Search results

The purpose of this paper is to establish the evidence for, the why and how recent austerity policy atmosphere associated with the UK government affected environmental protection decisions within planning in Scotland.

A qualitative analysis based on perspectives gathered via questionnaire survey targeted at stakeholders involved in planning in Scotland was undertaken. The questionnaire responses were analysed thematically, supplemented by using statistical tests of significance and variance to show how responses differed across participants.

The evidence showed that austerity policy atmosphere resulted in a pervasive neoliberal imperative of resuscitating the economy; whilst producing subtle and adverse effects on environmental decisions. This was best understood within a neo-Gramscian perspective of hegemony, borrowed from the field of political economy of states.

The gathered views were constrained within unknown biases that the participants may have had; and because the case study approach was not equipped to generalise the results beyond the study, more research testing cause-effect between the austerity and selected environmental parameters is needed, from various contexts.

Decision-making frameworks should explicitly acknowledge the unique pressures during austerity periods; and contemplate resilient decision-making frameworks that can withstand the hegemonic tendencies which prioritise economic goals above environmental ones.

Whilst the area of austerity’s impacts on the environment remains poorly evidenced, empirically, this seminal paper uses robust analysis to establish how the austerity policy atmosphere affects environmental decisions. This is insight into what may be happening in other similar situations outside Scotland, raising concern as to whether and how we should approach the challenge of hegemonic ideas.

This article argues that the transformation of the economies of Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) has to be understood in the context of the dynamics and development of the global economy. The analysis draws on the notion of combined and uneven development in which there has recently been renewed interest. Too often this notion has been a slogan that lacks substance, but the article elaborates how change is a dynamic process of interaction between economic change and political and social forces. The neoliberal analysis, as well as some Marxist accounts, are criticised for being deterministic, linear and prescriptive. This account emphasises the institutional dimension and role of the state as being critical to understanding the varied outcomes between and within economies in CEE in terms of the way that it has mediated the reinsertion of these countries into the global economy. The story focuses on agency, a neglected aspect of analysis, in emphasising the ideological and discursive aspects of transformation, which attempt to justify and reinforce economic and material changes and to close down debate about alternatives. Crucially, the form and content of development, in its widest sense, cannot be known or predicted because the process of transformation has been contested by different factions of the ruling class and by workers. Despite the marginalisation of organised labour in mainstream and many radical accounts, it is argued that trade unions and workers have been central to the process and outcomes of transformation.

The purpose of this paper is to enhance Bourdieu’s Theory of Practice for the analysis of power in multinational corporations. Therefore, they adopt and apply the Theory of Practice on power struggles within the board as the key field of power within the multinational company (MNC), which is interwoven with power struggles at the intraorganizational and interorganizational level of an MNC and its environment.

This paper describes the main elements of Bourdieu’s Theory of Practice and demonstrates their applicability to power struggles in MNCs, particularly through the development of a multi-level framework. This argument is illustrated by the case of a large German MNC’s supervisory board.

Extending Bourdieu’s Theory of Practice to the analysis of power in MNCs provides several advantages. Above all, we show the relevance of the board as the key field of power within MNCs that influences and is influenced by power constellations and power struggles throughout the MNC and its environment. Thereby, a more differentiated picture of (key) actors involved in power struggles in MNCs, and a deeper comprehension of the very nature of power in MNCs is achieved.

Placing the supervisory board at the center implies that our framework is relevant to the study of not only power in MNCs but also boards. In addition, the authors arrive at practical implications for organizational actors and politics. As they concentrate on the presentation and illustration of the conceptual framework, the discussion of its methodological applicability options, as well as the integration of the various, detailed empirical findings of the previous MNC literature remain limited.

In contrast to earlier studies, this paper introduces a theoretical perspective that is not limited to either the micro-, meso- or macro-level of organizational analysis, but includes them and balances aspects of structure and agency well. The value of this fresh perspective on power in MNCs and its capability to deal with the complexity of this specific type of organization is demonstrated.

