Search results

This study aims to investigate the viewpoints of heterodox economic thoughts and Islamic economic thought concerning the concept of waste. Additionally, it explores the shared criticisms that both perspectives hold against mainstream economic thought in relation to waste.

First of all, the concept of waste is examined and the global effects of waste are investigated. Criticisms directed in the context of waste in mainstream economics in the context of heterodox school thoughts are examined. Likewise, criticisms directed in the context of waste in mainstream economics in the context of Islamic economic thoughts are examined. Finally, the common and different aspects of heterodox and Islamic economic thoughts were discussed, and the common criticisms of mainstream economic thought’s point of view toward waste were examined. This study is a theoretical, qualitative study.

Although both ideas have different aspects, heterodox and Islamic economic thoughts believe that the mainstream economy, which is based on capitalism and materialism, creates waste by ignoring the long-term social and environmental consequences of economic activity. They argue that the pursuit of profits and growth, without considering the impact on society and the environment, leads to an inefficient and unsustainable use of resources.

The best author’s knowledge, by emphasizing the common and different aspects of Islamic economics and heterodox thoughts, this study is the first to examine the concept of waste in the context of the common aspects of these ideas.

The 50th anniversary of Fox's Beyond Contract and Man Mismanagement coincides with another vital contribution to the sociology of work from 1974: Braverman's Labor and Monopoly Capital. This article analyses these two scholars' complementary approaches to job design and the extent to which Fox's ideas influenced subsequent labour process thought.

The article's methodological approach is a historiographical reading of Fox and Braverman's thought in the context of their times and later scholarship.

The article demonstrates that despite some noteworthy overlap with Braverman concerning scientific management, Fox's insights were marginal to later iterations of labour process analysis. It delves into the reasons for this relative neglect, providing an understanding of the dynamics at play.

This paper's value lies in its combined industrial relations and labour process historiography. It offers a fresh perspective on Alan Fox's relationship to the latter field of study.

The purpose of this paper is to present a framework of ideation pathways that organically extend the current stock of knowledge to generate new and useful knowledge. Although detailed, granular guidance is available in the strategy literature on all aspects of empirically testing theory, the other key aspect of theory development – theory generation – remains relatively neglected. The framework developed in this paper addresses this gap by proposing pathways for how new theory can be generated.

Grounded in two foundational principles in epistemology, the Genetic Argument and the open-endedness of knowledge, I offer a framework of distinct pathways that systematically lead to the creation of new knowledge.

Existing knowledge can be deepened (through introspection), broadened (through leverage) and rejuvenated (through innovation). These ideation pathways can unlock the vast, hidden potential of current knowledge in strategy.

The novelty and doability of the framework can potentially inspire research on a broad, community-wide basis, engaging PhD students and management faculty, improving knowledge, democratizing scholarship and deepening the societal footprint of strategy research.

Knowledge is open-ended. The more we know, the more we appreciate how much we don’t know. But the lack of clear guidance on rigorous pathways along which new knowledge that advances both theory and practice can be created from prior knowledge has stymied strategy research. The paper’s framework systematically pulls together for the first time the disparate elements of transforming past learning into new knowledge in a coherent epistemological whole.

Key to transnational higher education (HE) cooperation is building trust to allow for seamless recognition of studies. Building on the Tuning Educational Structures initiative (2001) and lessons learnt from the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)-Assessment of Learning Outcomes in Higher Education (AHELO) feasibility study, this paper offers a sophisticated approach developed by the European Union (EU)-co-financed project Measuring and Comparing Achievements of Learning Outcomes in Europe (CALOHEE). These evidence the quality and relevance of learning by applying transparent and reliable indicators at the overarching and disciplinary levels. The model results allow for transnational diagnostic assessments to identify the strength and weaknesses of degree programmes.

The materials presented have been developed from 2016 to 2023, applying a bottom-up approach involving approximately 150 academics from 20+ European countries, reflecting the full spectrum of academic fields. Based on intensive face-to-face debate and consultation of stakeholders and anchored in academic literature and wide experience.

As a result, general (overarching) state-of-the-art reference frameworks have been prepared for the associated degree, bachelor, master and doctorate, as well as aligned qualifications reference frameworks and more detailed learning outcomes/assessment frameworks for 11 subject areas, offering a sound basis for quality assurance. As a follow-up, actual assessment formats for five academic fields have been developed to allow for measuring the actual level of learning at the institutional level from a comparative perspective.

