Search results

There is, in the UK, increasing attention being paid to the potential of university education to facilitate high quality growth firms. While some commentators believe that this potential can be realised in the short term, many believe that only a long‐term view of the entrepreneurial potential of graduate entrepreneurship is feasible as new graduates lack the resources, skills and experience necessary for sustainability and growth of ventures. Like most university entrepreneurship “departments”, the Hunter Centre for Entrepreneurship at the University of Strathclyde examines the profile of students and outcome of entrepreneurship electives in terms of student ambition and motivation. Using data from this exercise along with data from a study of 2,000 Strathclyde alumni, an impression of potentiality and actual outcome of entrepreneurship electives is possible.

The purpose of this paper is to consider how practices of critical theorising directed towards present dilemmas of neoliberalisation might inadvertently participate in the reproduction of colonial power.

The paper adopts a critical theoretical approach, focussing on Wendy Brown’s recent work on neoliberalism in particular.

The paper argues that an alignment with colonial power is evident at a methodological level in Brown’s critique of neoliberalism and that this offers indication of how critical theorising in general might begin to reorient itself in ways that better ally it with the creation/promotion of decolonial possibility in contemporary contexts.

The paper makes original contribution to understanding of how western critical theorising actively participates in the reproduction of colonial power. Its value lies partly in demonstrating how this occurs in Brown’s specific case, and partly in suggesting correctives of more general applicability.

A New Centre for Food Research was created in September 1993 at Queen Margaret College, Edinburgh. Its main purpose is to promote research into food choice, particularly factors influencing choice such as sensory, socio‐cultural and nutritional aspects. Research undertaken involves a multi‐disciplinary approach by bringing together expertise from various disciplines including consumer sciences, dietetics and nutrition, food science, social sciences and hospitality studies. A one‐day symposium “Food research in Europe” was held in 1994 to mark the Centre′s official launch. The symposium was well attended, with delegates representing a wide range of organizations in the UK and other EU countries. Presentations were given by eminent speakers and researchers – Dr David Lindsay, MAFF; Dr Ronan Gormley, The National Food Centre in Dublin; Dr David Kilcast, Leatherhead Food Research Association; Dr Wendy Brown and Dr Richard Shepherd, both from the Institute of Food Research, Reading. The centre′s major research interests and activities are related to fruit and vegetable consumption (sensory qualities of apples; barriers to consumption); the relationship between snacking, body weight and physical activity; healthy eating award schemes in the UK.

In response to the emergence of an enterprise economy, government claims that building an enterprise culture is vital. Correspondingly, provision of entrepreneurship education in higher education has expanded. The paper aims to assess the potential of entrepreneurship education to develop skills, and of whether students perceive them as having value within the modern economy.

The paper draws from a longitudinal, collaborative study of students of entrepreneurship in four universities. Using a questionnaire‐based methodology, the paper is based on responses from a sample of 519 students.

Results include that any increase in graduate entrepreneurship is most likely to be a long‐term. Results also suggest that many students expect to work in new and small firms, and that skills developed by entrepreneurship education are applicable to both waged employment and entrepreneurship. Accordingly, entrepreneurship education seems to have much potential to develop skills appropriate for the enterprise economy.

The research is limited by its quantitative nature. As the primary purpose is to evaluate attitudes to entrepreneurship and perceptions of the economic environment, further research should involve qualitative follow‐up, in the form of focus groups and/or longitudinal case studies.

The value of the paper lies in the suggestion that investment in entrepreneurship education is likely to have a positive impact within the economy. The long‐term impact of an increase in awareness of entrepreneurship; of the ability to start firms; and an increase in skills transferable to waged employment within an enterprise‐based economy, can not be underestimated.

Considerations of the legal rights of incarcerated juveniles are often concerned with the myriad ways in which due process rights are circumscribed, abridged, or undermined by the operations of the juvenile court (e.g., Berkheiser, 2016; Cleary, 2017; Feld, 1999; Rapisarda & Kaplan, 2016). Studies of youth legal consciousness have additionally sought to explore the role of media, legal status, court experiences, and even parents in the formation of youth attitudes about the justice system (e.g., Abrego, 2011; Brisman, 2010; Greene, Sprott, Madon, & Jung, 2010; Pennington, 2017). This chapter builds on this work by exploring the way rights shaped the everyday lives of incarcerated youth. Drawing on fieldwork conducted in a juvenile hall, this chapter explores three different moments outside of a formal legal context where the invocation of due process rights limited the self-expression and exploration of incarcerated youth. In each of these cases, the invocation of protecting due process rights by adults served to stifle youth efforts to remake juvenile hall as a place open and receptive to their needs. These three moments demonstrate that rights project a particular legal vision onto a world that does not neatly conform to the reality in which youth lived. For these reasons, the consideration of legal rights for youth must also consider how these rights can forestall the very transformation in circumstances that many youth seek.

