Search results

Given the great upheaval in the international situation and the increasing operating risk in international business, research on corporate diplomacy is thriving. However, it still lacks clear conceptualization and operationalization. Based on social capital theory, our study conceptualizes corporate diplomacy as a three-dimensional construct and quantifies its distinct and combined impacts on multinational enterprises’ (MNE) subsidiary performance.

This research analyzes 134 responses collected from a questionnaire survey among key informants in Chinese MNEs using the regression method.

This research finds that corporate diplomacy is positively correlated with MNEs’ subsidiary performance. Specifically, compatriot-oriented diplomacy is the most effective, followed sequentially by host-partner-oriented and host-regulator-oriented diplomacy. In addition, compatriot-oriented diplomacy substitutes for host-partner-oriented diplomacy but complements host-regulator-oriented diplomacy in enhancing subsidiary performance.

Our research enriches the conceptualization and operationalization of corporate diplomacy and provides a nuanced view of its distinct and combined effects on MNEs’ subsidiary performance.

For corporate communications, it is crucial to know how news media outlets report and frame the sociopolitical activities of multinational corporations (MNCs), including their corporate diplomacy, that affect perceptions of their legitimacy. Therefore, this study aims to identify how local news media frame corporate diplomacy in a host country and, in turn, benefit the media legitimacy of MNCs.

To identify media frames in the host country, a quantitative content analysis involving factor and cluster analyses of 385 articles published in newspapers in the United Arab Emirates from 2014 to 2019 addressing the corporate diplomacy of large European MNCs operating in the country was conducted.

This study identified three media frames, two of which establish moral and pragmatic media legitimacy. Results suggest that media legitimacy grows when news media emphasise institutional relationships between MNCs and local, established organisations and corporate diplomacy's benefits for society.

Findings provide insights into how corporate communications can contribute to legitimacy building by emphasising corporations' relationships with institutional actors in host countries and the benefits of corporate activities for local communities.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study was the first in corporate communications to empirically investigate news media's role in corporate diplomacy and how media frames contribute to the media legitimacy of MNCs at the moral, pragmatic, regulative and cognitive levels.

This article examines the effect of China's soft power projection through the Chinese media in Africa on the African audiences' perception of China's national image through a case study of the residents of Nairobi. It adopted Joseph Nye's soft power model and sought to address three fundamental questions : What is the extent and objective of China's media diplomacy in Africa? How has China's media “offensive” in Africa impacted African audiences' imagery of China? What are the implications, if any, of China's media diplomacy on the Kenyan public view of China?

This article used a mixed-methods research design, which deployed elements of positivism and interpretivism. It used a deductive approach and deployed the survey strategy, which entailed the collection of data from Nairobi city residents. The secondary data were collected from relevant academic literature sources. The primary data were analyzed empirically using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), while the secondary data were analyzed using discourse analysis.

China's soft power projection through the Chinese media in Africa is aimed at addressing the “misinformation” about China. China seeks its share of representation among the African public to correct negative perceptions of China. Kenyans had a generally positive attitude toward China. South Africa and Angola have “Fairly” positive perceptions of the Chinese media. However, this study did not reveal whether the perception was due to the influence of Chinese media. These findings implied that the African public's positive imagery of China cannot be fully attributed to Chinese media's influence.

This study is groundbreaking in that it is one of the few studies that have focused on China's public diplomacy in Africa and assessed the impact of Chinese media on the African public’s perception of China.

International climate politics are gradually changing in terms of new and ground-breaking policies and decision-making spearheaded by national governments. The growing global demand to combat climate change reflects the current challenges the world is facing. India’s negotiations at United Nations Conference on Climate Change are based on “equity,” “historical responsibility” and the “polluter pays” agenda, until a shift in the voluntary reduction of carbon emissions takes place. The purpose of this study is to understand why India, a “deal breaker”, is seen as a “deal maker” in climate governance?