Keeping Spivak’s essay “Can the Subaltern Speak?” in mind, the purpose of this paper is to examine the itinerant curriculum theory (ICT) as a subaltern momentum unveiling how ICT informs subaltern ways of being and thus, potentially, the research lens for qualitative approaches. In this context, the paper examines how curriculum as an ideological devise produces an epistemicide – the killing of knowledge – an epistemological havoc cooked up daily in the process of qualitative studies promoting and legitimizing a specific modern western Eurocentric episteme.

The paper dissects modernity as a colonial zone, creating “abyssal thinking,” a eugenic system of visible and invisible distinctions that legitimizes the visible, i.e. “this side of the line” and produces “the other side of the line” as “non-existent.”

The paper urges the need to decolonize leading modern western Eurocentric counter-hegemonic traditions such as Marxism.

The paper analyzes ICT’s contribution to subaltern struggles, asserts ICT’s commitment against any form of canon, grabs the educational matrix of qualitative research as an eugenic beast from its very own ideological horns, alerting the need to examine any study of education and society within the ideological eugenic political economy and modes of production of systems pillared by poverty, exploitation, segregation, and intellectual rape.

The transformations in the existing forms of governmentality and power regimes are deeply rooted within the political economy of advanced neoliberalism, having profound implications in the governance matrix. The new rationalities and instrumentalities of governance involve ‘governing without government’ (Rhodes, 1996) following the delegitimisation and deconstruction of the Keynesian Welfare State and the gradual enactment of what Jessop (2002) calls the Schumpeterian Competition State. This chapter throws open the play field for competing standpoints on governing the mega corporates. Various theorists consider that there is emptiness within the existing global regulatory armoury concerning the operational activities of TNCs. The convolution of ‘steering’ in this poly-centred, globalised societies with its innate uncertainty makes it tricky to keep an eye on the fix of ‘who actually steers whom’ and ‘with what means’. There also appears to be huge disinclination to spot systemic technical description of the evolving modern institutional structure of economic regulation in a composite and practical manner. Thus, the complexity of international issues, their overlapping nature and the turmoil within the arena in which they surface defy tidy theorizing about effective supervision.

This brings in the wider questions dealt with in the chapter – Is globalisation then a product of material conditions of fundamental technical and economic change or is it collective construct of an artifact of the means we have preferred to arrange political and economic activity? The new reflexive, self-regulatory and horizontal spaces of governance are getting modelled following the logic of competitive market relations whereby multiple formally equal actors (acting or aspiring to act as sources of authority) consult, trade and compete over the deployment of various instruments of authority both intrinsically and in their relations with each other (Shamir, 2008). The chapter also looks into these messy and fluid intersections to situate the key actors at the heart of processes of ‘rearticulation’ and ‘recalibration’ of different modes of governance which operates through a somewhat fuzzy amalgamation of the terrain by corporates, state hierarchy and networks all calibrating and competing to pull off the finest probable’s in metagovernance landscape. Unambiguously, this chapter seeks to elaborate on an institutional-discursive conceptualization of governance while stitching in and out of the complex terrain a weave of governances for modern leviathan – the global corporates.

The transformative potential of CSR is a far-reaching question. It has been analysed through the lens of the inclusion of stakeholders concerned by social and environmental issues in political CSR fora such as multi-stakeholder initiatives or, on the contrary, their exclusion from these processes. This paper aims to highlight the transformation or status quo produced by political corporate social responsibility (PCSR) initiatives, the extent of transformation being a function of the degree of inclusiveness, or conversely of exclusion, of these initiatives. From a promise of inclusion to the inability of corporate-society fora to act on the actual levers of marginalisation, PCSR scholars have developed contrasted views on these initiatives.

This led us to elaborate a hypothesis that such initiatives intrinsically act as levers in the recurring marginalisation of directly affected stakeholders. Drawing on an empirical study of the CSR discourses of mining industry stakeholders – both corporations and civil society – involved in an informal multi-stakeholder initiative, this paper discusses the disconnect between its representatives and the needs of the directly affected stakeholders.

To explore this disconnect, the authors draw on the voices and causes framework developed by Boltanski et al. (1984), which provided us with a relational system involving victims, guilty parties, complainants and judges.

