Search results

Food movements and organizations are increasingly complementing their longstanding emphasis on environment with a focus on social justice. This conceptual chapter discusses dimensions in which engagements in this arena diverge and converge along a continuum from neoliberalization to opposition/structural change. Categories and visions of social justice vary widely, highlighting certain social categories and locations while eliding others. Gender, in particular, is a social category that is a key factor in the allocation of power and privilege, but that has not been significantly addressed in efforts toward social justice in most food movements.

The topics and categories movements consider most important determine their assignments of energies. These assignments in turn create common understandings of priorities and mechanisms for changing the food system, although they may omit consideration of key axes of oppression. For example, strategic preferences for family farms and food-system localization may not consider legacies and contemporary practices of enslavement, exploitation, and patriarchy.

As movements increase their focus on social justice, they can engage in critical reflection and dialogue to interrogate the nature of conditions of injustice and the causes behind these conditions. This would include examining how practices and discourses of racism, classism, and sexism – along with the ways they intersect – have shaped, reflect, and reproduce the food system. This process must privilege the participation, perspectives, and priorities of those who suffer from injustice. It can then best illuminate strategic definitions and pathways that can move toward transformation of a food system grounded in conditions of social justice.

Structural violence (SV) is related to the uneven distribution of resources which then leads to social exclusion and marginalisation of people. Johan Galtung (1969) also refers to it as social injustice and it is characterised by unequal access to education, health, water, food, shelter and other basic services. SV manifests itself through different forms of exclusion supported through both public and private institutions. Without support to address economic and educational opportunities, Zimbabwean youth continue to experience SV and high levels of social inequality (Chimucheka, 2012). Conflict transformation (CT) can help address SV since it provides processes and ways to build something desired thus altering the manifestation of the conflict (Waldman, 2009). CT involves action between parties that leads to both social change and justice (M. Evans, 2016). Social entrepreneurship (SE) can be used as a CT tool because it (i) identifies an unjust equilibrium that perpetuates exclusion and marginalisation, (ii) identifies opportunities and innovatively challenges the status quo to add social value and (iii) provides a better future for the marginalised communities through creating a new and stable alternative equilibrium (Baporikar, 2016). This chapter discusses the SV transformation model which the author tested to address the disparities faced by youth in an urban area in Zimbabwe. The action research, which took place between January and May 2017, was carried out in combination with capacity building, social support systems and community participation to address some of the SV indicators prevalent in the community. Whilst SE showed great potential in tackling SV in the community study, findings also reveal contestations between theory and practice. Some of the barriers identified in the field include the community’s failure to self-organise, lack of financial resources and buy-in from the local government. Future research could test the model in multiple settings and over longer periods to see its effectiveness.

The use of teams has increased significantly over the past two decades, with recent estimates suggesting that between 50% and 90% of employees work in some kind of team. This chapter examines the implications of this trend for the literature on organizational justice – the study of fairness perceptions and effects in the workplace. In particular, we explore three specific research questions: (1) Will the justice effects observed in individual contexts generalize to team contexts and member-directed reactions? (2) Will the justice experienced by specific teammates have direct or interactive effects on members’ own reactions? (3) Will the justice experienced by the team as a whole impact reactions at the team level of analysis? Our review of almost 30 studies suggests that each question can be answered in the affirmative, illustrating that team contexts can magnify the importance of justice in organizations.

Social justice, true social justice, must be sought and obtained. Once obtained institutionally, social justice is manifested by a desire to maintain equality in otherwise diverse environments. The irony of social justice is that historically and currently, it is a societal ideal that is difficult to achieve. The uniqueness of every human being should be recognized in institutions that emphasize social justice, as being a strength. However, being that the nature of human beings is to be comfortable with fellow human beings who act and look similar to themselves, until made aware of our own hidden biases, social justice cannot prevail.

This chapter examines our leadership journey as Black female social justice leaders and culturally responsive leaders from the Caribbean Diaspora in Canada. Borrowing from Mullen, Fenwick, and Kealy (2014) and Campbell’s (2008) notion of leadership as a journey, we critically examine what it means to navigate educational leadership contexts. Through our lived experiences as racialized leaders, border crossing spaces and cultures, and with a deep sense and agency to resolve social inequities and injustice we critically gaze at our leadership contexts. This chapter examines ways we, as critical leaders, challenge inequities, issues of power and marginalization, and find transformative actions and purpose by critically reflecting on our leadership journey. This work will add to the educational leadership discourse by positing ways that leaders can develop agency and engage in leadership that is transformative – bringing theory into action.

Purpose – We outline a theoretical model of the emergence of justice climate in groups, teams, and organizations, and in doing so integrate multiple justice perspectives (e.g., affective events, fairness heuristic, deonance, justice integration, multifoci justice, overall justice).

Approach – In this theoretical paper, we propose that justice climate is spawned at the level of the event; individuals experience discrete events and then use their emotional reactions related to these events as information in forming fairness judgments. Cognitive processes explicated in justice integration theory, fairness heuristic theory, and fairness theory also play a role. Over time, these judgments about various perpetrators – which may include the evaluation of outcomes, procedures, information, and interpersonal treatment – are aggregated to form individual-level, stable judgments regarding the fairness of exchange partners with whom employees interact (e.g., supervisors, coworkers, and customers). Through socialization and social-information processing, and influenced by organizational structure and social networks, these individual multifoci justice perceptions merge to form multifoci justice climate, which over time lead to the formation of shared cognitions of overall justice climate.

Value – The chapter proposes a temporal model of how discrete events at the individual level merge to form individuals’ multifoci justice perceptions, shared multifoci justice climate, and ultimately overall justice climate. The chapter offers multiple propositions and concludes with recommendations for empirically testing the model.

In this chapter, I reflect on the place of hope in activist criminology. Offering reflections from my own activist scholarship, this chapter draws out the ways in which hope structures and sustains our work across temporal frames and distinct modes of academic practice. This chapter develops a hopeful analysis of lineage, memory and resistance, reflecting on my participatory research with the Tamil community in London, and reflects on the revival of utopian thought in criminological scholarship. Hopeful imaginaries of an abolitionist future inform my scholar-activism with Reclaim Holloway – an abolitionist collective formed to influence the redevelopment of the Holloway prison site. I describe this future-oriented work before considering hope as a practice in the present, focusing on ‘pedagogies of hope’ as activist criminology in the classroom.