Search results

Institutions have the capacity to constrain and regulate behavior. Social problems and their remedies are not exempt from this reality. Consequently, actors attempting to ameliorate pressing problems must do so within the existing frameworks of acceptable and unacceptable paths toward justice. The current study combines the institutional theory and social movement literatures to highlight how this dilemma affects the resource mobilization process. Elites control resources critical to solving social problems. Yet, they often benefit from the very institutional arrangements that have led to a social problem’s emergence. This contradiction then requires those seeking to alleviate social problems to construct a narrative that will simultaneously entice elites to give without challenging elites’ institutional position. The paper empirically investigates the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and the United Negro College Fund’s (UNCF) efforts to gain support from the Rockefeller family and its foundations between 1928 and 1954. A comparative historical analysis of correspondence records identifies the critical differences that led to the UNCF receiving millions in support from Rockefeller interests while the NAACP was routinely denied funding.

The purpose of this paper is to present the concept of smart globalization and identify links with the Rockefeller Foundation's philanthropic activities in a number of areas, including health, climate change, urbanization, economic insecurities, and basic survival needs.

The paper addresses how a new conceptualization of globalization intersects with the field of foresight by describing the Rockefeller Foundation's approach to addressing complex issues of human development.

A forward looking research component is a valuable organizational structure that can add value by tracking and monitoring current and emerging trends relevant to the Foundation's strategic framework, operational initiatives, and areas of work.

The paper suggests a closer interaction of foresight and development experts and practitioners by suggesting that individuals in both disciplines need to work more closely together to coherently address the multitude, interlocking global challenges of the 21st century.

The paper introduces the notion of “smart globalization” to the foresight community and details how this mindset has influenced and directed the ongoing work of the Rockefeller Foundation.

In recent years, cities have been facing economic, social and environmental crises that need to be prevented and dealt with. The new subject that has been brought up to improve city resistance to crises is urban resilience. The purpose of this study is to compare the resilience of Tehran and Mashhad to identify the strengths and weaknesses of these two cities for better planning in critical situations.

The research methodology is a comparative survey. The importance of the subject was manifested through a literature review. A questionnaire is designed using “the Rockefeller Foundation and ARUP’s model” and the Delphi method for testing 21 research hypotheses to evaluate resilience in the two cities (12 Delphi questionnaires and 232 urban resilience questionnaires). The data is analyzed using independent samples t-test by SPSS software.

The results show that both the cities are weak in terms of resilience indicators and sub-indicators, but Mashhad is more resilient than Tehran.

This paper compares urban resilience in Iran for the first time through a comparative study between two metropolises in the country. The Delphi method also is used for the first time (in Iranian case studies) to obtain the dimensions of urban resilience. By comparing the two cities, we can better understand their strengths and weaknesses.

The purpose of this study is to explain how library and information science (LIS) with a focus on libraries, librarians and LIS associations, developed into becoming a racist institution that supports white supremacy. The central argument is that a philanthropic organization, the Carnegie Foundation, which led the eugenics movement, captured LIS and with the assistance of the American Library Association (ALA), created a library ecosystem that was structurally racist in order to maintain the power of the elites. This study is an exegetical analysis that is explored through the lens of a Christian spirituality conceptual framework. Some tentative solutions to remedy this problem are suggested.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the utilization of the social network, Facebook, as an instrument of stakeholder engagement and dialogic accounting in American charitable foundations, specifically non-profit organizations that are dedicated to philanthropy.

The research motivation involves whether online interaction through Facebook could represent a channel of dialogic accounting that engages organizational stakeholders. This paper aims to understand if this dialogue is geared to generate a consensus necessary to deliberate over decisions that are shared between all stakeholders, or if a divergent and agonistic perspective, which highlights struggles and differences between actors, prevails. The present study employs a form of content analysis that takes into account the Facebook pages of the 100 largest American philanthropic foundations.

The primary goal of the analysis is to examine the discrepancies in terms of how (and how much) large organizations are using Facebook. The study wants to provide more details on which kind of information large organizations are willing to disclose and collect on Facebook, and to evaluate the level and type of interaction between foundations and users.

Further research could build on the present study by providing in-depth case studies and extending the analysis to other social media and other types of organizations.

Social media represent a powerful mechanism to engage stakeholders in a polylogic conversation. However, the scholarly literature confirms that further studies are necessary to understand how companies and organization can exploit this potential.

This chapter contributes to a better knowledge of the role played by the collective entrepreneurship of networks of scientists and doctors in the transfer and adaptation of ideas on hospital organization and management for modern hospitals with new technology, from Western Europe and above all the United States. Literature about new medical technology has demonstrated how medical innovations required changes in human capital and organization in hospitals, to benefit patients in the private and the public hospitals after World War II. The chapter provides an analysis about the origins of the modern North American ideas about professionalization and hospital accreditation, in the consolidation of a modern hospital management and organization. In particular, the focus is in demonstrating how networks of scientists’ entrepreneurs were fundamental drivers in the process of knowledge transfer and the dissemination of these ideas to the large Western European hospitals. More specifically, the chapter studies the diffusion of the new ideas about the large hospital organization and management from the United States to the Western Europe, applied to the Spanish context. Informal networks of doctors applied new ideas developed in the United States to new clinics and hospitals in Spain. Some of them occupied official positions in the key public health administrations and were crucial to introducing the hospital accreditation systems and the US ideas in Spain.

This chapter sketches a new development in responsible investing, namely impact investing. Impact investing, which we define as the entire spectrum of investments deliberately aiming to create shared value, can be seen as an integrative approach to wealth creation through investments. The case of microfinance is used to illustrate this new development.

The chapter combines a viewpoint and a case study that serves to illustrate the practical relevance of the viewpoint.

The chapter starts with a brief overview of the origin and rise of responsible investments, followed by a description of mission-related investments and impact investing as its latest development. Microfinance is presented as a special case, thereby focusing on the investors, the asset allocation and the meaning – and application – of the notion of impact.

The chapter shows that a focus on social and financial returns can be combined without having to make serious financial sacrifices. It also demonstrates that investments can come from investors as diverse as pension funds, foundations or high net-worth individuals.

If impact investing really takes off – particularly supported by institutional money – there will be much more opportunity to tackle social and environmental innovation than without those investments.

The chapter challenges (institutional) investors to evaluate their responsible investment strategy and to rethink their asset allocation. Impact investing can become an important addition to the responsible investment landscape.

This chapter examines ways harm can be done and prevented in Social Investing. It uses a case study based on a real deal to tell a cautionary tale and provides tools to help philanthropist and impact investors find their moral compass through community feedback.