Search results

NATIONALIZED industries occupy a key position in the national economy. In 1968, capital spending in the public sector was half the nation's capital spending of £7 700 million, and approaching half of that was incurred by public corporations. The whole economy depends upon their reliable, successful and above all, efficient operation. Unless they are successful, the country will be pulled down and our national standard of living seriously reduced.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the theory and practice of stakeholder democracy. After examining the liberal notion of representative democracy, the paper seeks to identify the democratic deficit associated with the shareholder and stakeholder approaches to corporate governance. Investigating stakeholder democracy in nationalized industries in both market‐ and state‐capitalist societies, the argument presented is that neither type of society has significantly increased stakeholder involvement in decision making.

The paper uses a Hegelian dialectical approach to stakeholder democracy; relying on such modes of analysis as identifying internal contradictions.

The paper concludes that stakeholder democracy is both real and nominal in the political sphere, but restricted and contested in the private and public sectors in the economic sphere.

The paper calls for the setting‐up of democratic structures to oversee the production and distribution of the goods and services necessary for human wellbeing.

The paper investigates the relatively neglected topic of stakeholder democracy, using a Hegelian dialectical methodology. In the context of the 2007/2008 financial crisis and its recessionary aftermath, the paper calls for a radical re‐evaluation of corporate governance.

“All things are in a constant state of change”, said Heraclitus of Ephesus. The waters if a river are for ever changing yet the river endures. Every particle of matter is in continual movement. All death is birth in a new form, all birth the death of the previous form. The seasons come and go. The myth of our own John Barleycorn, buried in the ground, yet resurrected in the Spring, has close parallels with the fertility rites of Greece and the Near East such as those of Hyacinthas, Hylas, Adonis and Dionysus, of Osiris the Egyptian deity, and Mondamin the Red Indian maize‐god. Indeed, the ritual and myth of Attis, born of a virgin, killed and resurrected on the third day, undoubtedly had a strong influence on Christianity.

THAT ADVOCATE of nationalisation — the Rt. Hon. Wedge‐wood Benn — wants to nationalise the aircraft industry. And they, in turn, declare that they have no desire to be nationalised; many with tongue in cheek because they are already jockeying for positions on the National Boards.

Iron and steel is an old industry. As a cyclical and a strategically important industry, it has long been subject to extensive government intervention in most countries, including Britain. When Labour won the general election in 1945, it was already pledged to nationalise several industries, including coal and steel. But steel had a lower priority than coal; the labour movement had not agreed a plan for steel nationalisation, which became the most complex and bitterly contested of the post‐war nationalisations.

This paper aims to explore the increasing role of financialisation on investment decisions in the power generation industry in Great Britain (GB). Such decisions affect society, and the relative role of financialisation in these macro-levels decisions has not been explored from a historical perspective.

The paper draws on historical material and interview data. Specifically, we use an approach inspired by institutional sociology drawing on elements of Scott’s (2014) pillars of institutions. Applying concepts stemming from regulative and normative pressures, we explore changes in investments over the analysis period to determine forces which institutionalised practices – such as accounting – into investment in power generation.

Investments in electricity generation have different levels of public and private participation. However, the common logics that underpin such investment practices provide an important understanding of political-economics and institutional change in the UK. Thus, the heightened use of accounting in investment has been, to some extent, a contributory factor to the power supply problems now faced by the British public.

This paper contributes to prior literature on the effects of financialisation on society, adding power generation/energy supply to the many societal level issues already explored. It also provides brief but unique insights into the changing nature of the role of accounting in an industry sector over an extended timeframe.

The recently announced appointment of Mr. Kenneth Sharp as head of the Government Accountancy Service and Accountant Adviser to the Department of Industry may have brought to some people's notice a fact of which few in the accountancy profession seem to be aware, namely that there are in central government a not inconsiderable number of qualified accountants performing functions similar to those performed by practising accountants in the profession. Much of the work which they do brings them into contact with their professional colleagues outside the Civil Service and some description of the work of one of the larger groups of qualified accountants in central government may therefore be of some interest to industrialists and their financial advisers.

In this paper I intend to try to explain briefly and in general terms the reasons for there being a Department of Energy. I will follow that by showing why the Department needs to have information about energy R&D and finally how the Department collects and holds information on energy R&D.

This chapter presents a discussion and an analysis of the literature on nationalization of international business. National governments have justified the expropriation and nationalization of the operations of foreign multinational in their jurisdiction based on the social responsibilities as welfare providers, and safeguarding the short- and long-term interest of their citizens.

There are multiple studies that show the processes and impacts of nationalizations and privatizations (also called denationalizations) worldwide. This chapter analyses specific cases to the light of existing international business literature and proposes prepositions for future studies.

This chapter presents an analysis where theories of internationalization could be used to analyze specific advantages of States and domestic investors when assuming ownership of operations of international business in their national territory.

The context, processes, and consequences of nationalization of foreign firms historically, economically, and politically have generally a correlation either with political changes, and macroeconomic scenarios related to scarcity and uncertainty in the international market of extractive industries, or with nationalistic political views in national governments.

The FFF is turning into a particularly bitter battle, judging from the latest front‐line reports. FFF? What else but the Fight on Form Filling which is being waged by battlions of British businessmen against entrenched ‘bureaucratic terrorists’.