Search results

Between 2008 and 2011 academic teaching staff from Leeds Beckett University (UK) and Chainama Hills College of Health Sciences (Zambia) worked together on a Development Partnership in Higher Education (DelPHe) project funded by the Department for International Development (DFID) via the British Council. The partnership focused on “up-scaling” the provision of mental health education which was intended to build capacity through the delivery of a range of workshops for health educators at Chainama College, Lusaka. The project was evaluated on completion using small focus group discussions (FGDs), so educators could feedback on their experience of the workshops and discuss the impact of learning into their teaching practice. This chapter discusses the challenges of scaling up the mental health workforce in Zambia; the rationale for the content and delivery style of workshops with the health educators and finally presents and critically discusses the evaluation findings.

In this chapter, the author critically examines the relationship between sociology and the identities/experiences of disability and ‘mental illness’ (referred to throughout as distress). The author argues that despite sociology having an ethos of social justice and frequently producing critical accounts of inequalities – such as anti-racism and gender equality – it nonetheless uncritically reiterates the marginalisation of disability and distress. As such, sociology not only reflects the increasing ‘medicalisation of everyday life’ and shores up the essentialist discourses of genetics and neuroscience, but also consigns research and knowledge production about disability and distress to the medical sciences. The author challenges these sociological conventions and highlights the ways in which both disability and distress are socially structured, embodied experiences. The author argues that a sociological account of distress and disability are important not only in and of themselves, but also because they highlight the ways and means to challenge essentialism, inequality and the ever-narrowing definition of what is considered a normal or acceptable part of human experience. Furthermore, vibrant streams of user-led research, activism and practice-interventions – resulting in widespread social, legal and identity transformations – have emerged from the experiences of disability and distress. These user-led perspectives highlight the importance and potential of knowledge produced from the margins, not only for those experiencing disability and/or distress but also for the ways in which we perceive, theorise and research the social world more broadly.

The authors of this volume present a wide range of perspectives, case studies, and theories on partnerships for international development. The authors discuss the leadership approaches, principles, frameworks, and elements needed to develop effective university partnerships for international development. In the age of globalization, these types of international partnerships are an essential element to drive political reform, social development, and economic growth, and as such, they have become an essential element in today’s global system of higher education. Within the context of a rapidly changing higher education system, international collaborations encourage diverse and inclusive learning environments. Readers of this volume will also understand the principles for making international joint activities structurally sound and socially oriented.

Ethnographic interviews are often favoured when examining sensitive issues, such as patients' accounts of their illness experiences. This type of interview enables the researcher to get a deeper (some would argue possibly better) understanding of the experiences that interviewees are recounting, relying on the interviewee to drive the focus of the conversation rather than the researcher determining what is discussed and shared.

Business cycle theory is normally described as having evolved out of a previous tradition of writers focusing exclusively on crises. In this account, the turning point is seen as residing in Clément Juglar's contribution on commercial crises and their periodicity. It is well known that the champion of this view is Schumpeter, who propagated it on several occasions. The same author, however, pointed to a number of other writers who, before and at the same time as Juglar, stressed one or another of the aspects for which Juglar is credited primacy, including the recognition of periodicity and the identification of endogenous elements enabling the recognition of crises as a self-generating phenomenon. There is indeed a vast literature, both primary and secondary, relating to the debates on crises and fluctuations around the middle of the nineteenth century, from which it is apparent that Juglar's book Des Crises Commerciales et de leur Retour Périodique en France, en Angleterre et aux États-Unis (originally published in 1862 and very much revised and enlarged in 1889) did not come out of the blue but was one of the products of an intellectual climate inducing the thinking of crises not as unrelated events but as part of a more complex phenomenon consisting of recurring crises related to the development of the commercial world – an interpretation corroborated by the almost regular occurrence of crises at about 10-year intervals.