Search results

This chapter addresses the question of what normatively binding claims can be associated with the principle of sustainability. It proposes a theoretical reading of justice that requires a new level of morality, namely a global (spatial), intergenerational (temporal) and ecological (material) extension of the scope of responsibility. This makes it plausible that responsibility for those who are distant in space and time, as well as for nature, becomes a matter of conscience. At the same time, it is shown how the binding claims resulting from the principle of sustainability can be internalised in the course of a conscience formation and how the gap between knowledge and action in questions of sustainable development can be closed by means of an emotional underpinning. Finally, it is proposed to transfer the question of conscience to spatial units and tourism through the model of ‘Destination Conscience’ and to institutionalise the idea of ‘inner commitment’ or self-commitment. One suggestion is the creation of committees that could be a collective ethical conscience for the future issues.

This study aims to contribute to the debate about the place of corporate taxation in corporate social responsibility (CSR) by reviewing the present state of research, offering a comprehensive understanding of the content and dimensions of corporate tax responsibility (CTR) and discussing further developments in research and action.

The study builds on a systematic literature review of 117 theoretical and empirical papers on tax within the broad field of CSR published in peer-reviewed academic journals and books.

The analysis unfolds and discusses the construct of CTR and proposes a unified conceptualisation that elucidates for what firms are (or should be) held accountable on tax matters and the different dimensions (i.e. instrumental, political, integrative and ethical) which justify greater tax responsibility and enable its achievement.

The results can provide companies with practical guidance to enhance their tax responsibility and can give stakeholders and policymakers suggestions for new mobilisation strategies to achieve more responsible tax behaviour.

Corporate tax payments are a fundamental dimension of CSR, as they fund public goods and services and reduce the unequal distribution of wealth. Providing a more structured understanding of CTR, this paper can contribute towards attaining more responsible tax outcomes which can better serve and benefit the whole society.

This study offers a structured overview of the present state of tax research in CSR, while providing a comprehensive understanding and conceptualisation of the construct of CTR, thus enabling scholars to situate their work and develop further relevant research in this field.

This article revisits some theories and concepts of public administration, including those related to public value, transaction costs and social equity, to analyze the advantages and disadvantages of using artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms in public service delivery. The author seeks to mobilize theory to guide AI-era public management practitioners and researchers.

The author uses an existing task classification model to mobilize and juxtapose public management theories against artificial intelligence potential impacts in public service delivery. Theories of social equity and transaction costs as well as some concepts such as red tape, efficiency and economy are used to argue that the discipline of public administration provides a foundation to ensure algorithms are used in a way that improves service delivery.

After presenting literature on the challenges and promises of using AI in public service, the study shows that while the adoption of algorithms in public service has benefits, some serious challenges still exist when looked at under the lenses of theory. Additionally, the author mobilizes the public administration concepts of agenda setting and coproduction and finds that designing AI-enabled public services should be centered on citizens who are not mere customers. As an implication for public management practice, this study shows that bringing citizens to the forefront of designing and implementing AI-delivered services is key to reducing the reproduction of social biases.

As a fast-growing subject, artificial intelligence research in public management is yet to empirically test some of the theories that the study presented.

The paper vulgarizes some theories of public administration which practitioners can consider in the design and implementation of AI-enabled public services. Additionally, the study shows practitioners that bringing citizens to the forefront of designing and implementing AI-delivered services is key to reducing the reproduction of social biases.

The paper informs a broad audience who might not be familiar with public administration theories and how those theories can be taken into consideration when adopting AI systems in service delivery.

This research is original, as, to the best of the author’s knowledge, no prior work has combined these concepts in analyzing AI in the public sector.

Work-life flexibility policies (e.g., flextime, telework, part-time, right-to-disconnect, and leaves) are increasingly important to employers as productivity and well-being strategies. However, policies have not lived up to their potential. In this chapter, the authors argue for increased research attention to implementation and work-life intersectionality considerations influencing effectiveness. Drawing on a typology that conceptualizes flexibility policies as offering employees control across five dimensions of the work role boundary (temporal, spatial, size, permeability, and continuity), the authors develop a model identifying the multilevel moderators and mechanisms of boundary control shaping relationships between using flexibility and work and home performance. Next, the authors review this model with an intersectional lens. The authors direct scholars’ attention to growing workforce diversity and increased variation in flexibility policy experiences, particularly for individuals with higher work-life intersectionality, which is defined as having multiple intersecting identities (e.g., gender, caregiving, and race), that are stigmatized, and link to having less access to and/or benefits from societal resources to support managing the work-life interface in a social context. Such an intersectional focus would address the important need to shift work-life and flexibility research from variable to person-centered approaches. The authors identify six research considerations on work-life intersectionality in order to illuminate how traditionally assumed work-life relationships need to be revisited to address growing variation in: access, needs, and preferences for work-life flexibility; work and nonwork experiences; and benefits from using flexibility policies. The authors hope that this chapter will spur a conversation on how the work-life interface and flexibility policy processes and outcomes may increasingly differ for individuals with higher work-life intersectionality compared to those with lower work-life intersectionality in the context of organizational and social systems that may perpetuate growing work-life and job inequality.