Search results

In this final chapter, we explore the ever-evolving 21st century landscape where ethics drive community development toward resilience and progress. Drawing inspiration from the subheadings mapping our journey, we traverse international case studies spanning Canada, Brazil, Sweden, Kenya, China, Australia, Antarctica, and India. Through these global insights, we uncover the impacts of dynamic forces on communities worldwide, navigating ethical dilemmas and opportunities. We present strategies tailored to diverse continent-specific needs, explore inclusive governance models, and highlight the transformative power of ethical engagement. This journey underscores the vital role of resilience and concludes with a global call to embrace ethical approaches for inclusive community development and a sustainable future.

Higher education institutions (HEIs) in Australia shape the country's economic, social, and political landscape and equip students with the skills they need to succeed in ever-changing work environments. Embedded within Australian HEIs are sets of values that reflect and reinforce collective Australian values, which describe the shared beliefs of the leadership, academic staff, students, and the local community. These shared values then direct all members of the university community. Using a top-tier university in Melbourne, Australia, as a case study, this chapter explores how the values of accessibility, inclusion, and collaboration are embedded into the curriculum, teaching, and assessment practices. Relationship-building and positive student interaction within learning contexts are also crucial to learning contexts in higher education (HE) and are essentially driven by values in HE. Furthermore, values identified in this chapter align with broader Australian values relating to fairness, equity, cooperation, and support. Utilizing the experience and reflection of four contributing academics in HE, this chapter offers ideas and strategies on how these values can be fundamentally rooted within learning and teaching programs, thereby increasing student engagement, interaction, and success. This chapter acknowledges that the needs of contemporary education have changed, as the HE sector now accommodates students from all walks of life. Additionally, a fundamental premise of the discourse is that learner diversity can be accommodated more effectively if it is spurred by values that respect and appreciate learner diversity.

This beginning chapter offers a comprehensive overview of community development, tracing its historical roots and societal implications. It underscores community development’s role in fostering social cohesion and positive change. Beginning with its foundational principles of collective action, participation, and empowerment, the chapter delves into its evolution in response to industrialization and urbanization. It explores diverse scales, contexts, tools, and strategies used in community development and its broader societal impact. The chapter advocates for inclusivity and active engagement of community members, emphasizing tailored solutions that address unique challenges. It acknowledges complexities like ethical dilemmas, power imbalances, and cultural sensitivities, underscoring the importance of integrity and local context understanding in community development.

The purpose of this study is to look at the factors that drive people to participate in the sharing economy (SE). Based on the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB), the study proposes a mathematical model. The study’s ultimate objective is to help businesses attract more involved customers and promote collaborative consumption as a sustainable alternative to typical consumption patterns. The study offers a conceptual framework established via a thorough literature review to examine Indian customers’ use behavior toward SE platforms. A one-sample two-tailed t-test is used to assess the framework’s efficacy. The research fills gap in the literature on the SE by investigating the factors that determine subjective norms (SN), attitudes (A), and perceived behavioral control (PBC). A framework is provided that takes behavioral intention (BI) contemplated as a mediating variable. The research improves TAM and TPB by including new factors such as technical characteristics. This research adds to the body of knowledge on the digital SE by underlining the relevance of usage behavior in comprehending Indian customers, where A, SN, and PBC are important aspects. The research presents a paradigm for better understanding customers’ attitudes and behaviors toward various SE platforms, which might help academics, practitioners, and policy makers situate their initiatives within the larger field of sharing. The study’s categorizations of Indian consumers’ A, SN, PBC, and BI toward the SE might potentially advise on future research and government policies.

This chapter explores the potential impact of middle leaders on their learning environments and on learning outcomes, focusing primarily on authenticity in leadership in schools. In outstanding schools, middle leaders are very active and visible in their curriculum areas, as well as more broadly around the school. They work together to build leadership capacity through the promotion of shared leadership practices based on a collective ethic of responsibility. They actively influence others to break down silos between departments and teams within a school. It is through the quality of their engagements that they project, maintain, and sustain their presence and influence with and on others. The work of authentic middle leaders is transformational insofar as they promote and support transformational teaching and learning for their students.

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.