulated through higher education policy, research projects, and cross-border academic exchange and cooperation. The Hong Kong case suggests that comparative research in higher education should advance from the methodological aspects of the comparative approach to exploring wider theoretical spectrum, for understanding emerging politico-economic factors shaping academic paradigm in comparative contexts. Moreover, scholars who engage in the trendy internationalization in higher education should move beyond the logics of neo-liberalism, and pay closer attention to the new geopolitical realities that are changing the normative and interactive dimensions of international higher education at large.