Suchergebnisse

Die Umweltgesamtrechnung für den Wald (Integrated Environmental and Economic Accounting for Forests - IEEAF) wurde vom Statistischen Amt der Europäischen Gemeinschaften (EUROSTAT) zur freiwilligen Dokumentation des Waldes und der Forstwirtschaft in Europa entwickelt. Die Arbeit untersucht das statistische Konzept und seine bisherige Anwendung. Dabei werden sowohl methodische als auch organisatorische Problemfelder identifiziert. Während die wirtschaftlichen Aktivitäten des Sektors eine gute Abdeckung erfahren, werden andere Informationen vielfach nur sporadisch, lückenhaft oder gar nicht an EUROSTAT übermittelt. Das bisherige Teilnahmeverhalten in Bezug auf die einzelnen Tabellen wird dokumentiert und analysiert. Empirische Erhebungen zu den spezifischen Hintergründen wurden an nationale Korrespondenten adressiert. Das Zustandekommen und die forstpolitische Bedeutung dieser Sektorstatistik werden zudem am Fallbeispiel Österreichs näher untersucht. Es zeigt sich, dass das Konzept der IEEAF eine gewisse, aber letztlich begrenzte Anerkennung findet. Speziell die Genauigkeit aber auch die Relevanz jährlich nachzuführender Daten über den Wald, seinen Zustand und seine Nutzung werden vielfach in Zweifel gezogen. ; The Integrated Environmental and Economic Accounting for Forests (IEEAF) is a set of economic accounts developed by the Statistical Office of the European Communities (EUROSTAT) for voluntarily describing forests and associated economic activities in Europe. The thesis investigates the concept and its application, elicits methodological problems and highlights organizational hurdles. Whereas data on forestry as an activity is available for most countries, participation has remained poor for tables of the accounts that would detail forest assets and other environmental parameters. Statistics on the provision of the various tables are detailed but provide no specific clues as to the motives for varying participation. A respective empirical investigation addressed national correspondents as well as the Austrian institutions responsible for the provision as well as the utilization of the data. The results show that while the accounts capacity to collate reporting requirements is acknowledged to a certain extent there remain doubts on the accuracy and meaning of annual estimates of forest extent and biological assets. ; submitted by: Mark Hedley ; Zsfassung in dt. Sprache ; Wien, Univ. für Bodenkultur, Masterarb., 2014 ; (VLID)1083088

This article uses a Bourdieuian notion of organizational field and social movement's frame analysis to understand the successful legitimation project of the socially responsible (SR) mutual fund industry. We show how institutional entrepreneurs, as both insiders and outsiders of the dominant organizational field, compete with existing mutual fund logics and become a legitimate presence in the mutual fund industry. The SR mutual fund industry has grown exponentially since its introduction in the 1970s, even though the product it sells is ambiguous in nature (Wood, 2000). Thus, while the product could be perceived as subversive, as the SR industry is arguing that companies should act 'responsible' in their efforts to make money, the reality is that industry innovators do not disrupt the existing mutual fund logic of 'fiduciary responsibility' in order to legitimate themselves. Rather, SR institutional entrepreneurs use their social location in multiple organizational fields to argue that consumers can 'make money while doing good'. Such a frame is not completely subversive nor completely compliant with the existing logic, yet it successfully appeals to both mutual fund insiders and social movement outsiders.

While it has become commonplace for mainstream media outlets to offer report and commentary on trends in economic globalization, it is rare for these same media outlets to exhibit self-awareness with regards to how the media has developed the forces of globalization. In this article, five academics from disparate disciplines in the humanities and social sciences address this impact, describe the negative consequences that the globalization of media has wrought in terms of social justice, and offer ideas concerning how activist academics might challenge the current direction of media globalization, both in their classrooms and in their activist endeavors.