Search results

India is a country of socio-cultural diversity. Every society and culture existing in India is full of values, ethics and morality regarding good deeds. The exhaustive survey of corporate social responsibility (CSR) literatures from Indian philosophical perspectives observes many studies based on the socio-cultural and religious aspects. It has been observed all these philosophical views and concepts covering socio-cultural and religious backgrounds have received attention in the field of CSR. It is observed that almost all views have been fully explored in the context of CSR. Therefore this chapter tries to detect the drivers of CSR with all these philosophies prevalent in the culture of Indian society. This study utilises the hermeneutics, a qualitative research methodology which involves an in-depth study, critical analysis, thoughtful understanding and explanatory interpretation of the concepts of CSR originated from diversified Indian society and culture. In a nutshell, from these viewpoints and philosophies of different cultures, CSR is seen from an inside-out perspective.

This chapter is a Marxist Critical Realist inspired discussion of my interest in, and experiences of, being a working-class academic from Indian/African heritage. I begin my autoethnography by problematising the limits of defining social class from a gradational approach, which is the most common way to make sense of social class in academia and beyond. I argue that neoliberal capitalism organises people into workers and owners of production and without this acknowledgement, discussion of social class in the gradational approach is limited. I then go on to critique the de-centering of social class, for which I used Critical Race Theory (CRT) as a case study. My intention is to promote the explanatory power of approaching social class as as an organisational relationship, which assimilates racism, in the service of capitalism. Throughout the chapter, I provide examples of the way that I navigate this intellectual standpoint in the classroom, specifically through utilising the concepts of mystification and feasibility that I developed through my PhD that focussed on social class in Sweden. Without dismissing the value of the gradational approach of understanding social class in toto, and also the importance of personal identities (indeed I have focussed on my ethno-racial identity), my basic argument is that without the centralisation of social class, and crucially its articulation with neoliberal capitalism, social class becomes a descriptive category rather than explanatory, rendering the possibility of radical social change as severely diminished.

There is considerable heterogeneity between primary care systems that have evolved in individual national cultural environments. Models of Child Health Appraised (MOCHA) studied how the transfer of models or their individual components can be achieved across nations, using examples of combinations of settings, functions, target groups and tracer conditions. There are many factors that determine the feasibility of successful transfer of these from one setting to another, which must be recognised and taken into account. These include the environment of the care system, national policy-making and contextual means of directing population behaviour – in the form of penalties and incentives, which cannot be assessed or expected to work by means of rational actions alone. MOCHA developed a list of criteria to assess transferability, summarised in a population characteristics, intervention content, environment and transfer (PIET-T) process. To explore the process and means of transferability, we obtained consensus statements from the researchers on optimum model scenarios and conducted a survey of stakeholders, professionals and users of children’s primary care services that involved three specific health topics: vaccination coverage in infants, monitoring of a chronic or complex condition and early recognition of mental health problems. The results give insight into features of transferability – such as the availability and the use of guidelines and formal procedures; the barriers and facilitators of implementation and similarities and differences between model practices and the existing model of child primary care in the country. We found that successful transfer of an optimal model is impossible without tailoring the model to a specific country setting. It is vital to be aware of the sensitivity of the population and environmental characteristics of a country before starting to change the system of primary care.

The leaders of the Association of the Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) announced to negotiate a Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RECP) in November 2012, which is comprised of 10 ASEAN Member States (Thailand, Indonesia, Philippines, Malaysia, Singapore, Brunei, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, and Myanmar) and its six FTA partner countries (China, Japan, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand, and India). Embedded in the ASEAN Charter and implemented in all existing ASEAN + 1 FTAs, the ASEAN Centrality has been a corner stone principle in ASEAN-centric economic initiatives. Emerging discord in the region, complicated security climate and the rise of China, among others, have put the ASEAN Centrality under challenge. The development of the RCEP provides a timely case to assess ASEAN’s leadership role in creating the world’s most populous Free Trade Area. The RCEP may enhance ASEAN’s central role, but ASEAN needs to address challenges facing the regional integration now and beyond 2015. On the country/economy level, the chapter reviews some ASEAN Member States and their FTA Partners how they practice their ASEAN policy and seek leadership role in ASEAN. The three major players in ASEAN-Indonesia, Thailand, and Malaysia have reiterated the importance of the ASEAN Centrality in their foreign policy in the past, but debates emerge whether, such as in Indonesia, ASEAN Centrality best suits the national interests. The chapter also explores how the major powers, including China and the United States, respond to and collaborate with the group of smaller developing country players.

The purpose of this chapter is to introduce the concept of public business models and develop a theory for the process of developing and managing public business models.

This research synthesizes insights from various fields into a set of theoretical ideas that lay out what public business models are, to what extent they differ from commercial/industrial business models, and how they are developed and managed by public entrepreneurs.

Developing and managing a business model is an entrepreneurial task that has been missing from the public entrepreneurship literature. Public entrepreneurs perform these tasks using public and private resources, leveraging public institutional systems, and developing capabilities that differ in several dimensions from private entrepreneurs due to the nature of public goods and existence of quasi-markets where public business models are developed and used.

This chapter opens new avenues for research in public entrepreneurship by suggesting that (1) public business models form the foundation of public entrepreneurship, (2) public business models differ from commercial business models not in their functionality but rather in their scope and design, and (3) public business models co-evolve with public institutions to maintain their legitimacy and value creation potential.

This chapter equips public entrepreneurs with new insights into enterprising behaviors and the dynamism of value creation and capture in public ventures.

The current study represents the first attempt to directly incorporate the notion of business models into the public entrepreneurship literature.

By almost any index Mexico has historically struggled in the last century with economic and social growth. For example, Kearney's (2005) well-respected Globalization Index ranks Mexico 42nd in the world and the U.N. Human Development Reports (2003) rank Mexico 53rd in its Human Development Index. Recently, however, Mexico appears to have made a commitment to transform into a competitive nation by privatizing state-owned industries, reducing international commerce barriers and tariffs, attracting foreign investment, and establishing free-trade agreements (NAFTA) with neighbors such as the United States and Canada (Young & Welsch, 1993). However, to sustain the changes, a strong and capable group of domestic entrepreneurs are needed in Mexico.