Search results

Catherine Althaus, Ph.D., is an Assistant Professor at the University of Victoria in Canada. Her present research interests focus on public policy and public administration as well as bioethics, leadership in the public service, and the interface between politics and religion. She teaches online courses in the Master of Public Administration and Master of Arts in Community Development programs.

Purpose: We critically examine the idea of neurodiversity, or the uniqueness of all brains, as the foundation for the neurodiversity movement, which began as an autism rights movement. We explore the neurodiversity movement's potential to support cross-disability alliances that can transform cultures.

Methods/Approach: A neurodiverse team reviewed literature about the history of the neurodiversity movement and associated participatory research methodologies and drew from our experiences guiding programs led, to varying degrees, by neurodivergent people. We highlight two programs for autistic university students, one started by and for autistics and one developed in collaboration with autistic and nonautistic students. These programs are contrasted with a national self-help group started by and for stutterers that is inclusive of “neurotypicals.”

Findings: Neurodiversity-aligned practices have emerged in diverse communities. Similar benefits and challenges of alliance building within versus across neurotypes were apparent in communities that had not been in close contact. Neurodiversity provides a framework that people with diverse conditions can use to identify and work together to challenge shared forms of oppression. However, people interpret the neurodiversity movement in diverse ways. By honing in on core aspects of the neurodiversity paradigm, we can foster alliances across diverse perspectives.

Implications/ Values: Becoming aware of power imbalances and working to rectify them is essential for building effective alliances across neurotypes. Sufficient space and time are needed to create healthy alliances. Participatory approaches, and approaches solely led by neurodivergent people, can begin to address concerns about power and representation within the neurodiversity movement while shifting public understanding.

The Bureau of Economics in the Federal Trade Commission has a three-part role in the Agency and the strength of its functions changed over time depending on the preferences and ideology of the FTC’s leaders, developments in the field of economics, and the tenor of the times. The over-riding current role is to provide well considered, unbiased economic advice regarding antitrust and consumer protection law enforcement cases to the legal staff and the Commission. The second role, which long ago was primary, is to provide reports on investigations of various industries to the public and public officials. This role was more recently called research or “policy R&D”. A third role is to advocate for competition and markets both domestically and internationally. As a practical matter, the provision of economic advice to the FTC and to the legal staff has required that the economists wear “two hats,” helping the legal staff investigate cases and provide evidence to support law enforcement cases while also providing advice to the legal bureaus and to the Commission on which cases to pursue (thus providing “a second set of eyes” to evaluate cases). There is sometimes a tension in those functions because building a case is not the same as evaluating a case. Economists and the Bureau of Economics have provided such services to the FTC for over 100 years proving that a sub-organization can survive while playing roles that sometimes conflict. Such a life is not, however, always easy or fun.

The world in which companies operate today is volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous, thus subjecting contemporary forms to an array of risks that challenge their viability in an increasingly competitive landscape. Organizations that cling to their traditional ways of operating impede their ability to survive while those able to embrace evolving changes and lever their strategic response capabilities (SRCs) will thrive against the odds. The possession of such capabilities has become a prominent explanation for effective adaptation to the impending changes but is rarely analyzed and tested empirically. Strategic adaptation typically assumes innovation as an important component, but we know little about how the innovative processes interact with the firm’s SRCs. Hence, this study investigates these implied relationships to discern their effects on organizational performance and risk outcomes. It explores the effects of SRCs and the role of innovation as intertwined adaptive mechanisms supporting strategic renewal that can attain superior performance and risk effects. The relationships are analyzed based on a large sample of US manufacturing firms over the decade 2010–2019. The study reveals that firms possessing effective SRCs have the ability to exploit opportunities and deflect risky situations to gain favorable performance and risk outcomes. While innovation indeed plays a role, the precise nature and dynamic effect thereof remain inconclusive.

Adopting an EU policy lens, this chapter primarily addresses the proposed pivotal role of firm-level innovation capability (FLIC) in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) as a stimulant of sustainable development (SD) and green growth in Ireland/Wales. The chapter specifically examines the scale and scope of the green economy (GE), and considers the importance of organizational inherent “green” innovation capabilities (GICs) to achieve it. Underpinning the study is the methodology and concept of utilizing a facilitated cross-border multi-stakeholder learning network to enable knowledge transfer and exchange practices to flourish between partners, acting as a significant predictor of the development of SME GICs structures. Specifically, against the backdrop of the Green Innovation and Future Technologies (“GIFT” hereafter) INTERREG 4A Project, the research assesses how academic–industry partner exchange and inter-group learning and cooperation facilitates the development of GICs in smaller enterprises to realize a sustainable smart green economy in Ireland.

This study tracked rural network activity among regional stakeholders, including government supported agencies, educational institutes, indigenous business representatives, economic support organizations and rural community groups. It explored the relationships that exist between regional stakeholders in a collaborative rural network environment, offering insights into the relationship dynamic between stakeholder organizations.

A longitudinal case study method was utilized to identify the component elements of regional stakeholder network engagement.

Communication, resource sharing and prolonged social interaction were found to be key elements in promoting stakeholder trust. Furthermore, proactive stakeholders improve commitment to network relationships over time. A cyclical flow of these criteria is necessary for congruent understanding to develop between the stakeholders resulting in collaborative network engagement.

Limitations include stakeholder willingness to participate in the research study, potential participant and researcher bias and the possibility that certain features may be particular to the observed network.

The current research demonstrated that stakeholder engagement cannot be assumed in a rural network environment, thus the implementation of the network paradigm into national strategic plans for rural regional development is recommended.

This research contributes to the under-developed area of regional stakeholder network engagement and provides a basis from which to consider the relationships that exist between regional stakeholders in a rural network. A key outcome is the development of a Framework of Regional Stakeholder Network Engagement, which offers insight into how committed network relationships evolve and highlight the factors that promote and hinder sustainable regional stakeholder engagement.