For a state like India, domestic preferences are equally important in introducing climate policies alongside its concerns over poverty reduction and economic development, which also stand with its sustainable development goals. This paper explains India’s decision-making using a two-level approach focusing on “domestic preferences.” This rationale is based on India’s historical background as well as new upcoming challenges.

This paper shows that India has both the domestic needs and long-term benefits of combating climate change to cut carbon emissions, which gives the responsibility primarily to domestic audiences and international societies.

This paper uses an international political lens to critically analyze India’s climate positions and politics from both domestic and international levels, demonstrating the importance of considering both short- and long-term goals. The outcome benefits not only the policymakers in India but also stakeholders in the Asia-Pacific and beyond.

This study explores a hegemonic alliance and the role of relational forms of accounting and accountablity in the making of contemporary capitalism.

We use the WikiLeaks “Cablegate” documents to provide an account of the detailed machinations between interest groups (corporations and the state) that are constitutive of hegemonic activity.

Our analysis of the “Cablegate” documents shows that the US and Chevron were crafting a central role for Turkmenistan and its president on the global political stage as early as 2007, despite offical reporting beginning only in 2009. The documents exemplify how “accountability gaps” occlude the understanding of interdependence between capital and the state.

The study contributes to a growing idea that official accounts offer a fictionalized narrative of corporations as existing independently, and thus expands the boundaries associated with studying multinational corporate activities to include their interdependencies with the modern state.

The study traces how global capitalism extends into new territories through diplomatic channels, as a strategic initiative between powerful state and capital interests, arguing that the outcome is the empowerment of authoritarian states at the cost of democracy.

The study argues that previous accounting and accountability research has overlooked the larger picture of how capital and the state work together to secure a mutual hegemonic interest. We advocate for a more complete account of these activities that circumvents official, often restricted, views of global capitalism.

The purpose of this paper is to advance our understanding of international crisis mediation by introducing and examining the nested insider-partial mediator (NIPM) concept, a nuanced perspective on IPM behavior. This study challenges the traditional view of effective mediators as external, unbiased entities by delving into the behavior and contribution of mediators who are deeply embedded in the conflict environment, such as South Korea’s unique position in navigating the US–DPRK crisis in 2017–2018. By analyzing South Korea’s dual role as mediator and negotiator and its employment of both nondirective and directive mediation strategies, the paper demonstrates the potential effectiveness of NIPMs in managing complex biases and contributing to de-escalation in intense crisis scenarios.

This paper uses a focused single-case study approach to analyze South Korea’s role as an NIPM. Using a process-tracing methodology, it examines how contextual factors such as relationships, interests and inherent biases influenced South Korea’s mediation strategies in this complex geopolitical scenario. Empirical evidence was retrieved from public sources, including official statements and press interviews, providing an empirical foundation for understanding NIPM behavior. This approach facilitates a detailed study of South Korea’s unique mediation role within the intricate dynamics of the Korean Peninsula conflict.

The study’s findings illustrate the pivotal role NIPMs can play in complex international conflicts, underlining the significant potential of NIPMs in crisis prevention. The findings highlight South Korea’s adept navigation through intricate geopolitical dynamics, leveraging its unique insider position and established relationships with both the USA and North Korea. This behavior was instrumental in mitigating a potentially explosive situation, steering the crisis toward negotiation and de-escalation. The research underscores the effectiveness of the NIPM framework in understanding the nuanced behavior of mediators who are deeply integrated into multi-level conflicts, influenced by their connections, interests and inherent biases.

This research not only broadens the theoretical framework of insider-partial mediation by introducing the concept of NIPM, but also has practical implications for policymakers and practitioners in leveraging regional mediation strategies for international crisis mitigation. The study underscores the importance of mediators’ deep-rooted connections, biases and vested interests in influencing their mediation tactics, thus offering a comprehensive understanding of the multifaceted nature of international mediation in complex geopolitical conflicts.

The notion that disasters are not natural is longstanding, leading to a growing number of campaigns aimed at countering the use of the term “natural disaster.” Whilst these efforts are crucial, critical perspectives regarding the potential risks associated with this process are lacking, particularly in places affected by violent conflict. This paper aims to present a critical analysis of these efforts, highlighting the need to approach them with care.

