Schlagwort-Archiv: Moral

CfP „The Ethics of the Commons“ – Special Issue of the Journal of Business Ethics

Call for Papers

Special Issue of the Journal of Business Ethics

The Ethics of the Commons

Submission Deadline: 15 December 2018

Guest editors Helen Haugh, University of Cambridge, UK, h.haugh@jbs.cam.ac.uk<mailto:h.haugh@jbs.cam.ac.uk>

Marek Hudon, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Belgium, mhudon@ulb.ac.be<mailto:mhudon@ulb.ac.be>

Camille Meyer, University of Victoria, Canada, camillemeyer@uvic.ca<mailto:camillemeyer@uvic.ca>

Ana Maria Peredo, University of Victoria, Canada,             aperedo@uvic.ca<mailto:aperedo@uvic.ca>

Introduction to the Special Issue

The concept of ‘the commons’ has a long history (Sison & Fontrodona, 2012) and during the last three decades has generated increasing excitement in the scholarly literature. A major factor in the surge of interest has been the work inspired by Elinor Ostrom, Nobel memorial prize in economics sciences laureate for 2009, especially when linked to the economic and social crises that have fostered interest in different ways of organizing economic life. Recovering and implementing the concept of the commons has been hailed by scholars and practitioners as a way of creating new collective wealth (Akrivou & Sison, 2016; Bollier & Helfrich, 2014; Tedmanson et al., 2015), and for addressing what are seen as the societal ills created by neoliberalism (Caffentzis, 2010). This is a call for submissions to a special issue of the Journal of Business Ethics aimed at providing an overarching perspective on the ethical dimensions and drivers of the phenomenon labelled ‘the commons’. In its broadest sense, ‘the commons’ is understood to refer simply to resources of many kinds, e.g., open access and public goods, where no individual person has the right to exclude others from enjoying their benefits. Ostrom focuses on the common property regime – a tighter concept of the commons wherein some group succeeds in making a ‘common pool resource’ a shared benefit by establishing the right of exclusion from it and managing it in a way that avoids the infamous ‘tragedy of the commons’ (Ostrom, 1990, 1999; Ostrom & Hess, 2008). This special issue particularly welcomes more bounded conceptualization of the commons. The (re)emergence of a “commons paradigm” (Bollier, 2011) refers explicitly to how civil society organizations enable people to collaborate and share. This paradigm presents a way that is simultaneously novel yet draws also on the deep history of analyzing social practices implemented through cooperation, collective action and solidarity. Collective forms of resource ownership and management are often directed toward the common good in keeping with the ethics of living in a community whose purpose is both individual and collective flourishing (Argandoña, 1998; Haugh, 2007; Melé, 2009, 2012; Peredo & Chrisman, 2006; Sison et al., 2012). In this regard, commons organizations create, transform and legitimize nonprofit and community norms and rules (Bushouse et al., 2016; Marquis & Battilana, 2009; Périlleux & Nyssens, 2017). Some forms of commons require multiple forms of collective action for their management (Ostrom, 1990). These participatory methods generate ethical challenges due to the complexity of their management and collective governance. Others have drawn attention to the way that new commons are being created in many resources and environments (Fournier, 2013; Meyer & Hudon, 2017, and how commons are being ‘enclosed’ and removed from wider access (Bollier, 2003). The idea of ‘commoning’ has become a central concept in determining how commons are created and recognized as a social phenomenon (Euler, 2015; Fournier, 2013; Linebaugh, 2008).

This call seeks papers that examine the ethical landscape of the commons in any and all of these dimensions. Possible Themes and Topics We seek papers that shed light on the ethical foundations and implications of the commons. We welcome original papers from a wide variety of methodological and disciplinary perspectives and invite papers that provide insights into, but not limited to, the following topics:

Topic 1: Conceptualization, Ethics and Rights related to the commons – How does ethics shape the definition and conceptualization of commons? – How do different ethical theories provide descriptive and normative insights into commons? – Property rights, including common property rights, are after all rights. How do the ethical implications of different property regimes compare and influence entrepreneurship and organizing? – For organizations and communities, how do ethical drivers enable collective action in social, environmental and other commons?

Topic 2: Governance of Commons – What are the motivations and mechanisms for cooperation and participation in commons governance and management? – What are the ethical challenges to and limits of collective action and decision-making in commons organizations? – How has the conception, practice and institutionalization of commons evolved over time, and what are the ethical factors that contribute to its evolution and persistence? – How do values and culture regenerate collective practices?

Topic 3: Social and Community Entrepreneurship and Impacts – What insights can a study of the commons offer to social and community entrepreneurship research? – How is social value created through commons organizations? – What are the ethical implications of new commons and new ways of commoning for entrepreneurship? – What are the ethical impacts of commons in housing? Food? Environmental activism? Other commons?

Topic 4: The Commons in a Market Society – Are there differences in the way that private property and common property regimes influence markets? If so, what are the ethical implications? – Do prevailing conceptions of entrepreneurship impinge on the role of the commons as a means of producing and distributing goods, e.g., by new forms of enclosure in items such as traditional knowledge, patents, and the human genome? – Do commons represent an ethical challenge to capitalist-market/neoliberal political systems? Submission Process and Deadlines Authors are encouraged to refer to the Journal of Business Ethics website for instructions on submitting a paper.

