Search results

The three governance modes of state, market and network have long been recognized as key forms of social organization. However, the failure of these modes to solve complex public problems has meant that new hybrid arrangements drawing on and mixing the strengths of each mode have come to the fore. This situation results in what is contended to be a “crowded” policy domain which may erode the potential for positive service delivery and programme outcomes. This paper argues that policy and decision-makers need to recognize the difference between these modes and select optimal mixes. The paper proceeds by tracing the evolution of the expanded mix. It sets out a coherent framework to aid decision-making and explores the challenges faced by governments in balancing the structural and operational mechanisms necessary to sustain the engagement of such a diverse set of players

The study examines how the interactions among three prominent institutional logics—state, market and religion—fundamentally shape the patterns of individuals’ engagement in social entrepreneurship (SE).

The study develops a configurational theoretical framework and uses fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis to test the hypotheses by gathering data on social ventures from 35 countries from the World Values Survey and Global Entrepreneurship Monitor.

The results show that the prevalence of social entrepreneurial ventures is enabled by different combinations of logics of action, governance mechanisms, strength of religious beliefs and religious pluralism.

This research reveals that the relationship between institutional logic profiles and SE is contingent on the coherence between different institutional logics.

Asia's traditional experiences with care provision differ considerably from those of the West given the prevalent family‐based social norms about care and policies in this region. In recent decades, Asia has experienced profound social and demographic transformations and is thus faced with significant challenges around care. However, care in Asian countries is a relatively less studied topic. There is an urgent need for a comparative study on recent policy and practice changes in care for the elderly and young children in different regions of Asia. The purpose of this special issue is to examine complicated boundary shift in care provision and financing between the state, market, community and family in East, Southeast and South Asia and to explore the implications of these changes in care policies and practices for social stratification by class and gender in Asia.

The introduction to this special issue gives an overview of the social and demographic transformations and new strains on care in Asia as a background and introduces the framework of welfare mix employed in this special issue, especially the concepts of social care and the welfare/care diamond.

The introduction summarizes the variations in regard to the governance and provision of care between different Asian countries and compares the differences in the state involvement between Asia and Europe.

The authors also discuss some of their contributions to methodological approaches and analytical frameworks in studying care and the implications of the current research for future studies.

During the period 1966/67–1984/85, the United States market share in the global wheat trade averaged 41 per cent. Recently, this percentage has declined considerably after a period when the US agricultural sector expanded rapidly to meet the needs of growing world markets. The US market share of wheat trade reached an all‐time high of 48 per cent in 1981/82 then steadily declined to 37 per cent in 1984/85.

The purpose of this paper is twofold: first, to assess the impact of the 1999 Special Issue on Professionalization in Asia in the Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal (AAAJ); and second, more generally to review research on this topic post-1999.

The paper starts with a discussion of the research articles of the Special Issue. It then identifies research that has cited papers in the Special Issue and which focusses on professionalization in Asia to identify relevant subsequent research. In addition, a literature search is conducted to locate post-1999 work that has not cited papers from the Special Issue but has investigated the same topic area. Analyzing both sets of work enables an integrated review of the field and aids the identification of future research opportunities. The study covers published research articles and books on professionalization projects in Asia from 1999 to 2018. In this paper, reference to Asia focusses on East Asia (including countries such as China and Japan), South Asia (including countries such as Bangladesh, India and Sri Lanka), and South East Asia (including countries such as Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines and Vietnam). Given the elapsed time of near 20 years, there has been sufficient time for research to be published. Therefore, the review focusses on published output only and does not discuss unpublished theses, conference proceedings nor working papers.

First, the Special Issue of AAAJ in 1999 generally adopted a critical lens and studied professionalization as projects of market closure and collective mobility. The corporatist framework of Puxty et al. (1987) provided a useful framing to analyze the influence of states, markets and communities on professionalization. Second, the Special Issue has helped to spur interest in understanding professionalization in the region. Post-1999, there are studies of countries not covered in the Special Issue. Third, the themes identified in the Special Issue continue to be relevant and are examined in post-1999 work: the active role of the state, the legacies of colonization, the activities of transnational accounting bodies; and to a lesser degree, the influence of transnational accounting firms. Finally, future research could usefully focus on: the distinctive and more expansive role of Asian state agencies; the conduct of deeper comparative research; the role of accounting firms in the region; and the impact of transnational agencies such as the International Federation of Accountants and the World Bank.

There are three limitations. First, the review of literature omits unpublished research such as PhD theses and working papers. Second, it focusses only on research published in English. As a result, some work may be excluded. Third, it assesses the contribution of a single issue (i.e. the 1999 AAAJ Special Issue) and does not discuss work that preceded 1999.

