Search results

Economists usually shy away from talking about power. They assume an economy comprised of many small and medium-sized firms, each competing for consumer dollars. This circumvents the problem of economic power. John Kenneth Galbraith, however, refused to ignore power. It stood at the center of his economics, and he saw it as a key reason the US economy thrived in the years following World War II (WWII). This chapter examines Galbraith’s changing views regarding economic power. American Capitalism explains how countervailing power, or power on the other side of the market, solves the problem of economic power. In The New Industrial State, scientists and educated managers within the firm (the technostructure) mitigate the negative consequences of economic power wielded by large firms. The Affluent Society and Economics and the Public Purpose look to the government as the main check on corporate power. It does this through labor legislation or programs such as the New Deal and Fair Deal. This chapter then evaluates the different solutions Galbraith proffered to the problem of economic power. It contends that Galbraith got three things right when analyzing economic power. First, we no longer live in a world of scarcity due to oligopolistic firms. Second, capitalism was different in the post-WWII era because the US economy thrived and gains were shared widely. Third, Galbraith understood that power was unequally distributed – both between the public and private sectors and within the private sector itself. On the other hand, Galbraith was overly optimistic in believing the market economy or the public sector could counter corporate power.

This study draws parallels between the Major and Johnson eras to reclaim a discursive space beyond the media and political battlefields to examine long-term systemic failure of government PR.

As part of a wider study into government communications from 1979 to date, this paper draws on evidence from government archives from the 1990s, as well as contemporary accounts, official documents, media accounts, memoirs and biographies, to examine the PR record of two Conservative administrations divided by three decades.

News management during the Major premiership is worth serious scrutiny, not just as an interlude between two media-friendly Prime Ministers, Thatcher and Blair, but in comparison to Boris Johnson's struggle to contain the news narrative between 2019 and 2022. Both administrations experienced terminal reputational crises during their closing years but their means of managing the news were counter-productive and damaging to public trust (65).

Does this failure in public communication illustrate a systemic dysfunction in government-media relations and, if so, what is the role of government PR in these circumstances?

This article uses a comparison between fixed and moving variables associated with two very different administrations to identify the causes of ongoing systemic failure in government communication.

This study aims to examine the nexus of the US rebalance strategy to Asia and the US–China rivalry in the South China Sea (SCS) from the perspective of the offensive realism theory.

The study depends on the descriptive approach that deals with the analysis and description of the phenomenon. Also, the study uses the qualitative method to analyze the primary sources concerning the rebalance.

The study has found four results: first, the rebalance strategy to Asia is a comprehensive strategy to contain China’s rise. Second, China’s offensive strategy in the SCS since 2008 has been the main driver of launching the rebalance. Third, offensive realism presents a convenient analysis to understand the rebalance, China’s offensive strategy in the SCS, and the US–China rivalry in the SCS. Forth, SCS is one of the most important venues of the US–China rivalry for global hegemony.

Limited to the period from 2009 to 2016. The Obama Era.

This study highlights the centrality of the SCS in the US–China global rivalry that has not been yet well researched.

Today, as we hurtle towards imminent planetary destruction in the age of the Anthropocene, we believe it may be instructive to try and understand if the ancient science of spirituality can prove useful in humankind's ability to change course, even at this late hour. We argue that such a paradigm shift is critically essential for human survival and that without the inner transformation proposed by this science, it may prove impossible to build a society based on the principles of liberty, equality and fraternity. This chapter draws from foundational texts and authoritative sources across multiple religious traditions, based upon which it outlines a brief sketch of the ancient science of spirituality. We begin with an account of the differentia specifica of this science, where we delve into what kind of science this is. Since it is centrally concerned with inner transformation, we briefly outline the theory of change embedded in this science and the kind of rejuvenation it enables, which makes it possible for us to clearly perceive the key elements and the structure of reality. We then spell out the impact this has on the nature of human action, continually teasing out implications for policy and practice in our time. We provide a few concrete illustrations of the same. Inter alia, we also show how many of these insights can be found even within modern scientific and philosophical traditions, thereby indicating possibilities of convergence and synthesis between ancient and modern science, following thereby the guidance of genuine spirituality.

Regulated differently in modern constitutions, emergency rule is a case of awkward, and dilemmatic, legal fine-tuning of an ambivalent political move that leads the executive of a democratic regime to the verge of the constitutional system. For that reason, as an utmost situation, emergency rule becomes a testing field for the resilience of the constitutional order. It affects its own foundations, the basic rights, and thus the constitutional capability to make possible their fulfilment. It also serves to appraise the workings of democratic regimes and, accordingly, the type of legitimacy derived from their institutional performance. Furthermore, it provides a vantage point to watch the reactions of both their representatives and their publics. Focussed on the COVID-19 pandemic, this chapter compares the cases of Germany and Spain through their legal regulations of emergency rule and their governments’ responses. Having rather analogous emergency legislations, from 2020 through 2022, there have been significant differences in their decision-making patterns.

The term sustainable tourism has been in existence for many years, yet the concept is still lacking universal agreement in terms of definition, a situation reflected in the difficulties encountered in producing, particularly implementing and related policies. The broad range of issues involved with sustainable development makes integrated policy and governance difficult even in the more specific fields such as sustainable tourism. This chapter begins by reviewing the basic elements of sustainable tourism, its links with the parent subject of sustainable development, and the issues involved in applying the ‘triple bottom line’ concept to tourism. It then examines the relationship between policy formulation and application in the context of governance, and the links between governance and power at different levels. While one of the achievements of sustainable tourism has been its widespread acceptance and official adoption of the concept in many countries, regions and communities, this acceptance has not been translated very often into effective action, owing partly to the lack of integration between stakeholders and partly to the multiple viewpoints making up the tourism landscape which rarely achieve unanimity of policy issues. The chapter includes a discussion of case studies at different scales to illustrate the positive and negative results of the implementation of such policies and concludes with a general summation.

Leveraging Emerson’s theory of power and motivated reasoning, this study aims to explore how the net power of an individual and actual, instead of perceived, vulnerability results in asymmetric trust and distrust development in a dyadic relationship.

Based on extant literature and gaps in the literature, this conceptual paper hypothesises and proposes trust formation based on power dynamics and vulnerability.

This research extends the knowledge base by exploring the role of actual vulnerability over perceived vulnerability in trust formation and distrust formation.

The research propositions imply that the dyadic trust formation process is not rational, and trust itself is not symmetrical but asymmetrical. The net power possessed by one individual over the other drives trust. Net power balance determines the actual vulnerability of the focal individual, and then the individual, through motivated reasoning, trusts or distrusts another individual. Scholars, going forward, could explore how trust formation varies at group and firm levels.

Extant literature has not explored the role of power imbalance in determining actual (versus perceived) vulnerability that influences trust formation between parties. The conceptual paper fills this gap.