Search results

Diaspora tourism primarily refers to various population groups, including migrants, foreign workers, political refugees, ethnic and religious minorities and overseas communities living away from their ancestral homeland for various reasons. Throughout history, people have been forced to leave their original homeland due to various factors ranging from economic crises to natural and human-made tragedies, including war. The 24 February 2022 unjustified and unproved Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine, which started on the heels of the two-year COVID-19 pandemic, has resulted in massive and terrible consequences for many domains of political, economic and social life. The Russian invasion of Ukraine has generated the largest historical migration flows at a scale unforeseen in Europe since World War II. Since Russia invaded Ukraine, at least 12 million people have been displaced from their homes, according to the United Nations. The unprecedented influx of the Ukrainian people raises concerns about future developments, issues and challenges associated with Ukrainians' presence in other countries, particularly neighbouring ones. Therefore, this chapter analyses the possibility of diaspora tourism for Ukrainians shortly by utilising a critical approach when the situation stabilises in Ukraine. To begin with, this chapter first explains diaspora tourism with its definition and characteristics. Furthermore, it reviews the literature on the Russia–Ukraine war and its impact on Ukrainian tourism. In conclusion, it discusses the new Ukrainian diaspora wave soon.

Although healthcare and healthy living are integral to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) for 2030, the coronavirus epidemic has dealt a devastating blow to these efforts. As governments and policymakers were compelled to shift their focus to lockdowns, sustenance, procurement, and distribution of vaccines, the momentum for health initiatives slowed, and the already fragile health systems of emerging markets were subjected to additional shocks. However, in many underserved regions of the globe, the introduction of technology has greatly facilitated the distribution and adoption of healthcare services.

This chapter highlights mini-cases from four emerging nations: Bangladesh, Nigeria, Vietnam, and the Philippines. Although the countries are emerging, each one of them are in a distinct stage of development and face a unique set of healthcare-related challenges. The chapter showcases how four different organizations based in these countries leveraged the use of technology to take healthcare services to underserved populations. In doing so, they addressed the key challenges of imparting healthcare: geographic accessibility, availability, financial accessibility, and acceptability.

This chapter concludes with a discussion of the implications of expanding healthcare industries leading to increased healthcare waste. To prevent mass population exposure to hazardous substances, the emergence of intelligent healthcare waste collection and disposal systems will be an absolute necessity. Hence, with the development of healthcare services, governments and policymakers need to mechanize smart waste management systems to safeguard humans, animals, and the environment.

The development of electronic monitoring policy over the last decade in Scotland has contributed towards its expansion and the intensification of what McNeill (2019) refers to as mass supervision. Often posited as a solution to relieve problems in the criminal justice system such as prison overcrowding and high remand populations, electronic monitoring can be punitive and problematic, exposing more people to diffused forms of social control and functioning more as a supplementary feature of prisons as opposed to a substitution for prisons. In this chapter, I explore the existing and emerging policy landscape of penal electronic monitoring Scotland, drawing upon qualitative, experiential data about being subject to and enforcing penal electronic monitoring in Scotland (see Casey, 2021) to highlight how policy is enacted in practice. Ultimately, I argue that there are fundamental issues with how electronic monitoring is currently enacted in terms of what it promises, in terms of fairness and in relation to the potential harms of integration. I call for a fundamental and holistic reframing of policy and regulation of penal electronic monitoring in Scotland that avoids siloed approaches towards policymaking, attending to both the social and digital impacts of electronic monitoring in people’s lives, thus contributing to arguments about how ‘mass supervision’ should be moderated and resisted.