This paper is aimed at assessing the impact of the 1999 Special Issue but also presents a wide-ranging analytical review of published research on accounting professionalization in Asia since 1999. The paper identifies several areas for future research and proposes a modified model of state-market-community-profession relations. In particular, the paper emphasizes the large and distinctive roles of Asian state agencies and the activities of transnational actors (both those within the profession as well as those that are external).

The paper examines the key driving factors behind the rapid and uneven growth of social enterprises in China based on Kerlin’s Macro-Institutional Social Enterprise (MISE) model of social enterprise development, with an emphasis on testing key local institutional factors.

The study adopts the quantitative method approach. The hypotheses have been tested based on a cross-regional empirical analysis with two national datasets on China.

This study shows that among the state, market and civil society, local government support in terms of favorable policies is the sole determinant factor driving China’s social enterprise growth. On the other hand, the market is irrelevant and local civil society impedes social enterprise growth. This demonstrates that the current growth model is the result of government intervention.

The datasets have a limited sample size. We suggest that future studies may collect a larger sample size with more comprehensive information. We think this study will encourage more comparative qualitative studies at the local level to reveal the underlying mechanisms of growth.

Since government policy is the determinant factor, the quality and quantity of government-backed incubation programs and platforms would matter the most for social enterprise growth. Our study also helps social entrepreneurs understand what factors matter when they try to develop social enterprises in China. They are advised to work on aspects of gaining legal legitimacy and political support in order to grow the sector.

This conclusion suggests that professionals and practitioners should review the implications of the current growth of social enterprises in China, in terms of their sustainability, given their institutional isolation from other sectors.

Current studies have yet to thoroughly explore the role of meso- and micro-institutional factors in social enterprise development, especially in different contexts. With reference to Kerlin’s framework and the tri-sector model, this paper advances the understanding of social enterprise growth in China.

Looks at whether globalization is all its proponents claim it to be. States markets for money, goods and services are surely already becoming increasingly globalized. Posits that proprietary knowledge is crucial for creating competitive advantage — but knowledge multiplies when it is shared and developed. Reckons that there are four sources of global competitiveness: technological capacity; access to the right markets; differential between production costs at the production site and prices at the market of destination; and political will of national governments and supranational institutions to foster a climate of growth.

Using evidence from Brunei Darussalam, Malaysia and Indonesia, the purpose of this paper is to explore how Islamic welfare regime notion evolves in a South East Asian (SEA) context.

To gain a broad frame of reference in discussing Islamic welfare regimes in SEA, this paper employs a combined political-economic and cultural approach to analyze how Islamic welfare ethics in Brunei Darussalam, Malaysia and Indonesia are developed. The specific criterion used to make a comparative analysis of these countries is an interconnection between four levels of Islamic welfare actors (state, market, community and household/relatives) in providing social welfare.

Malaysia and Indonesia have demonstrated the most balanced form of “Islamic welfare diamond” in the relationship between welfare actors, even as the state-centered welfare initiative continues to be expanded, while Brunei has taken a different route. A monarchical political system underpinned by high economic growth has enabled the state to play a major role in welfare distribution, rather than other welfare actors. For this reason, Malaysia and Indonesia are described as having an “Islamic inclusive welfare regime,” while Brunei is reported to have an “Islamic welfare state regime.”

For the purpose of theoretical advancements, there is no doubt that this paper has proposed an alternative framework to developing an understanding of how the Islamic ethical code is articulated in a wide range of welfare configurations within the “South East Asian context.”

Private certification systems (PCS) have emerged as governance tools for sustainable development, regulating social and environmental standards through global supply chains. PCS are seen as essentially private and market-driven, but governments have engaged with them in various ways. There are also substantial differences in the institutional design of PCS with regard to the standard-setting process, ex-ante conformity assessment and ex-post verification procedures. Consequently, what determines the institutional design of PCS has attracted growing attention. This article argues that governments, through public regulation, influence the design of PCS, which in turn affects their effectiveness. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

First, a review of academic literature, policy and legal documents presents how PCS have become institutionalized in government policy, focusing on sustainable public procurement (SPP) regulation. Second, the authors explore the link between effectiveness and the institutional design of PCS by empirically assessing the variations between institutional parameters conducive to effectiveness. Data from the Ecolabel Index database were used to assess the presence or absence of four institutional design parameters related to the rule-making and monitoring mechanisms of PCS.

Public procurement regulations are important drivers influencing the institutional design of PCS. The buying power and market share of government spending is a potential tool for policy-makers not only to stimulate the adoption of PCS, but also for shaping their design and effectiveness. However, the impact of such policies is highly dependent upon the market-share of public procurement within a given sector. In addition to public procurement frameworks, other factors drive the institutional evolution of PCS.

The article connects two themes within the study of non-state market regulation; the growing interaction of governments with PCS, and the institutional variety and development of these systems.