In the last four years, since Volume I of this Bibliography first appeared, there has been an explosion of literature in all the main functional areas of business. This wealth of…
Abstract
In the last four years, since Volume I of this Bibliography first appeared, there has been an explosion of literature in all the main functional areas of business. This wealth of material poses problems for the researcher in management studies — and, of course, for the librarian: uncovering what has been written in any one area is not an easy task. This volume aims to help the librarian and the researcher overcome some of the immediate problems of identification of material. It is an annotated bibliography of management, drawing on the wide variety of literature produced by MCB University Press. Over the last four years, MCB University Press has produced an extensive range of books and serial publications covering most of the established and many of the developing areas of management. This volume, in conjunction with Volume I, provides a guide to all the material published so far.
Details
Keywords
Dennis R. Appleyard, Alfred J. Field and Edward Tower
This article conceptually extends a previous analysis of the impact of Offshore Assembly Provisions (OAP) upon Effective Rates of Protection (ERPs). Allowance is made for the fact…
Abstract
This article conceptually extends a previous analysis of the impact of Offshore Assembly Provisions (OAP) upon Effective Rates of Protection (ERPs). Allowance is made for the fact that the OAP incentive to foreign assemblers to use US components will bid up the price of the components. Expressions are obtained for the relationship between the “standard” ERP, the ERP with OAP in effect, and the nominal rate of protection.
Dennis R. Appleyard and Alfred J. Field
This article examines the impact of the US Offshore Assembly Provisions (OAP) on the effective tariff rates of the United States. The effects of OAP are incorporated theoretically…
Abstract
This article examines the impact of the US Offshore Assembly Provisions (OAP) on the effective tariff rates of the United States. The effects of OAP are incorporated theoretically into the effective rate calculation and the resulting algorithm is then applied to the 245 affected categories in 1974. The results indicate that, with the presence of OAP, ordinary effective rate calculations overstate the protection afforded to value added in US industries. Although the OAP effect was small, greater usage of the available concessions by importers could alter considerably the level and relative industry impact of the US tariff.
Anthropologists have long discussed the ways in which their discipline has been entangled, consciously and unconsciously, with the colonized populations they study. A foundational…
Abstract
Anthropologists have long discussed the ways in which their discipline has been entangled, consciously and unconsciously, with the colonized populations they study. A foundational text in this regard was Michel Leiris' Phantom Africa (L'Afrique fantôme; Leiris, 1934), which described an African ethnographic expedition led by Marcel Griaule as a form of colonial plunder. Leiris criticized anthropologists' focus on the most isolated, rural, and traditional cultures, which could more easily be described as untouched by European influences, and he saw this as a way of disavowing the very existence of colonialism. In 1950, Leiris challenged Europeans' ability even to understand the colonized, writing that “ethnography is closely linked to the colonial fact, whether ethnographers like it or not. In general they work in the colonial or semi-colonial territories dependent on their country of origin, and even if they receive no direct support from the local representatives of their government, they are tolerated by them and more or less identified, by the people they study, as agents of the administration” (Leiris, 1950, p. 358). Similar ideas were discussed by French social scientists throughout the 1950s. Maxime Rodinson argued in the Année sociologique that “colonial conditions make even the most technically sophisticated sociological research singularly unsatisfying, from the standpoint of the desiderata of a scientific sociology” (Rodinson, 1955, p. 373). In a rejoinder to Leiris, Pierre Bourdieu acknowledged in Work and Workers in Algeria (Travail et travailleurs en Algérie) that “no behavior, attitude or ideology can be explained objectively without reference to the existential situation of the colonized as it is determined by the action of economic and social forces characteristic of the colonial system,” but he insisted that the “problems of science” needed to be separated from “the anxieties of conscience” (2003, pp. 13–14). Since Bourdieu had been involved in a study of an incredibly violent redistribution of Algerians by the French colonial army at the height of the anticolonial revolutionary war, he had good reason to be sensitive to Leiris' criticisms (Bourdieu & Sayad, 1964). Rodinson called Bourdieu's critique of Leiris' thesis “excellent’ (1965, p. 360), but Bourdieu later revised his views, noting that the works that had been available to him at the time of his research in Algeria tended “to justify the colonial order” (1990, p. 3). At the 1974 colloquium that gave rise to a book on the connections between anthropology and colonialism, Le mal de voir, Bourdieu called for an analysis of the relatively autonomous field of colonial science (1993a, p. 51). A parallel discussion took place in American anthropology somewhat later, during the 1960s. At the 1965 meetings of the American Anthropological Association, Marshall Sahlins criticized the “enlistment of scholars” in “cold war projects such as Camelot” as “servants of power in a gendarmerie relationship to the Third World.” This constituted a “sycophantic relation to the state unbefitting science or citizenship” (Sahlins, 1967, pp. 72, 76). Sahlins underscored the connections between “scientific functionalism and the natural interest of a leading world power in the status quo” and called attention to the language of contagion and disease in the documents of “Project Camelot,” adding that “waiting on call is the doctor, the US Army, fully prepared for its self-appointed ‘important mission in the positive and constructive aspects of nation-building’” a mission accompanied by “insurgency prophylaxis” (1967, pp. 77–78). At the end of the decade, Current Anthropology