Frameworks as well as assessment models and items are highly innovative, content-wise as in the strategy of development, involving renown academics finding common ground. Its value is not limited to Europe but has global significance. The model developed, is also relevant for micro-credentials in defining levels of mastery.

This paper presents an historical reconstruction of the radicalisation of Alan Fox, the industrial sociologist and a detailed analysis of his early historical and sociological writing in the classical pluralist phase.

An intellectual history, including detailed discussion of key Fox texts, supported by interviews with Fox and other Biographical sources.

Fox’s radicalisation was incomplete, as he carried over from his industrial relations (IR) pluralist mentors, Allan Flanders and Hugh Clegg, a suspicion of political Marxism, a sense of historical contingency and an awareness of the fragmented nature of industrial conflict.

Recent academic attention has centred on Fox’s later radical pluralism with its “structural” approach to the employment relationship. This paper revisits his early, neglected classical pluralist writing. It also illuminates his transition from institutional IR to a broader sociology of work, influenced by AH Halsey, John Goldthorpe and others and the complex nature of his radicalisation.

This study aims to analyze the emergence of a new structural configuration of globalization, with the 2008 global financial crisis serving as the first symptom of this change. By introducing the “Evolutionary Structural Triptych” (EST), this research seeks to understand the basic components of the new evolutionary trajectory of global capitalism post-2008. The study places emphasis on its interdependent and coevolving economic, political and technological dynamic facets.

This research introduces the EST framework, critically contrasting it with conventional understandings in international political economy (IPE) to provide a comprehensive and structured analysis of global developments after 2008. It traces the phases of global capitalism since Second World War, examines the central dynamic dimensions during each evolutionary phase, identifies the basic patterns and delves into the foundational elements of the emerging era of globalization.

The analysis reveals three key findings. First, the emerging restructured globalization indicates a need for a new balance in the contemporary world system; however, this balance cannot be achieved within the architecture of the old system. Second, the new era of globalization necessitates a re-equilibrated approach across different dimensions of geopolitical stability, economic development and innovation. This approach should emphasize sustainability, adaptability, resilience and inclusivity and lean toward responsible, open and organic innovation models for a revamped global structure. Third, while many current IPE theories tend to compartmentalize aspects of the new globalization, the EST advocates for a holistic perspective that integrates politics, economics and technology within the framework of global trends. This perspective bridges existing gaps and offers actionable insights for a dynamic and inclusive global future.

The paper presents the EST as a novel analytical instrument in the realm of the modern IPE. This tool uniquely places technology and innovation at the forefront, parallel to economic and political spheres, to comprehend the progression of globalization. In doing so, it highlights the intertwined relationship of these structural dimensions in shaping the future of the subject of the IPE.

Scholarship on America’s K-12 economics curriculum reveals an inattention to many harmful economic realities, specifically wealth inequality. Critics of the present curriculum posit that its emphasis on out-dated concepts and models ignores crucial elements of reality that impact economic interaction and identities. In response to the dominant economic paradigm and methods, this practitioner-focused paper discusses an economically pluralist, pedagogically critical approach to interrogating destructive economic realities. It details how three social studies classroom simulations based on the board game Monopoly may be integrated with certain informational texts to explore economic factors that contribute to America’s unique form of wealth inequality.

This paper describes wealth inequality in America and rationalizes the need to make this social problem a focus of study in the secondary social studies classroom. First, I survey the present curricular apparatus of K-12 economics education and then argue for a pluralist approach that expands the curriculum’s dominant neoclassical paradigm. Connecting economic pluralism to critical citizen education, I draw upon emerging critical economic citizen education scholarship to explain attendant pedagogical and instructional approaches. The described lesson builds upon a tradition of Monopoly simulations, is rooted in critical citizen education pedagogy and aligns with Soroko’s (2023) critical economic literacy framework.

This paper progresses the curricular movement of economic pluralism through its critique of America’s current K-12 economics curriculum that does not focus on immediate, lived social problems. It further defines critical economics, citizenship and pedagogy, then details an instructional practice that employs critical disciplinary tools to investigate contributing factors of American wealth inequality.

