Suchergebnisse

This select committee report scrutinised and influenced the government's 'electricity market reform' programme.

This paper critiques the two-dimensional (hierarchical–spatial) focus on scales evident in management and organizational studies, and the capitalist ecological modernization (CEM) paradigm that dominates current corporate and governmental approaches to sustainability. Our contribution is to propose a more complex and nuanced understanding of scale, which incorporates social, political, temporal and material dimensions. We propose a heuristic framework from Harvey, in order to evaluate different paradigms of socio-ecological organizing: specifically, the dominant paradigm of CEM against a social ecology (SE) alternative. We explore the divergent conceptions of, and relative importance placed upon, concepts of scale, grain, level and field in these two contrasting paradigms. Our analysis highlights the limitations and contradictions of the CEM expression of scale, namely its predominant focus on measurement and expansion through 'economies of scale'. By offering an alternative conception of the links between scales, grains, levels and social fields, we show how this enriches the conceptualization of potential forms of socio-ecological organizing and opens up the potential for alternative modes of organizing socio-ecological sustainability.

The difficulties in establishing and delivering reliable clinical hematology and laboratory services in resource-limited settings are well recognized. However, much can be achieved by better use of existing resources through a concerted quality improvement approach. The recommendations of this chapter are based in part upon work in the thalassemias, inherited disorders of hemoglobin that are widely prevalent in Asia, which may serve as a model that is applicable to other common, chronic disorders in resource-poor settings. Resources are highlighted and recommendations made regarding approaches to improving services. Over the last few years, a number of low and middle-income countries, obtaining support from appropriate governmental sources, have assessed and overcome difficulties and significantly improved clinical services for patients with thalassemia.

This paper critiques the two-dimensional (hierarchical–spatial) focus on scales evident in management and organizational studies, and the capitalist ecological modernization (CEM) paradigm that dominates current corporate and governmental approaches to sustainability. Our contribution is to propose a more complex and nuanced understanding of scale, which incorporates social, political, temporal and material dimensions. We propose a heuristic framework from Harvey, in order to evaluate different paradigms of socio-ecological organizing: specifically, the dominant paradigm of CEM against a social ecology (SE) alternative. We explore the divergent conceptions of, and relative importance placed upon, concepts of scale, grain, level and field in these two contrasting paradigms. Our analysis highlights the limitations and contradictions of the CEM expression of scale, namely its predominant focus on measurement and expansion through 'economies of scale'. By offering an alternative conception of the links between scales, grains, levels and social fields, we show how this enriches the conceptualization of potential forms of socio-ecological organizing and opens up the potential for alternative modes of organizing socio-ecological sustainability.