Accordingly, the authors highlight a set of three interrelated marginalisation mechanisms (i.e. the capture of the role of the judge by PCSR initiatives, the side-lining of victims’ needs by complainants, the intertwining of the guilty party and the judge), which empirically support the lack-of-inclusiveness hypothesis.

Critiques of international business (IB) have long pointed to the weaknesses in the understanding of context. This has ignited debate on the understanding of institutions and how they “matter” for IB. Yet how institutions matter ultimately depends on how IB applies institutional theory. It is argued that institutional-based research is dominated by a narrow set of approaches, largely overlooking institutional perspectives that account for institutional diversity. This paper aims to forward the argument that IB research should lend greater attention to comparing the topography of institutional configurations by bringing political economy “back in” to the IB domain.

Using principal components analysis and hierarchical cluster analysis, the authors provide IB with a taxonomy of capitalist institutional diversity which defines the landscape of political economies.

The authors show institutional diversity is characterised by a range of capitalist clusters and configuration arrangements, identifying four clusters with distinct modes of capitalism as well as specifying intra-cluster differences to propose nine varieties of capitalism. This paper allows IB scholars to lend closer attention to the institutional context within which firms operate. If the configurations of institutions “matter” for IB scholarship, then clearly, a quantitative blueprint to assess institutional diversity remains central to the momentum of such “institutional turn.”

This paper provides a comprehensive survey of institutional theory, serving as a valuable resource for the application of context within international business. Further, our taxonomy allows international business scholars to utilise a robust framework to examine the diverse institutional context within which firms operate, whilst extending to support the analysis of broader socioeconomic outcomes. This taxonomy therefore allows international business scholars to utilise a robust framework to examine the institutional context within which firms operate.

This study aims to explore the conflicting issues of carbon accounting and trading practices in China through the lens of agonistic democracy.

Based on a framework of three interrelated levels, this study explores emitting entity carbon accounting debates and discussions in mitigating climate change. Interview data were collected from 20 emitting entity participants and external auditors.

This study identifies irreconcilable conflicts between emitting entities and the government in carbon accounting and trading activities. Under the strong influence of government power, emitting entities portray themselves as “responsible” and “legitimate” state-owned enterprises. This study further identifies possible democratic spaces and reveals the potential for agonistic discourse and a fallacy of “consensus” and monologues in institutional space. If the emitting entity and government can overcome their participation challenges, this would significantly facilitate vibrant and agonistic discourse in carbon activities and pave the way for democratic spaces.

This study demonstrates the potential and limitations of applying agonistic democracy and the significance of participation in institutional spaces in government-led carbon accounting and trading issues. It enriches prior research on promoting democratic participation in carbon accounting from the agonistic democracy perspective.

This study aims to discover the role of accounting and media in hegemonic discourse for divestment valuation of PT Freeport Indonesia shares.

This study employs data from 608 news articles from 5 national media. This study uses Gramsci's concept of hegemony and Laclau and Mouffe's hegemonic discourse to explore the ideological role of accounting in the formation of historical blocs and investigate the contestants' discursive strategies through the chains of equivalence and difference.

The incumbent presidential candidate, by involving political and intellectual actors, has succeeded in taking over and shifting PT Freeport Indonesia's hegemony to maintain its power, through the ideology of divestment and accounting. The media played a role in the victory of the pro-divestment bloc in the hegemonic divestment discourse contest. The pro-divestment bloc's discursive strategy uses more formal and technical language styles than the anti-divestment bloc, which uses informal language styles. The pro-divestment bloc uses the key signifiers of low price, improved financial performance, nationalization and welfare, as opposed to the anti-divestment bloc, with the key signifiers of high price, declining financial performance and neoliberalist colonization.

The implications of this research may encourage accounting academics to contribute to emancipatory social movements in the struggle for hegemony. The implication for policy makers is the importance of involving the public, intellectual actors, political actors and the media in supporting diverse state strategic policies in the national interest.

This paper contributes to Gramsci's theory of hegemony and Laclau and Mouffe's hegemonic discourse to understand the role of accounting and media in a nationalization project as an emancipatory social movement, as well as a hegemonic shifting political movement.