This paper contributes to the growing field of pluralist economic perspectives and pedagogies. Specifically, it enriches understanding of critical economics citizenship education by further defining attendant pedagogy and explaining Monopoly as an instructional tool for critical economics citizen education. Previous works have discussed Monopoly’s utility for teaching various concepts within the social studies disciplines. This simulation lesson is unique in its instructional approach that merges simulation experiences with certain informational texts to cultivate critical economic knowledge of American wealth inequality and critical economic skills for critiquing and transforming oppressive economic realities.

This paper illuminates our journey as accounting educators by exploring accounting as a technical, social and moral practice towards decolonising ourselves. It lays the foundations for decolonising the higher education curriculum and the consequences for addressing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

This paper focuses on the potential to foster a space for praxis by adopting dialogism-in-action to understand our transformative learning through Jindaola [pronounced Jinda-o-la], a university-based Aboriginal knowledge program. A dialogic pedagogy provided the opportunity to create a meaningful space between us as academics, the Aboriginal Knowledge holder and mentor, the other groups in Jindaola and, ultimately, our accounting students. Since Jindaola privileged ‘our way’ as the pedagogical learning process, we adopt autoethnography to share and reflect on our experiences. Making creative artefacts formed the basis for building relationships, reciprocity and respect and represents our shared journey and collective account.

We reveal our journey of “holding to account” by analysing five aspects of our lives as critical accounting academics – the overarching conceptual framework, teaching, research, governance and our physical landscape. In doing so, we found that Aboriginal perspectives provide a radical positioning to the colonial legacies of accounting practice.

Our journey through Jindaola contemplates how connecting with Country and engaging with Aboriginal ways of knowing can assist educators in meaningfully addressing the SDGs. While not providing a panacea or prescription for what to do, we use ‘our way’ as a story of our commitment to transformative change.

Through Bourdieusian sociology, this study aims to interpret a globalized symbolic environment ward by the States and dominated by organizations through the States’ Nobilities enticing and the Euro-American influences disseminated by the cultural circuit of capitalism in the inculcation and incorporation of a class habitus conniving with this logic of domination.

This study has developed a theoretical essay based on the contributions of Bourdieusian sociology to discuss and understand the following concepts and their respective relationships: symbolic environment, globalization, organizations, State, State Nobility, Euro-American influences, cultural circuit of capitalism and class habitus.

The arguments built throughout this theoretical essay recognized how class habitus on environment contributes to organizations establishing themselves as a space that consolidates and replicates the domination logic. As indicated, the State Nobility is an intermediary element between dominant organizations and the State, as dominated.

This theoretical essay signals that less harmful alliances between organizations, the State Nobility and the State could culminate in social, environmental and economic scenarios provided with more inclusion, diversity and preservation.

This study presents an in-depth conceptual analysis to hold power structures responsible as direct and indirect drivers of environmental problems, with their different proportions and severity levels, affecting the planet.

This study proposes an alternative lens to debate and question how much the results presented by the contemporary world order compensate (if in any way) the damage that invades and deteriorate environmental assets.

The purpose of this paper is to consider the ethical and environmental implications of allowing space resource extraction to disrupt existing fuel economies, including how companies can be held accountable for ensuring the responsible use of their space assets. It will also briefly consider how such assets should be taxed, and the cost/benefit analyses required to justify the considerable expense of supporting this emerging space industry.

This paper adopts theoretical bioethics methodologies to explore issues of normative ethics and the formulation of moral rules to govern individual, collective and institutional behaviour. Specifically, it considers social justice and social contract theory, consequentialist and deontological accounts of ethical evaluation. It also draws on sociological and organisational literature to discuss Dowling and Pfeffer’s (1975) and Suchman’s (1995) theories of pragmatic, cognitive and moral legitimacy as they may be applied to off-world mining regulations and the handling of space assets.

The findings of this conceptual paper indicate there is both a growing appetite for tighter resource extraction regulations to address climate change and wealth concentration globally, and an opportunity to establish and legitimise new ethical norms for commercial activity in space that can avoid some of the challenges currently facing fossil fuel divestment movements on Earth.

By adopting methodologies from theoretical bioethics, sociology and business studies, including applying a legitimacy lens to the issue of off-world mining, this paper synthesises existing knowledges from these fields and brings them to the new context of the future space resource economy.