Search results

There is no doubt that there is a need for new traditions, that is, wisdoms for enhanced responsible business in Africa. As one of the oldest world economies, Africa has a rich history of responsible indigenous business traditions that have sustained and supported her people’s principled business entrepreneurship over the centuries. However, there is little knowledge about these African responsible indigenous business traditions in the international literature. Currently, internationally familiar Western responsible business traditions dominate global responsible management knowledge and practice. The chapter explores responsible indigenous business traditions amongst the Sesotho-speaking people of Southern Africa called Basotho, bringing to light an aspect of responsible indigenous business management knowledge and practice from Southern Africa. These Basotho’s responsible indigenous business traditions embedded in Mokorotlo business model are Seahlolo, that is, communal, or mutual aid sharing, Letsema, that is, communal work party, Tsimo-ea-lira, that is, the field of enemies, Moelela, that is, food paid for work at threshing time, and Mafisa, that is, communal livestock loaning. The chapter concludes by suggesting that these Mokorotlo business traditions are prima facie attractive to be taken seriously in the global responsible management knowledge and practice.

This chapter examines the evolution and legacy of African socialism and the features of postcolonial educational transformation in Africa. Drawing on critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature on African socialism, the chapter discusses the role of the state in educational transformations with illustrations from selected countries. The failed promises of African socialism and elements of continuity emerge within a complex suite of factors that influenced postcolonial development in education and other sectors. Empirical research on educational transformation in African countries offers important insights into the difficulties of implementing socialist and other development policies in African countries influenced by global trends.

Most research on language acquisition using technology generally investigates collegiate language learners. However, it is unclear as to how well these findings apply to refugee learners, who sometimes have experienced interrupted schooling and had little exposure to technologies found in the resettlement context. Little research concentrates on the use of technology to aid language acquisition among this population. By better understanding the digital literacies refugees already possess, the author are better able to bridge this digital divide (Thorne & Reinhardt, 2008; Warschauer, 2002) and move toward researching how to capitalize on the technological skills refugees already possess in order to facilitate language learning. Therefore, this chapter reviews available literature on how refugees worldwide use multiple forms of technology, their levels of access to such technology, and considerations for pre- and post-resettlement technological options. It identifies best practices for employing technology to facilitate language acquisition in light of the multifaceted constraints refugees face. It concludes by outlining the suitability of different technologies as a means of facilitating language development within a myriad of contexts and gives recommendations for future research on using technology to facilitate language learning at all proficiency levels.

South Africa’s mixed, pluralistic legal order demands a nuanced approach to cultural expertise in litigation. Culture in general and cultural expertise in particular have always played an important role in all areas of law, both state and non-state, and a rich collection of jurisprudence is available to serve as illustration. Even though both the common law and the customary law are both recognized legal systems, they are treated differently by the judiciary. The general rule is that judicial notice must be taken of the common law rules and that judicial notice of customary law may only be taken “in so far as such law can be ascertained readily and with sufficient certainty.” The ascertainment of customary law provides a challenge to the judiciary because of its adaptive inherent flexibility and indeterminate nature, especially where the rules are oral or so-called “living” customary law. Cultural expertise also plays an important role in the case of non-state law. A considerable quantity of case law exists where the courts have considered expert evidence regarding the content of certain religious legal systems to provide protection to litigants claiming that they are subject to those systems. The aim of this contribution is to investigate the diverse approaches of the South African courts when it comes to the admissibility of expert evidence in cases where culture (both custom and religion in both state and non-state law) is relevant. The fact that the South African legal system has its roots firmly in Western law and has been confronted with cultural diversity for a very long time might provide some lessons to the Western world, even if those lessons are only to prevent it from making the same mistakes as the South African legal system has made or might still be doing.

Post-apartheid South Africa has some of the highest educational and economic disparities in the world. Taylor Salisbury’s (2016) analysis of the National Income Dynamics Study reveals that South Africa’s unequal distributions of income and wealth by race are likely to worsen over time, with Africans the most disenfranchised by low-quality education and low monthly earnings. What is missing from Salisbury’s discussion is that definitions of quality education are analogous to Western democracy, epistemologies, and curriculum. Township schools where most African children and youth attend do not draw upon African epistemologies, values, and languages to support the development of Africans’ productive capacities. Increasingly, capacities are only considered “productive” if they align with modernity and values of the labor market. In this chapter, I argue that South Africa is schooling inequality through the exclusion of African epistemological traditions and the inclusion of mainly Western liberal principles. The notion of divided (epistemological) space – separate, distinct, and apportioned – is examined from the research data I collected with African (in this case Xhosa) primary and secondary students, teachers, and principals in South Africa’s longest-standing township. The intent is to orient the field of comparative and international education to critically problematize discourse that identifies equality as central to social change but that ignores indigenous constructions of democracy informed by different epistemological traditions. This work builds on the growing argument about the need for comparative educators to learn from indigenous perspectives (Freeman, 2004), indigenous knowledge systems (Kubow, 2007), and different educational traditions for comparative study (Assié-Lumumba, 2017).

There are still many different theoretical approaches and practical interpretations about what an integrated report is. Starting from this premise, the overall purpose of this chapter is to critically analyze the relationship between integrated reporting (IR) and social/sustainability disclosure. Indeed, although some scholars considered IR as a tool to improve the sustainability approach of the companies allowing to disclose more relevant social information, others are more critical about the potentiality of IR to improve social disclosure. Therefore, the general research question is: Is there a natural link between IR and social disclosure (true love) or is the IR a practice to “normalize” the social disclosure and accounting (forced marriage)?

In the attempt to provide a preliminary answer to the research question, the chapter analyzes what is the approach of three categories: (1) academics; (2) soft-regulators; and (3) companies. From the methodological point of view, a mixed method of analysis has been adopted.

From the analysis of the three different points of view, IR can be considered as a “contested concept” because of the heterogeneous and sometimes conflicting interpretations and implementation that are done on this type of report. This leads to relevant theoretical and practical implications.