published a series of articles on anthropologists’ “social responsibilities,” and Human Organization published a symposium entitled “Decolonizing Applied Social Sciences.” British anthropologists followed suit, as evidenced by Talal Asad's 1973 collection Anthropology and the Colonial Encounter. During the 1980s, authors such as Gothsch (1983) began to address the question of German anthropology's involvement in colonialism. The most recent revival of this discussion was in response to the Pentagon's deployment of “embedded anthropologists” in Afghanistan and elsewhere in the Middle East. The “Network of Concerned Anthropologists” in the AAA asked “researchers to sign an online pledge not to work with the military,” arguing that they “are not all necessarily opposed to other forms of anthropological consulting for the state, or for the military, especially when such cooperation contributes to generally accepted humanitarian objectives … However, work that is covert, work that breaches relations of openness and trust with studied populations, and work that enables the occupation of one country by another violates professional standards” (“Embedded Anthropologists” 2007).3 Other disciplines, notably geography, economics, area studies, and political science, have also started to examine the involvement of their fields with empire.4
Nobody concerned with political economy can neglect the history of economic doctrines. Structural changes in the economy and society influence economic thinking and, conversely…
Abstract
Nobody concerned with political economy can neglect the history of economic doctrines. Structural changes in the economy and society influence economic thinking and, conversely, innovative thought structures and attitudes have almost always forced economic institutions and modes of behaviour to adjust. We learn from the history of economic doctrines how a particular theory emerged and whether, and in which environment, it could take root. We can see how a school evolves out of a common methodological perception and similar techniques of analysis, and how it has to establish itself. The interaction between unresolved problems on the one hand, and the search for better solutions or explanations on the other, leads to a change in paradigma and to the formation of new lines of reasoning. As long as the real world is subject to progress and change scientific search for explanation must out of necessity continue.
Aim of the present monograph is the economic analysis of the role of MNEs regarding globalisation and digital economy and in parallel there is a reference and examination of some…
Abstract
Aim of the present monograph is the economic analysis of the role of MNEs regarding globalisation and digital economy and in parallel there is a reference and examination of some legal aspects concerning MNEs, cyberspace and e‐commerce as the means of expression of the digital economy. The whole effort of the author is focused on the examination of various aspects of MNEs and their impact upon globalisation and vice versa and how and if we are moving towards a global digital economy.
Details
Keywords
There are many accepted ways in which the economist may look at the business enterprise, each of which involves a different blend of theory and empirical evidence. Unfortunately…
Abstract
There are many accepted ways in which the economist may look at the business enterprise, each of which involves a different blend of theory and empirical evidence. Unfortunately, one gets the impression that many microeconomists have had no direct contact with firms: their experience of the very object on which some lavish such intricate mathematical analysis is entirely second‐hand. Happily, such isolation from the proper object of analysis, the firm, is by no means typical of the history of economic analysis. Adam Smith, the founder of modern economics, was well acquainted with the business community of Glasgow. He was on good terms with the leading merchants of the day including, most notably, Provost Andrew Cochrane who assisted Smith in the acquisition of statistical and institutional information later to be used the The Wealth of Nations. Alfred Marshall too had a serious concern for the realities of business activity. In 1885 he made an extended visit to the United States which took him into many factories and provided the basis for his paper “Some Features of American Industry”. Even ten years later “his zeal for field work remained unimpaired”, and the months of August and September saw Marshall undertaking extensive tours of English mines and factories. One hundred years later, one notices scarcely any enthusiasm on the part of economists for fieldwork of the sort that would take them into the business enterprise. A welcome sign of the possibility that this parlous state may yet be modified is contained in an article by Lawson, where it is argued that “more resources should be allocated, and attention paid, to the results of forms of case‐study, to personal histories, and to the study of primary sources. At the very least a re‐evaluation of research priorities and methods may be in order”. Such an attitude is in sympathy with the line of argument pursued in this article.
Makes and attempts to substantiate, the following claims: It wasMarshall′s objective to show how poverty could be ameliorated. Helocated the causes of poverty in the institutions…
Abstract
Makes and attempts to substantiate, the following claims: It was Marshall′s objective to show how poverty could be ameliorated. He located the causes of poverty in the institutions of the state, education, monopoloid business enterprise, and the working‐class family. He viewed institutions as structures and as organized social behaviour. He explained that the latter is conditioned by customs. Some of these are rooted in the legend‐enshrouded past and hence change‐resisting. Other customs are change‐promoting by virtue of being engendered in scientific, technological, and educational processes. Marshall recommended that the state be reformed through a strengthening of democratic processes and that this be followed by state‐engineered reform of monopoloid institutions and of educational institutions. These reforms would result in increased institutionalization of dynamic behaviour and accelerated deinstitutionalization of static behaviour. The outcome would be an increase in welfare. Because of his recommendations. Marshall considered himself a socialist.