[…]

The CfP for download as a PDF file: CfP_JBE_The Ethics of the Commons

CfP „Organisation und Verantwortung“ – Tagung und Pre-Conference der Kommission Organisationspädagogik

Nicht nur für alle an CSR, CMS und kritischer Organisationsforschung Interessierten: Hier der interessante Call der Tagung der Kommission Organisationspädagogik am 1./2. März 2018 an der Universität Linz:

CfP Organisation und Verantwortung 2018

Und hier der Call für die vorausgehende Nachwuchstagung:

Forum Pädagogische Organisationsforschung 2018_Call for Abtsracts

CfP: Moral Struggles in and around Markets, 11.-12. November, Neuchatel (Schweiz)

Another interesting workshop. Here is a short extract from the call:

Economic activity is always “morally embedded”. Adopting a sociological view of mo-rality as historically and socially located norms and beliefs about what is right and wrong, good and bad, worthy and unworthy, a number of studies have investigated how ethics and economic activity intermingle (Fourcade/Healy 2007). That markets are “the theater of a morality play” (Fourcade 2013: 620) becomes especially visible in moments of moral struggles, where different moral views on market exchanges clash. […] In this workshop, we want to bring together a range of researchers who have been studying “morals and markets” with divergent theoretical perspectives. Indeed, contributions to the role of morality in markets have come from different disciplines and research fields who rarely engage with each other. Aspects of market morality have been ad-dressed, among others, by economic sociologists studying market boundaries or pro-cesses of valuation; by organization and (critical) management scholars studying corpo-rate social responsibility and social entrepreneurship; by social movement scholars studying the contentiousness of markets; or by anthropologists studying the meanings of economic exchanges and moral economies. We believe that in order to advance research on the moral embeddedness of markets, it is crucial to bring together this variety of dis-ciplinary perspectives. Thus with this conference, our aim is to bring researchers to-gether who already study moral struggles and processes of market moralization but without necessarily referring to the research category of morality. In particular, we seek to deepen our understanding of morality in markets in three directions.“

The workshop will take place at the University of Neuchâtel, Switzerland, Institute of Sociology, on November 11–12, 2016. The deadline for all abstract submissions (max 500 words) is April 30, 2016. Final papers should be sent by October 15, 2016.

CfP Moral Struggles in and around Markets_Neuchatel

„Scheitern – Organisations- und wirtschaftssoziologische Analysen“ – Buchpublikation / in eigener Sache

Scheitern_CoverNeu erschienen ist der von Jens Bergmann, Matthias Hahn, Antonia Langhof und Gabriele Wagner herausgegebene Band „Scheitern – Organisations- und wirtschaftssoziologische Analysen“. Aus dem Klappentext:

„Reserviert man den Begriff des Scheiterns lediglich für die nicht gelingende Herstellung oder Aufrechterhaltung sozialer Ordnung, dann vergibt die Soziologie ihr Potenzial an differenzierter Analysefähigkeit. An diesem Schwachpunkt der soziologischen Analyse möchte der vorliegende Sammelband ansetzen und konzentriert sich daher auf Formen, Funktionen und Folgen des Scheiterns sowie auf ihre Bearbeitung. In den Beiträgen werden dabei ganz unterschiedliche Phänomene des Scheiterns in den Blick genommen und analysiert. Dabei fällt in der Zusammenschau vor allem eines auf: ‚Das Soziale‘ scheint extrem flexibel und widerstandsfähig. Bemerkenswerterweise – und das ist die Quintessenz der Beiträge – scheitert das Scheitern offensichtlich immer wieder an der Widerständigkeit des Sozialen. Die differenzierte Auseinandersetzung mit Phänomenen und Facetten des Scheiterns ermöglicht es, die Widerständigkeit des Sozialen in ihrer Doppelgestalt ernst zu nehmen: sie verwandelt Erfolgsprojekte en masse in scheiternde Konstellationen und gleichzeitig bringt sie das Scheitern zum Scheitern.“

Im Band findet sich auch ein Beitrag meinerseits zur Semantik des Scheiterns im Kontext der globalen Finanzkrise.

