Search results

The authors articulate a posthuman politics of hope to unpack the richly embodied personal experiences and web of relationalities formed through repeated encounters with insects. Interrogating insect speciesism teaches to extend the authors’ compassion and live symbiotically with insects. The authors focus on the narrative of insect decline as impacted by colonialism and white supremacy, enabling insect speciesism to flourish alongside exploitation of other human and nonhuman creatures.

The authors pay particular attention the use of everyday language and framing of insects to “other” them, thereby trivializing and demonizing their existence, including “it's *just* a bug” or “they are pests.” Insect speciesism employs similar rhetoric reinforcing discrimination patterns of other nonhuman animals and humans. The authors focus on the unexpected encounters with insects in domestic spaces, such as an office desk, and through the multispecies space of “the allotment.”

The authors reflect on two possible posthuman futures: one where insect speciesism is entrenched and unrepentant; the second a decolonized society where we aspire to live a more compassionate and non-violent existence amidst these remarkable and brilliant creatures we owe our very existence on Earth.

One of the most profound lessons of the crisis-driven epoch of the Anthropocene is this: our existence on Earth is intimately bound with the flourishing of all forms of life. This includes complex multispecies encounters between humans and insects, an area of enquiry widely neglected across the social sciences. Faced with imminent catastrophic decline and extinction of insect and invertebrate populations, human relationships with these fellow Earthlings are deserving of further attention.

The University of Houston Libraries are developing an expert system to assist library users in selecting appropriate indexes and abstracts to meet their information needs. This project, which is being conducted by the Intelligent Reference Systems Committee, is the first step in a broader plan to develop reference expert systems.

The following classified, annotated list of titles is intended to provide reference librarians with a current checklist of new reference books, and is designed to supplement the RSR review column, “Recent Reference Books,” by Frances Neel Cheney. “Reference Books in Print” includes all additional books received prior to the inclusion deadline established for this issue. Appearance in this column does not preclude a later review in RSR. Publishers are urged to send a copy of all new reference books directly to RSR as soon as published, for immediate listing in “Reference Books in Print.” Reference books with imprints older than two years will not be included (with the exception of current reprints or older books newly acquired for distribution by another publisher). The column shall also occasionally include library science or other library related publications of other than a reference character.

This article probes the dimensions of a newly constructed, modern citizenship within the context of post‐war tensions between a national history that recognised and asserted sexual, racial, and cultural differences and an assimilationist state drive that enshrined one law and one way of life. In particular, I address the question of what we can learn about gender and race relations and their relationship to national identities and citizenship by studying government and educational policies and publications. As recent scholarship on education and citizenship has observed, issues surrounding national identity/identities, citizenship, and education in Australia were critical to state formation from the late 1940s to the 1960s. This research has done much to expand our understanding of the pedagogical and curriculum components of citizenship education and the central role of teachers within the education enterprise. As well, other scholars have informed our understanding of the related processes of post‐war social adjustment of young people. This article draws on a range of theories and perspectives from post‐colonial literature, cultural and performance studies, and critical ‘race’ and feminist theories to analyse the texts and images. A discourse analysis of these documents highlight the complex and competing forms of identity/identities, colonialism, ‘race’, and gender. In particular, I address the following questions: First, what representations of modern young citizens were featured as part of the ‘Australian way of life’ in both state education policies and publications? Second, in what ways were gender and ‘race’ constitutive of Australian citizenship? Third, how do the images and texts in these publications manifest the multiple performances of education in the 1950s and 1960s? Although this study focuses on education reforms, the results of the research speak to wider issues of historical representation, gender, and culture and the complicated relationship between state policy, nationalism, and reform.

Much of the contemporary literature surrounding the barriers to community self‐help in the advanced economies has placed great emphasis on capital‐orientated barriers, such as a household's access to financial capital, time capital, human capital and social capital. Focusing explicitly on one‐to‐one mutual aid, and drawing on rich qualitative data from two urban communities in the UK, this paper aims to re‐visit the barriers to participation that prevent households from doing more for others in their community. In particular, the paper explores a range of entrenched social taboos that underpin the contested spaces of mutual aid. These include: “being aburden to others”, “false expectations/ inappropriate gestures”, “being taken advantage of” and “being unable to say no”. Furthermore, the paper also addresses the potentially problematic implications that the nature of work undertaken through mutual aid has for the social relationships that are involved. Despite finding previous UK‐based research findings focused on capital barriers to be highly appropriate when considering mutual aid, the paper argues that the current emphasis placed on these barriers in policy and practice is disproportionate. To address this imbalance, the paper concludes that a greater awareness of socially‐orientated barriers must be forthcoming if a more nuanced and accurate reading of mutual aid is to be achieved.

The research that is used to inform the findings of the paper is drawn from 100 in‐depth semi‐structured questionnaires conducted within households in the urban wards of West Knighton and Saffron in the city of Leicester, UK. The methods are designed to generate both quantitative and qualitative findings that engage explicitly with the informal work practices of households.

The paper explores a range of entrenched social taboos that underpin the contested spaces of mutual. These include: “being a burden to others”, “false expectations/inappropriate gestures”, “being taken advantage of” and “being unable to say no”. The main conclusions argue that both social barriers and capital‐based barriers to participation in mutual aid must be given more equal consideration in future academic and policy‐making discourse.

The qualitative nature of the research makes it difficult to meaningfully extrapolate the findings beyond the case studies used.

The research focused on the informal coping strategy of mutual aid offers a deeper insight into this coping strategy. In exploring the various capital and social barriers to participation, the findings offer ways for popular, academic and political communities to reflect on their own approaches to informal volunteerism, and if appropriate these can inform future approaches tasked with tackling these barriers and harnessing mutual aid in society.

In discussing the barriers to participation, the paper gives new insight into the contested geographies of mutual aid at the household and community level. To successfully overcome these barriers and further promote mutualism and community self‐help is seen to be both desirable and necessary particularly following the formal economic crisis that has raised serious questions for the economy and society in recent years.

The research not only adds robustness to previous emerging findings related to the resource‐based barriers to participation in mutual aid, but it also constructively asserts the relevance and centrality of social taboos. The paper argues that these social taboos must form a core point of analyses whenever barriers to greater levels of participation in mutual aid are discussed.

This paper discusses recent developments in asset‐backed financing and proposes a method for securitizing the bankers' acceptance market. It then derives a model for the pricing of these securitized bankers' acceptances (SECBAs) incorporating a random arrival and maturity process. The paper concludes with a discussion of institutional factors and alternative methods for implementing our proposal.

U.S. academic centers for quality and productivity provide many benefits for academic and business communities. The centers support the diffusion of new technologies and business practices that allow U.S. businesses to improve their competitiveness. These centers also provide opportunitiesto improve the education process through innovative research, leading edge course work, and student involvement and compensation. Although establishing and operating academic quality and productivity centers provides many challenges for involved faculty, the U.S. economy and culture typically embrace academic centers and associated activities. Now, changes in the Russian economy are paving the way for consideration of academic centers in Russia. Academic centers for quality and productivity can provide Russian businesses with assistance in their efforts to compete in the global economy. However, the Russian economy does not provide the same infrastructure and support for academic centers as the U.S. does, and the introduction of academic centers in Russia may be faced with impediments unfamiliar to their U.S. counterparts. A case involving the establishment of academic centers at a Russian university is discussed to provide insight into some of these issues.