Search results

While companies in developed countries are increasingly turning to indigenous employees, integration measures have met with mixed results. Low integration can lead to breach of the psychological contract, i.e. perceived mutual obligations between employee and employer. The purpose of this paper is to identify how leadership and organizational integration measures can be implemented to promote the perceived insider status (PIS) of indigenous employees, thereby fostering fulfillment of the psychological contract.

A search for relevant literature yielded 128 texts used to identify integration measures at the level of employee–supervisor relationships (leader-member exchanges, inclusive leadership) and at the level of employee–organization relationships (perceived organizational support, pro-diversity practices).

Measures related to leadership included recruiting qualified leaders, understanding cultural particularities, integrating diverse contributions and welcoming questions and challenges. Organizational measures included reaching a critical mass of indigenous employees, promoting equity and participation, developing skills, assigning meaningful tasks, maintaining good work relationships, facilitating work-life balance, providing employment security, fostering support from communities and monitoring practices.

While PIS has been studied in western and culturally diverse contexts, it has received less attention in indigenous contexts. Yet, some indigenous cultural values are incompatible with the basic assumptions of mainstream theories. Furthermore, colonial policies and capitalist development have severely impacted traditional indigenous economic systems. Consequently, indigenous people are facing many barriers to employment in ways that often differ from the experiences of other minority groups.

The authors respond to the special edition call for papers which explore the intersection between equity pedagogy and open educational practices (OEPs). The purpose of this study is to address the question “In what ways are educators ensuring equity in open educational practices (OEP)?” by investigating the use of OEPs in a first-year Cultural Capability unit at an Australian University. The Cultural Capability unit and this study are underpinned by concepts of border crossings (Aikenhead, 1996) across the cultural interface (Nakata, 2007) enabled by modelling and practicing collaborative power relations (Cummins, 2000).

This study uses a qualitative content analysis method to analyse three textual data sets from students (interviews, writing samples and unit evaluation comments), for insights into students’ learning experiences and outcomes related to OEPs used in the unit.

The OEPs used in the unit support working across multiple knowledge systems, disciplines and conceptual boundaries. The unit’s OEPs facilitate border crossings amongst multiple subcultures and share power to induce participation and give students language to discuss how they might cross borders in the wider cultural interfaces they are learning and working in.

This study extends the theorising of OEP to introduce cultural border crossings and collaborative relations of power as examples of values-centred OEPs in the service of emancipatory learning in multi-cultural contexts. This study extends the practical applications of OEPs to making space for Indigenous and global students’ perspectives as valuable in the development of cultural capabilities.

This study aimed to determine the motivations of a select group of South Africans in terms of their potential engagement with cultural tourism; more specifically, the study set out to show whether these motivations influence the cultural activities that the tourists want to participate in and whether their interest in specific cultural activities determines their destination choices. Furthermore, the mediating role of activities in the relationship between cultural motivations and destination choice was also assessed.

An online panel survey collected responses from 1,530 potential cultural tourists across South Africa. Hypotheses were tested, using structural equation modelling.

The results show that tourists' motivations for cultural tourism influence their likelihood of participating in specific cultural activities. Cultural tourism is shown to be influenced by more than learning and includes entertainment, relaxation, novelty and escape dimensions. There also seems to be a difference in the activities engaged in by destination type. For example, tourists likely to take part in indigenous cultural tourism activities are more likely to do so at hedonic destinations.

This paper contributes to the understanding of cultural tourism activities, aiding destinations in attracting cultural tourists. Destinations need to develop activities that match visitor motivations, increase satisfaction and encourage visitors to return.

The paper increases the understanding of cultural tourism in South Africa and underlines the importance of communities in providing distinctive tourism activities. The study also has an important social dimension, highlighting the role of social status in cultural tourism consumption and destination selection.

For many Indigenous nations globally, ethics is a conversation. The purpose of this paper is to share and mobilize knowledge to build relationships and capacities regarding the ethics review and approval of research with Indigenous peoples throughout Atlantic Canada. The authors share key principles that emerged for shifting practices that recognize Indigenous rights holders through ethical research review practice.

The NunatuKavut Inuit hosted and led a two-day gathering on March 2019 in Happy Valley-Goose Bay, Newfoundland and Labrador, to promote a regional dialogue on Indigenous Research Governance. It brought together Indigenous Nations within the Atlantic Region and invited guests from institutional ethics review boards and researchers in the region to address the principles-to-policy-to-practice gap as it relates to the research ethics review process. Called “Naalak”, an Inuktitut word that means “to listen and to pay close attention”, the gathering created a dynamic moment of respect and understanding of how to work better together and support one another in research with Indigenous peoples on Indigenous lands.