The author draws upon insights and discussions accumulated over a decade of research into the relationship between disasters and conflict. The article includes a critical literature review on the disaster–conflict relationship and literature specifically addressing the idea that disasters are not natural. The analysis of field notes led to a second literature review covering topics such as (de) politicisation, instrumentalisation, disaster diplomacy, ethics, humanitarian principles, disaster risk reduction, peacebuilding and conflict sensitivity.

This analysis underscores the importance of advocating that disasters are not natural, especially in conflict-affected areas. However, an uncritical approach could lead to unintended consequences, such as exacerbating social conflicts or obstructing disaster-related actions. The article also presents alternatives to advance the understanding that disasters are not natural whilst mitigating risks, such as embracing a “do-no-harm” approach or conflict-sensitive analyses.

The author offers an innovative critical approach to advancing the understanding that disasters are not natural but socio-political. This perspective is advocated, especially in conflict-affected contexts, to address the root causes of both disasters and conflicts. The author also invites their peers and practitioners to prioritise reflective scholarship and practices, aiming to prevent the unintentional exacerbation of suffering whilst working towards its reduction.

This study delves into the transformation of UAE-Israel relations, which transitioned from a long-term rivalry to a formal peace agreement in 2020. It aims to uncover the multifaceted elements that influenced both nations’ pursuit of bilateral negotiations, with a special emphasis on the role of unofficial collaboration.

Employing a case study approach, the research traces the evolution of the UAE-Israel ties, mapping their progression from covert collaborations to public accords. This exploration is set against a backdrop of political, economic, and societal factors that have historically characterized the broader Israel-Arab conflict. Real-world dynamics and theoretical constructs are analyzed in tandem to derive comprehensive insights.

Key drivers for the transformation of UAE-Israel relations included the threat from Iran, internal disturbances, economic stresses, and the strategic advantages of discreet diplomacy. Exogenous catalysts like the Covid-19 pandemic and Israel's annexation plans in 2019-2020 played pivotal roles, capitalizing on pre-existing covert collaborations and shared regional interests. Constructive strategies, notably inducements, effectively reshaped their adversarial relationship. The resultant U.S.-mediated agreement conferred strategic, security, economic, and diplomatic benefits to both parties. Importantly, the potency of conengagement conflict management strategy, especially when bolstered by exogenous factors and growing mutual interest, emerged as a game-changer in terminating longstanding rivalries.

This study offers a unique perspective on Israel-UAE relations, emphasizing the significance of covert engagements, inducements, and the innovative conengagement strategy in conflict resolution. By examining a relationship devoid of direct armed conflict, the research underscores the interplay of economic, political, and societal factors in reshaping rivalries. This case study serves as a testament to the potential for transformative change in enduring disputes when the right conditions and strategies align, supplementing conventional perspectives and offering valuable implications for policy and mediation initiatives in the Middle East.

Using system theory, this paper aims to interrogate the impact of Boko-Haram on bank administration. The paper explains how death, injury and property destruction caused by terrorism affect banking supervision and structures.

With the aid of a mixed research method, this paper conducted 47 interviews. It extracted secondary data from the Central Bank of Nigeria database, the National Deposit Insurance Corporation publications, Enhancing Financial Innovation and Access Survey, the World Bank database and the Global Terrorism Index. Descriptive, content and regression analysis was used in this research.

With a significant regression model (p-value < 0.05), the analysis shows that terrorism accounts for 84.02% variation in banking administration. The impact of Boko-Haram on banking administration is negatively significant, especially in the areas like on-site supervision of Money Deposit Banks/Micro-finance Institutions and citizens’ accessibility to financial systems.

This paper generates new knowledge in the thematic area, which is still grey. The influence of terrorism on financial institutions as an element of economic governance is less researched. Hence, the strategic linkage of the impact of Boko-Haram on banking administration as a component of financial institutions. Therefore, this paper contributes to the existing body of literature on terrorism and economic governance.