Search results

The twenty-first century has seen a wave of white-collar and corporate crime scandals and the economic crisis associated with the home mortgage foreclosure debacle is but one prominent example. Understanding who is to blame for this crisis and what steps can be taken in the future to limit a reoccurrence are important topics of inquiry. Similarly important is understanding public perceptions associated with the mortgage foreclosure crisis, especially since public sentiments are potentially important in influencing crime control policy. Using data from a random sample survey of American adults, this chapter examines the degree to which the public blames banks/lenders as opposed to individual homebuyers for the American foreclosure problems as well as the extent to which they favor specific control and prevention strategies such as government limitations on executive pay or bonuses and legislation aimed at increasing the regulation of business.

Writing shortly after the economic turmoil that began in earnest since the fall of 2008, it is clear to any reader what is meant when reference is made to “the” crisis. The financial crisis that developed out of the implosion of the United States housing bubble that reached its peek around 2006–2007 no doubt can be told, in its origins and consequences, in terms of a complex economic tale. But even and especially for nonexperts, the crisis need not to be argued to be of special significance in any more detail than to consider the reality that, on a near worldwide scale, millions of people have lost their jobs and/or their homes, while governments have been scrambling to develop appropriate policies to rectify conditions which they had helped to create.

In the last 10 years or so, a growing body of research has highlighted the importance of social movements as the mechanism through which fields change or new fields emerge. This article contributes to this body of research by studying how an organization was able to promote institutional change from the center of a field by channeling the legitimacy generated by local religious movements. Data comes from the archives of a special commission within the Catholic Church that developed rules for adjudicating miracles performed by candidates to sainthood. The social movement is composed of candidates and their supporters who mobilized local communities using miracles. The period of the analysis was the aftermath of the Protestant Schism, when long-established practices and beliefs were fundamentally challenged. By approving miracles that created ties between individuals that spanned across kinship and social status boundaries, the commission was able to channel legitimacy into the wounded core of the Church. At the same time, receiving Rome’s approval reduced the competition the candidate’s supporters faced from other religious activists. The noncontentious interaction that occurred between the two actors gave birth to the field of modern sainthood. The main implication for organization theory is that, even in the absence of conflict, a new environment and ideology can emerge endogenously from the center of a field and transform both the organization and the social movement.

The simplest part of sound preservation involves technology and its application. The real complexities lie in a mix of social legal, and financial issues. The social issues include how archivists, curators, librarians, historians, or anyone with limited engineering, computing, and other technical training can evaluate competing claims and risks. The legal issues include copyright and the risks that an institution may choose to take about what constitutes fair use and preservation copying. The financial issues include how much of what quality of preservation an institution can afford, and for how many of the items in its collection.

RLG is a not-for-profit international alliance of about 160 members, including universities and colleges, national and public research libraries, archives, historical societies, museums, and independent research collections devoted to improving access to information that supports research and learning. Founded in 1974 as the Research Libraries Group by four visionary library directors from Columbia, Harvard and Yale universities and the New York Public Library, the consortium formed to allow research institutions to tackle tough challenges via collaborative action. Key issues were managing the transition from locally self-sufficient and independently comprehensive collections to a system of interdependencies that would preserve and enhance the capacity for research in all fields of knowledge and improving the ability to locate and retrieve relevant research resources (RLG, 1986). At its inception, four activity areas were identified for collaborative action: cooperative bibliographic control and access; effective mechanisms for sharing information and resources among member institutions; expanded and coordinated collection development efforts; and preservation of the collections, either in the original or surrogate format.