Through this process of dialogue and reflection, emergent principles and practices for “good” research ethics were collectively identified. Open dialogue between institutional ethics boards and Indigenous research review committees acknowledged past and current research practices from Indigenous peoples’ perspectives; supported and encouraged community-led research; articulated and exemplified Indigenous ownership and control of data; promoted and practiced ethical and responsible research with Indigenous peoples; and supported and emphasized rights based approaches within the current research regulatory system. Key principles emerged for shifting paradigms to honour Indigenous rights holders through ethical research practice, including: recognizing Indigenous peoples as rights holders with sovereignty over research; accepting collective responsibility for research in a “good” way; enlarging the sphere of ethical consideration to include the land; acknowledging that “The stories are ours” through Indigenous-led (or co-led) research; articulating relationships between Indigenous and Research Ethics Board (REB) approvals; addressing justice and proportionate review of Indigenous research; and, means of identifying the Indigenous governing authority for approving research.

Future steps (including further research) include pursuing collective responsibilities towards empowering Indigenous communities to build their own consensus around research with/in their people and their lands. This entails pursuing further understanding of how to move forward in recognition and respect for Indigenous peoples as rights holders, and disrupting mainstream dialogue around Indigenous peoples as “stakeholders” in research.

The first step in moving forward in a way that embraces Indigenous principles is to deeply embed the respect of Indigenous peoples as rights holders across and within REBs. This shift in perspective changes our collective responsibilities in equitable ways, reflecting and respecting differing impetus and resources between the two parties: “equity” does imply “equality”. Several examples of practical changes to REB procedures and considerations are detailed.

What the authors have discovered is that it is not just about academic or institutional REB decolonization: there are broad systematic issues at play. However, pursuing the collective responsibilities outlined in our paper should work towards empowering communities to build their own consensus around research with/in their people and their lands. Indigenous peoples are rights holders, and have governance over research, including the autonomy to make decisions about themselves, their future, and their past.

The value is in its guidance around how authentic partnerships can develop that promote equity with regard to community and researcher and community/researcher voice and power throughout the research lifecycle, including through research ethics reviews that respect Indigenous rights, world views and ways of knowing. It helps to show how both Indigenous and non-Indigenous institutions can collectively honour Indigenous rights holders through ethical research practice.

Analyses of teaching and learning in higher education are increasingly being based on a distinction between surface and deep learning. This distinction is helpful for investigating approaches used by teachers as well as student preferences for teaching and learning. Surface learning places an emphasis on memorizing facts and information as well as the relatively passive reproduction of content. In contrast, deep learning involves an intention to understand, the critical assessment of content and relating new information to past knowledge in meaningful ways. There has been an assumption that in the U.A.E. there is an orientation to surface learning in schools and higher education. To examine this assumption, an adaptation of questionnaires used with Western students (the Approaches to Study Skills Inventory for Students) was used with a small sample of ZU students. There are limitations in the use of this procedure and difficulties in interpreting the results. However, the results suggest that ZU students show strong beliefs and preference for deep learning approaches in addition to surface learning approaches. This finding is consistent with evidence obtained from student responses to assessment tasks, where there was evidence of deep learning. It was concluded that learning outcomes for ZU students could be enhanced by employing deep learning approaches to teaching and learning.

This study aims to explore the similarities and differences between the three concepts that are commonly used to describe the knowledge of traditional and indigenous communities, namely, indigenous knowledge, traditional knowledge and local knowledge, with a view to contributing to the discourse on conceptualizing indigenous knowledge.

Data was extracted from the Scopus database using the main terms that are used for indigenous knowledge, namely, “indigenous knowledge” (IK), “traditional knowledge” (TK) and “local knowledge” (LK). Data were analyzed according to the themes drawn from the objectives of the study, using the VOSviewer software and the analytical tool embedded in the Scopus database.

The findings indicate that whereas IK and LK are older concepts than TK, TK has become more visible in the literature than the former; there is minimal overlap in the use of the labels in the literature; the three labels’ literature is largely domiciled in the social sciences; and that there were variations in representation of the labels according to countries and geographic regions.

The author avers that the scatter of literature on the knowledge of traditional and indigenous peoples under the three main labels has huge implications on the accessibility and use the literature by stakeholders including researchers, students, information and knowledge managers and information service providers.

This study demonstrates the application of informetrics beyond is traditional use to assess trends, nature and types of research patterns and mathematical modeling of information patterns to encompass the definition of the scope of concepts as covered in the literature.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the mindset shift, systems change and boundary spanning practices needed to transition to a regenerative approach in tourism. The paper seeks to deliver concrete ways to shift thinking and transition to a regenerative paradigm.

This viewpoint paper defines regenerative tourism, explores its principles and the levers for driving transformational change in tourism. It outlines what a conscious approach to regenerative tourism entails and outlines working principles for regenerative tourism. The paper concludes by identifying five key areas for reflection that seek to challenge established thinking and practice.

