Suchergebnisse

"For centuries, people have debated whether nature is mostly competitive--as Darwin theorized and the poet Tennyson described as "red in tooth and claw"--or innately cooperative, as many ancient and indigenous peoples believed. In the last 100 or so years, a growing gang of scientists have studied the mutually beneficial interactions that are believed to benefit every species on earth. This book is full of stories of generosity--not competition--in nature. It is a testament to the importance of a healthy biodiversity, and dispels the widely accepted premise of survival of the fittest"--Provided by publisher

Abstract
Attendees of accounting empirical research seminars all too often come to view the conclusions presented in the papers as non-persuasive. This disappointing situation indicates that researchers employ data analysis methodologies which inherently support conclusions they are looking for. Such issues are rarely discussed because many participants have relied on the same methodologies – thus they have firsthand knowledge about the inherent deficiencies. The mantra becomes: "We are all aware of uncomfortable aspects of the methodologies used in our research, so why dwell on it?" Because these potential questions tend to be outside normal and acceptable bounds, I term them "elephants in the room". Five such cases are delineated to illustrate incontrovertible problems therein. To sum it up, the elephants highlight that the purported substantive contents of most published papers will be taken with a grain of salt for the foreseeable future.

AbstractThis article shows how vulnerable communities use Mexico's Day of the Dead for social justice activism. Activists sustain what I call the 'political afterlives' of their victims through street altars and dark humour. I analyse this as a 'necrosocial repertoire of contention'. The Day of the Dead can play an important role in human rights advocacy by insisting that the marginalised dead be honoured and cared for. However, disappeared people pose a challenge to Mexico's horizontal, or popular, ethics of commemoration and illustrate what I call 'necrotaboos', with new problems for the nation's inclusive spirit of commemorating the dead.

Mexico's contentious necropolitics see different stakeholders involved in political struggles for control over the dead. The families of victims of state and corporate violence protest state necrogovernance and corporate necropower, the power to dictate the circumstances of citizens' and workers' lives and deaths. Two case studies show how the state and corporations deploy the criminal technique of disappearing bodies as a means of social control and rendering workers expendable and sometimes killable. Social movements counter this with a determined struggle to restore a sense of worth to the victims of violence through public mourning. Their repertoire of collective action has created a subversive necropower that challenges both necrogovernance and corporate necropower. La contenciosa necropolítica de México involucra a distintos grupos de interés que participan en la contienda política por el control de los muertos. Las familias de las víctimas de la violencia de Estado y corporativa protestan contra la necrogobernanza estatal y la necropotencia corporativa, y du poder de dictaminar las circunstancias de vida y muerte de los ciudadanos y trabajadores. Dos estudios de caso muestran cómo el Estado y las corporaciones despliegan la técnica criminal de desaparecer los cuerpos como un medio de control social que hace a los trabajadores prescindibles y a veces matables. Los movimientos sociales responden con una lucha decidida por restaurar un sentido de valor para las víctimas de la violencia a través del duelo público. Su repertorio de acción colectiva ha creado una necropotencia subversiva que desafía tanto a la necrogobernanza como a la necropotencia corporativa.

Abstract The permit application process for offshore wind farms (OWF) in Sweden conceivably requires a comprehensive and transparent complement within risk management. The NETEP framework (covering risks concerning navigation, economics, technology, environment and politics), based on a futures planning mechanism (STEEP) has consequently been brought forward as a structure for the application of FMECA (Failure Mode, Effects, and Criticality Analysis) methodology to the permit application process of the Swedish offshore wind farm sector. FMECA, originating from the aeronautical and automobile industries, presents a systematic method for the prediction of future failure in a product, part or process, to evaluate the consequences of that failure and to suggest possible measures for its mitigation or eradication. Its application to attitude and acceptance, safety and environmental effect remains, however, limited which creates the research gap for this thesis. Three Swedish offshore wind farm (OWF) projects in the Baltic Sea area (Lillgrund, Taggen and Trolleboda) were put forward as case studies for use in the evaluation of the proposed FMECA-NETEP methodology, which was approached in two stages. The first evaluation stage results showed that the model accommodates the precautionary principle, the consideration of stakeholder viewpoints, the mitigation of negative effects, the analysis of alternative sites, the observation of relevant legislation and the utilisation of contemporary research. In the subsequent stage of evaluation, the factor for incorporation into the adapted model was intra- and inter-sector cumulative impact. Results showed that positive cumulative impact cannot be illustrated by the model whereas neutral and negative cumulative impact can. The model's added value is that it facilitates decision making by providing a rigorous, transparent and structured methodology, the holistic approach of which provides a sound basis for the incorporation of contemporary research.

There is a conceptual gap between causes-of-war research and conflict resolution research. This article introduces a macro-level conceptual framework to facilitate analysis of the outbreak, conduct and resolution of armed conflict within states. Three arguments are advanced, linked to the three questions Why do people start fighting?, Why do people stop fighting? and How can peace be made durable? The first argument is that people take to arms because they have Reasons in the form of grievances and goals, Resources in the form of capabilities and opportunities, and Resolve because they see no alternative to violence in order to address grievances and attain goals. Second, the Triple-R concepts also explain the `outbreak of peace', that is, war termination and peace-building. Third, variations in the dependent variable — different degrees of peace; here termed Triple-M (Mutually Hurting Stalemate, Mutually Enticing Opportunities and Mutually Obtained Rewards) — are explained by changes within those three clusters of explanatory factors.