Brian Beharrell and Alasdair Crockett
Examines the role of organic and conventional farming in the supplyfood chain. In particular addresses whether organic and conventionalfarmers have different beliefs and values;…
Abstract
Examines the role of organic and conventional farming in the supply food chain. In particular addresses whether organic and conventional farmers have different beliefs and values; do organic farmers′ beliefs and values constitute a barrier to the conversion of conventional farmers; are these organic beliefs and values antithetic to modern distribution systems and; do organic and conventional farmers have different views about the economics of organic farming? Addresses these questions through the discriminant analysis of the results of an attitude survey of 117 English farmers which gathered beliefs, values and norms using the theory of Reasoned Action. Concludes that organic and conventional farmers share a common negative economic outlook on organic farming, but they have separate value systems which parallel the “alternative” and “conventional” paradigms identified by the American Research.
Details
Keywords
In this chapter, we set out to demonstrate how organizational theory and analysis can benefit from the work of the distinguished philosopher Alasdair MacIntyre. In the first part…
Abstract
In this chapter, we set out to demonstrate how organizational theory and analysis can benefit from the work of the distinguished philosopher Alasdair MacIntyre. In the first part of the chapter we show how MacIntyre's conception of how rival traditions may move towards reconciliation has the potential to resolve the relativist conclusions that bedevil organization theory. In the second part, we show how MacIntyre's ‘goods–virtues–practices–institutions’ general theory provides a framework for reconciling the fields of organization theory and organizational ethics. In the third part, we provide a worked example of these two strands to demonstrate the implications of MacIntyre's philosophy for organizational analysis. We conclude with a research agenda for a distinctively MacIntyrean organization theory.
Details
Keywords
THE Scot, I have noticed in international gatherings, is peculiarly liable to be chaffed about his country. One reason is the association of Scotland with whisky and the kilt…
Abstract
THE Scot, I have noticed in international gatherings, is peculiarly liable to be chaffed about his country. One reason is the association of Scotland with whisky and the kilt. Another reason is the Scot's self‐consciousness about Scotland. When he hears it derided, he gives a wry smile, or enters on a flustered defence. Praise of Scotland specially annoys him, because it is generally praise of the wrong things,—and he is not quite sure what are the right things.
The purpose of this paper is to question the supposed self‐evidence of a core category in the social entrepreneurship literature: “social value creation”. By criticizing the…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to question the supposed self‐evidence of a core category in the social entrepreneurship literature: “social value creation”. By criticizing the taken‐for‐granted use of the dichotomy “social vs business” the paper aims to develop a multi‐dimensional approach that conceptualizes the creative entrepreneurial process as generating several forms of value for individuals and society.
Design/methodology/approach
The paper proceeds in two steps. First, the shortcomings of the “social vs business” dichotomy are revealed by analyzing its common yet mostly unquestioned use on several levels of inquiry. Then, some conceptual ideas from institutional theory and virtue business ethics are used to sketch a framework for the “social” dimensions of entrepreneurial value creation.
Findings
The result of the discussion is a coherent set of conceptual pairs, each characterizing two important aspects of “social” value beyond the utilitarian mainstream. In this respect, the paper gives an overview of potentially useful categories which could help to fill the conceptual void resulting from the vagueness of the “social value creation” concept.
Research limitations/implications
The proposed categories are not exhaustive, as a brief outlook on further ambiguities of value creation shows. Nevertheless, they are an attempt to point out the fruitfulness of virtue business ethics to developing an extended understanding of entrepreneurial value creation for society. An important consequence is an uncommon view on what is the range of relevant examples of social entrepreneurship in the first place.
Originality/value
The paper offers novel, possibly more adequate categories for dealing with the societal and ethical qualities of entrepreneurial value creation. Eventually, it can lead future research to maybe less obvious, but equally important, expressions of social entrepreneurship.