This chapter provides a brief overview of community sanctions in Australia and examines the extent to which McNeill’s analysis in Pervasive Punishment (2019) is applicable in the Australian context. Two key issues in the Australian context are, firstly, state and territory-level variations within a federal political structure, and secondly, disproportionate Indigenous imprisonment and community sanction rates and the generally destructive impact of the criminal legal system on Indigenous communities and peoples. The chapter argues that developing a better agonistic politics around community sanctions requires descending from the broad level of historical and sociological analysis to examine state and territory-level variations in judicial and correctional structures, histories and cultures. Further, that Australian community sanctions cannot be understood without a primary focus on the differences between Indigenous and non-Indigenous rates, experiences and meaning. The key to addressing the destructive impact of criminal legal processes and practices on Indigenous peoples lies in developing Indigenous governance, empowerment, self-determination, sovereignty and nation-building. Two recent developments promoting Indigenous governance are examined: the Uluru Statement from the Heart and Justice Reinvestment projects initiated by First Nations communities, highlighting the importance of activism, contest and struggle by community organisations.

Drawing on interviews with men and women gun carriers, this paper considers the intersection of femininity and guns. It argues that two sets of expectations shape the normative relationship between women and guns: First, armed women are a blind spot in feminist discourse, which tends to reproduce the “pacifist presumption” that women are nonviolent caretakers and peacemakers. Second, contemporary pro-gun discourse often bases women’s gun carry within their duties and obligations as mothers in a form of “martial maternalism.” Inflected with a post-feminist appropriation of rights and equality, this pro-gun discourse reproduces gender binaries through a discourse of gender inclusivity. Following previous analyses that emphasize the contradictory politics of gender in conservative spaces, my analysis emphasizes how the gendered politics of guns is sustained by multiple, though not necessarily shared, understandings of women’s guns by men and women within American gun culture.

This chapter argues that modern societies are changing in ways that disrupt the complementarity between social structure and character structure. One source of this divergence occurs because, on the one hand, there exists a “neoliberal” character structure that is oriented toward the accumulation of human capital and holds that such accumulation and hard work will allow one to achieve the “American Dream.” On the other hand, the deep embeddedness of this character structure may in fact deepen the possibility of structural crisis, as developments in automation and ongoing transformations of labor continuously shift the economic structure and many feel they are employed in meaningless “soul crushing” jobs. This diagnosis prompts the question: is the accumulation of human capital futile? In other words, can there exist an abundance of jobs that simultaneously pay enough to provide a middle-class lifestyle and be both socially respected by most members of society while also providing subjective meaning for the individual – without accruing high social costs? Through reflections upon my own biography growing up in East Tennessee, this chapter utilizes the framework of Planetary Sociology to encourage sociologists to rethink the category of “human capital” and recognize the divergence of social structure and character structure to be a serious problem with planetary implications. Only by critical examination of the sociohistoric context from a planetary perspective can these challenges be constructively evaluated and reckoned with.

Spurred by the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been an increase in the open acknowledgment of the importance of teaching and learning praxis that is grounded in compassion, understanding, cocreation, community, and flexibility. This is especially so for ‘traditional’ university spaces, in essence questioning and resisting the many established dynamics that face-to-face teaching and learning took for granted within many neoliberal and neocolonial higher education contexts. In this chapter, I propose positioning a love ethic as a primary point of departure for all educational engagements, a foundational shift in ontology (way of being) of the university. By focusing on love as liberation and justice, and teaching as an act of love, I draw on critical, engaged, and feminist pedagogies, as well as my experience as a lecturer in a social justice– and global citizenship-oriented program at the University of Cape Town (UCT), South Africa, where I positioned a love ethic as central to my pedagogical approach. I argue that when we begin to view love as more than mere emotion, but as an ideological position that informs values and praxis within higher education (and our university “classrooms” in particular), we may move toward new and exciting ways of envisioning the decolonized university of the 21st century. A love ethic, as defined by bell hooks, offers possibilities for an approach to critical transformation that is not merely motivated by the change of institutional structures, but by the reform of values guiding teaching and learning and ways of being within higher education institutions.