Search results

How can large international financial firms go green in authentic ways? What enhances ‘Net Zero action’? Changes in global banks, fund managers, and insurance firms are at the heart of green finance. External change pressures – combined with problematic firm predispositions – exacerbate barriers to change and promote scepticism about authentic Net Zero change. Field research reveals main elements, connections, and interactions of this question by considering financial firms as complex socio-technical systems (Mitleton-Kelly, 2003). An interdisciplinary/holistic narrative approach (De Bakker et al., 2019) is adopted to design a conceptual framework that can support a green ‘behavioural theory of the financial firm’ (green BTFF). The BTFF presents an international version (Peng, 2001) of the resource-based view (RBV) of the firm (Barney, 1991; Hart, 1995; Teece et al., 1997).

The approach of this chapter is aimed at closing knowledge gaps and realign values in financial markets and society. By raising awareness about organised hypocrisy and facades (Brunsson, 1993; Cho et al., 2015; Schoeneborn et al., 2020) in financial firms the chapter aims at overcoming the gap between ‘talking’ and ‘walking’ in the financial sector. The chapter defines testable firm-level hypotheses for ‘Green Finance’ (Poterba, 2021) as well as – by implication – tests for ‘greenwashing’.

Parents ‘matter’ to schools for their child’s education and parents ‘matter’ in relation to their child’s wellbeing. Indeed, in his synthesis of over 800 studies, Hattie (2008) equated the benefits of parental engagement with schools as being equivalent to adding two or three further years to their education. The aim of this chapter, therefore, is to look at parents in relation to wellbeing through positive education and, as part of this, the concept of positive psychology parenting too. Drawing on scientific research, the benefits of positive psychology to parents and families, alongside some of the ‘why’ and ‘how’ parents can better engage with schools, will be presented. A Positive Psychology in Practice case study of Bounce Back, a freely available, online introduction to positive psychology designed to give parents and carers an introduction to several different concepts, approaches, and hands-on techniques, based on the principles of positive psychology, will also be provided. This case study will also present Bounce Back as an intervention, giving parents and carers practical advice on how best to use this online resource, as well as information on how to implement some of the wider ideas from positive education at home to help them better understand, and intervene in, their own and their family’s wellbeing.

This chapter is on positive education in primary schools (including pre-schools), and how programmes that use interventions from positive psychology (PPIs) can have positive effects (academic and for well-being), on children in this age group (up to 11 years). It explores some of the key challenges of implementing PPIs at younger ages and why, compared to secondary schools, limited studies of PPIs in pre- and primary schools exist. Based on the author’s personal experience of successfully delivering a multiple PPI (mPPI) in a primary school in the United Kingdom, the chapter also presents a case study. In particular, a mPPI known as Hummingbird Primary, adapted from the Hummingbird Project which has successfully been delivered in high schools; see Chapter 3. The case study presents an overview of the mPPI, the impact it had and some of the lessons learned. The chapter concludes with recommendations for educators wishing to implement PPIs in a whole primary school setting.

Four reputed leaders for the coming years in the field of special education for individuals with emotional and behavioral disorders (EBD) each with a slightly different perspective on the field were asked to respond independently to a prompt asking what does special education mean for students with EBD and what is being done and how do we maintain tradition? The contributors' responses to the prompt are presented and then summarized across the essays. A remarkable consistency emerges across the independent essays. In addition to the tradition of providing a free and appropriate education in the least restrictive environment, the contributors identify needs to support teachers serving this population. Needs in teacher training and the expertise required to meet the needs of individuals with EBD are outlined as well as potential contributions of technology to carry out specific tasks. We conclude with a call for increased advocacy for use of the knowledge that we currently possess and that which will soon be discovered to support students with EBD as well as their teachers. We also note that the contributors' names are listed alphabetically to acknowledge the equality of each person to the final product.

In Chapter 1, we critically reviewed the foundations of the free enterprise capital system (FECS), which has been successful primarily because of its wealth and asset accumulation potentiality and actuality. In this chapter, we critically argue that this capacity has been grounded upon the profit maximization (PM) theories, models, and paradigms of FECS. The intent of this chapter is not anti-PM. The PM models of FECS have worked and performed well for more than 200 years of the economic history of the United States and other developed countries, and this phenomenon is celebrated and featured as “market performativity.” However, market performativity has not truly benefitted the poor and the marginalized; on the contrary, market performativity has wittingly or unwittingly created gaping inequalities of wealth, income, opportunity, and prosperity. Critical thinking does not combat PM but challenges it with alternative models of profit sharing that promote social wealth, social welfare, social progress, and opportunity for all, which we explore here. Economic development without social progress breeds economic inequality and social injustice. Economic development alone is not enough; we should create a new paradigm in which economic development is the servant of social progress, not vice versa. Such a paradigm shift involves integrating the creativity and innovativity of market performativity and the goals and drives of social performativity together with PM, that is, from market performativity to social performativity.