The aim of this article is to provide an analysis of the features that have shaped the state's decision‐making process in the United Nations, with regard to the humanitarian…
Abstract
Purpose
The aim of this article is to provide an analysis of the features that have shaped the state's decision‐making process in the United Nations, with regard to the humanitarian intervention in Darfur from 2003 onwards.
Design/methodology/approach
The methodological approach to the study is a review of political statement papers grounded in the concept of “humanitarian imperialism” and a “responsibility to protect”.
Findings
It was found out that the decision‐making process, leading to humanitarian interventions in Darfur was shaped by a larger extent by the states' own national interests and to a smaller extent by humanitarian considerations.
Practical implications
The main implications of this paper are that the United Nations are not the right platform when it comes to humanitarian interventions that should be placed on humanitarian grounds. Therefore, nation states are strongly advised to accept their leading role in international politics and to realise their responsibility to protect foreign citizens in humanitarian catastrophes.
Social implications
This paper will have an effect on the way humanitarian interventions and “humanitarian motives” can be seen in society and will suggest that in some situations it is advised to take a more realist approach towards humanitarian interventions.
Originality/value
This paper is valuable for further analysis of political decision‐making processes and learning processes within politics.
Details
Keywords
Julian Vasquez Heilig, Michelle Young and Amy Williams
The prevailing theory of action underlying accountability is that holding schools and students accountable will increase educational output. While accountability's theory of…
Abstract
Purpose
The prevailing theory of action underlying accountability is that holding schools and students accountable will increase educational output. While accountability's theory of action intuitively seemed plausible, at the point of No Child Left Behind's national implementation, little empirical research was available to either support or critique accountability claims or to predict the long‐term impact of accountability systems on the success of at‐risk students and the schools that served them. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the work and perceptions of school teachers and leaders as they seek to meet the requirements of educational accountability.
Design/methodology/approach
Interviews with 89 administrators, staff and teachers revealed a variety of methods utilized to manage risks associated with low test scores and accountability ratings.
Findings
The findings reported in this paper challenge the proposition that accountability improves the educational outcomes of at‐risk students and indicates that low‐performing Texas high schools, when faced with the press of accountability, tend to mirror corporate risk management processes, with unintended consequences for at‐risk students. Low‐scoring at‐risk students were often viewed as liabilities by school personnel who, in their scramble to meet testing thresholds and accountability goals, were at‐risk student averse – implementing practices designed to “force kids out of school.”
Originality/value
In this paper, the authors use theory and research on risk management to analyze the work and perceptions of school teachers and leaders as they seek to meet the requirements of educational accountability. This paper is among the first to use this particular perspective to conceptualize and understand the practices of educational organizations with regards to the treatment of at‐risk students attending low‐performing high schools in the midst of accountability.
Details
Keywords
From earliest times the land and all it produced to feed and sustain those who dwelt on it was mankind's greatest asset. From the Biblical “land of milk and honey”, down through…
Abstract
From earliest times the land and all it produced to feed and sustain those who dwelt on it was mankind's greatest asset. From the Biblical “land of milk and honey”, down through history to the “country of farmers” visualised by the American colonists when they severed the links with the mother country, those who had all their needs met by the land were blessed — they still are! The inevitable change brought about by the fast‐growing populations caused them to turn to industry; Britain introduced the “machine age” to the world; the USA the concept of mass production — and the troubles and problems of man increased to the present chaos of to‐day. There remained areas which depended on an agri‐economy — the granary countries, as the vast open spaces of pre‐War Russia; now the great plains of North America, to supply grain for the bread of the peoples of the dense industrial conurbations, which no longer produced anything like enough to feed themselves.
“At the core of business success there is something more fundamental than the theories found in business schools, management books, and consulting reports. That something is…