Hier das komplette Inhaltsverzeichnis: Scheitern_- Inhaltsverzeichnis

Moral und Ökonomie: Wall Street in Crisis – A Perfect Storm Looming

Eine Umfrage unter 250 Beschäftigten im Finanzsektor der Vereinigten Staaten brachte (eigentlich) wenig Neues. Die Umfragezahlen verweisen auf jene von Honegger, Neckel und Magnin (2010) so benannte „strukturierte Verantwortungslosigkeit“ im Vorfeld und Kontext der globalen Finanzkrise. Inwiefern eine ethische Perspektive hier etwas bringt – Sprache und Präsentation der Umfragedaten legen diese nahe – wäre erst einmal zu diskutieren. Einige  Ergebnisse seien herausgegriffen:

  •  More than half of respondents–52%–felt it was likely that their competitors have
    engaged in unethical or illegal activity to gain an edge in the market; 24% felt
    employees at their own company likely have engaged in misconduct to get ahead.
  • Misconduct is still widespread in the financial services industry; 23% of respondents indicated that they had observed or had firsthand knowledge of wrongdoing in the workplace.
  • More than half of respondents–52%–felt it was likely that their competitors have engaged in unethical or illegal activity to gain an edge in the market
  • 24% felt employees at their own company likely have engaged in misconduct to get ahead.
  • 29% of respondents believed that financial services professionals may need to engage in unethical or illegal activity in order to be successful.
  • More than one-quarter of all financial services professionals–26%–believed the
    compensation plans or bonus structures in place at their companies incentivize
    employees to compromise ethical standards or violate the law.
  • An alarming number of financial services professionals, 24% of respondents, likely would engage in insider trading to make $10 million if they could get away with it.
  • Shockingly, and consistent with recent and high-profile criticism of the culture within the financial services industry, a full 28% of respondents felt that the financial services industry does not put the interests of clients first.

Hier die komplette Studie zum Download: Wall Street in Crisis – A Perfect Storm Looming

Theology, Work and Organization – Special Issue in ‚Organization‘

Die aktuelle Ausgabe von ‚Organization‘ widmet sich den Beziehungen von Theologie und Organisation. So diskutiert Anna-Maria Murtola unter dem schönen Titel „Materialist theology and anti-capitalist resistance, or, ‘What would Jesus buy?“ und unter Rückgriff auf Zizek (auch) theologisch motivierten Widerstand in der Form ‚parodistischer Überidentifikation‘. Peter Case et al. zeichnen hingegen die Austreibung der Kontemplation auf dem Weg von der theoria zur theory anhand der Führungsforschung nach und zeigen dies auch an den Arbeiten zu ’spiritual leadership‘ auf.

Hier das komplette Inhaltsverzeichnis:

Theology and organization
Bent Meier Sørensen, Sverre Spoelstra, Heather Höpfl, and Simon Critchley
Organization 2012;19 267-279
http://org.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/19/3/267
The market order as metaphysical loot: Theology and the contested legitimacy of consumer capitalism
Stefan Schwarzkopf
Organization 2012;19 281-297
http://org.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/19/3/281
Salvation, theology and organizational practices across the centuries
Bruno Dyck and Elden Wiebe
Organization 2012;19 299-324
http://org.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/19/3/299
Materialist theology and anti-capitalist resistance, or, ‘What would Jesus buy?
Anna-Maria Murtola
Organization 2012;19 325-344
http://org.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/19/3/325
From theoria to theory: Leadership without contemplation
Peter Case, Robert French, and Peter Simpson
Organization 2012;19 345-361
http://org.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/19/3/345
Theology, accountability and management: Exploring the contributions of Scottish Presbyterianism
Alistair Mutch
Organization 2012;19 363-379
http://org.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/19/3/363

 

Public Eye Award 2012

Im Vorfeld des Weltwirtschaftsforums in Davos kann man im Netz über die Verleihung des Public Eye Award 2012 (initiert von ‚Greenpeace‘ und der ‚Erklärung von Bern‘), den ‚Unternehmerpreis‘ für unsoziales und unökologisches Verhalten abstimmen:

„The Public Eye Awards mark a critical counterpoint to the annual meeting of the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos. Organized since 2000 by Berne Declaration and Friends of the Earth (in 2009 replaced by Greenpeace), Public Eye reminds the corporate world that social and environmental misdeeds have consequences – for the affected people and territory, but also for the reputation of the offender. Whether exploitative working conditions, environmental sins, intentional disinformation, or other disregards of corporate social responsibility: At the forefront of the World Economic Forum (WEF) in late January, the most evil offenses appear on the shortlist of the Public Eye Awards 2012. And those firms placed in the pillory will feel the heat: Our renowned naming&shaming awards shine an international spotlight on corporate scandals and thereby help focused NGO campaigns succeed. This year’s categories are the GLOBAL award (chosen by an internal panel of experts) and the PEOPLE’S award (chosen by YOU and thousands of other online activists).“

Hier geht es zur Homepage und zu den Nominierten der diesjährigen Abstimmung:

http://www.publiceye.ch/de/vote/

 

Globale Finanzkrise und die Alternativen – Eine Animation zur Lage

In diesem sehenswerten RSA Animate geht David Harvey auf die Erklärungsmuster von Krisen ein, rekonstruiert die Logik der Kapitalakkumulation und des Finanzkapitals und fragt nach den Alternativen – und dies alles in nur 11 Minuten:

 

Organisation und Moral

Neues Buch – Organisation und Moral von Günther Ortmann

Organisationen sind die mächtigen Akteure der Moderne. Organisationen sind Orte normaler moralischer Katastrophen. Sie sind Moralverdrängungsmaschinen und Legitimationsfabriken. Wie ist das möglich? Wie geht das? Was tun?