The reinvention of tourism requires work in three key areas: systems change, mindset shift and practice. Three findings are summarised as: (1) Regenerative tourism requires a shift in social-ecological consciousness and depends on our capacity to evolve our thinking from “me” to “we” and to develop compassion, empathy and collaborative action. (2) Scientific management is inconsistent with the transition to regeneration. Tourism must be managed as a complex adaptive system and overcome the challenges of individualism, reductionism, separation and marketisation associated with scientific thinking. (3) Regenerative tourism requires a deeply engaged bottom-up approach that is place-based, community-centred and environment-focused.

This paper shares the reflections, working principles and recommendations of The Tourism CoLab and is based on 30 years of experience as a consultant, policy analyst, educator, researcher, professor and now as founder of two tourism social enterprises. With the luxury of reflection and the distance from higher education that many do not have, the author shares her approach to shifting mindsets and driving transformative change.

Education in sustainability science is largely ignorant of the implications of the environmental crisis on inner dimensions, including mindsets, beliefs, values and worldviews. Increased awareness of the acuteness and severity of the environmental and climate crisis has caused a contemporary spread of hopelessness among younger generations. This calls for a better understanding of potential generative forces of hope in the face of climate change. This paper aims to uncover strategies for fostering constructive hope among students.

This study examines, through qualitative interviews, the characteristics of constructive hope amongst proactive students enrolled in university programs related to global environmental challenges. Constructive hope describes a form of hope leading to sustained emotional stability and proactive engagement through both individual and collective actions.

The findings are presented according to four characteristics of constructive hope: goal, pathway thinking, agency thinking and emotional reinforcement. This shows how students perceive the importance of: collaboratively constructing and empowering locally grounded objectives; reinforcing trust in the collective potential and external actors; raising students’ perceived self-efficacy through practical applications; teaching different coping strategies related to the emotional consequences of education on students’ well-being.

We outline practical recommendations for educational environments to encourage and develop constructive hope at multiple levels of university education, including structures, programs, courses and among students’ interactions. We call for practitioners to connect theoretical learning and curriculum content with practice, provide space for emotional expressions, release the pressure from climate anxiety, and to foster a stronger sense of community among students.

The aims of this paper are to share how one cohort of tourism practitioners viewed the transformative change needed within the tourism industry and to explore the implications for leadership in the future.

The research design is based on a virtual whiteboard brainstorming activity incorporating both the individual and collective thinking of 20 participants in a global cohort class. Using conversational techniques to elicit cognitive knowledge and felt experience, the methodology generates shared understandings about the opportunities and challenges of implementing regenerative tourism.

The conversations reported in the findings of this paper provide important insights into the challenges and opportunities faced by tourism professionals as enablers of regenerative tourism. Findings included, first, that participants within the course demonstrated characteristics of transformational leadership including a strong moral positioning, embodied self-awareness, collaboration and collective action. Second, specific points of inertia that impede regenerative tourism are identified including embedded culture, power and organisational structures. Third, professionals are calling for practical tools, new frames of reference, and examples to help communicate regenerative tourism.

This is a viewpoint, not a research paper. Nonetheless, it provides a rich vein of future research in terms of disruptive pedagogy, potentially gendered interest in regenerative tourism, issues of transforming the next generation and power.

Governance, organisational, destination management strategies, planning and policy frameworks, individual issues as well as contradictions within the tourism system were revealed. Transformative change in an uncertain future requires transformational leadership, characterised by moral character and behaviours that trigger empowered responses.

This paper shares insights from a unique global cohort class of tourism professionals wherein the challenges and opportunities for regenerative tourism are identified. The methodology is unusual in that it incorporates both individual and collective thinking through which shared understandings emerge.

The purpose of this study is to discuss how enhancing the role of local institutions (LI) and incorporating indigenous knowledge (IK) in climate change adaptation planning can improve adoption and scaling success of climate-smart agriculture innovations.

A review of relevant literature from sub-Saharan Africa was used to answer the study research questions.

Embracing IK and LI in climate change adaptation projects can enhance adoption and scaling success of climate-smart agriculture innovations in smallholder farming. Such efforts will improve: information gathering and dissemination, mobilization of resources, establishment of useful networks with relevant stakeholders, capacity building farmers on various fronts and provision of leadership in climate adaptation programs.

Fully embracing IK and LI can improve the scaling of climate-smart innovations only if development partners recognize IK systems that are to be transformed and build on them instead of trying to replace them. Also, participatory approaches in scaling innovations will enhance input from rural people in climate change adaptation programs.

Development interventions aimed at taking proven effective climate-smart innovations to scale must, therefore, engage local communities and their indigenous institutions as active stakeholders in designing, planning and implementation of their climate adaptation programs.