Search results

This paper considers the Eurocentric conceptualisation of risk, which reinforces language, culture and business practices that are in conflict with Africa’s own traditional business methodologies. It attempts to identify the rent-seeking methods and resource-seeking strategies that sustain the hegemony of global corporations in Africa.

The paper explores non-linear historical narrative around the concept and construction of the idea and language of risk. It follows discourse analysis to identify how the Eurocentric concept of risk was exported and incorporated within the language of international business in non-Western business traditions. The fundamental research question driving this paper is: To what extent does the conceptualisation of risk perpetuate the African continent as risk-ridden?

The rent and resource-seeking strategies used by multinational corporations (MNCs) are central to “manufactured” risks, and this negatively creates impact for post-independent Africa. Whilst the state is inconsistent in its approach to dealing with this crisis, global corporations continue to do business, extract resources and expand their capital and market base in Africa.

The paper, therefore, proposes a further full empirical and theoretical enquiry to examine the nature of manufactured risk from an African perspective on the discursive psychological methodology to investigate how African leaders report on risk as the authors believe that risk theories in the Western-based theories are exaggerated and discursively shaped by their own ideals which do not necessarily apply to the contextual realities in Africa.

It is imperative for African governments to implement a nationalist-modernising strategy whereby initially the levels of export from local businesses could be proportioned to the levels of MNC resource-seeking activities. This approach would ensure the proliferation of local business groups that could gain access to local and international capital to maximise local production. In this sense, the government would not have to deal with manufactured risk and the challenges that emanate from the flight of capital.

There are political implications for the nation-states, as MNCs use the instabilities and weaknesses of governments on the continent to seek and exploit resources to maintain their competitive advantage at the global level. On the economic implications side, weaker governments cannot have a proper development programme for their countries, thereby perpetuating a cycle of uncertainty and unemployed younger graduates. Instability in economic realms leads to social unrest whereby governments are constantly and fully blamed for the inadequacies in social equality.

The philosophical basis of risk and its historical foundations in the African context are presented. Neo-colonial business methods, languages, cultures and strategies are explored and consideration is given as to how African governments could address the issue of co-option, as well as how to respond to the risks arising by MNCs’ business practices. The paper adds to the theoretical narratives by arguing that when considering entry into the marketplace, MNCs must ensure they integrate African perspectives (native categories) into their operational strategies. Moreover, management practitioners might consider addressing the essential topics of language, culture, business systems and business practices using ethnomethodological lenses.

The paper argues that the classical Marxist theory of capitalist accumulation is inadequate to understand new forms of capitalism and their accumulation processes determined by “platforms” and “big data”. Big data platforms are shaping the processes of production, labour, the price of products and market conditions. “Digital platforms” and “big data” have become an integral part of the processes of production, distribution and exchange relations. These twin pillars are central to the capitalist accumulation processes. The article argues that the classical Marxist theory of capitalist accumulation is inadequate to understand new forms of capitalism and their accumulation processes determined by “platforms” and “big data”.

As a conceptual paper, this paper follows critical methodological lineages and traditions based on non-linear historical narratives around the conceptualisation, construction and transition of the “Marxist theory of capital accumulation” in the age of platform economy. This paper follows a discourse analysis (Fairclough, 2003) to locate the way in which an artificial intelligence (AI)-led platform economy helps identify and conceptualise new forms of capitalist accumulation. It engages with Jørgensen and Phillips' (2002) contextual and empirical discursive traditions to undertake a qualitative comparative analysis by exploring a broad range of complex factors with case studies and examples from leading firms within the platform economy. Finally, it adopts two steps of “Theory Synthesis and Theory Adaptation” as outlined by Jaakkola (2020) to synthesise, adopt and expand the Marxist theory of capital accumulation under platform capitalism.

This article identifies new trends and forms of data driven capitalist accumulation processes within the platform capitalism. The findings suggest that an AI led platform economy creates new forms of capitalist accumulation. The article helps to develop theoretical understanding and conceptual frameworks to understand and explain these new forms of capital accumulation.

This study builds upon the limited theorisation on the AI and new capitalist accumulation processes. This article identifies new trends and forms of data driven capitalist accumulation processes within platform capitalism. The article helps to understand digital and platform capitalisms in the lens of digital labour and expands the theory of capitalist accumulation and its new forms in the age of datafication. While critiquing the Marxist theory of capitalist accumulation, the article offers alternative approaches for the future.

The paper aims to understand and expand the idea of capitalist accumulation process from social structures of accumulation theory to religious structures of accumulation within the Indian context. It analyses the philosophical tenets of Hindu religious philosophy as outlined in the Bhagavad Gita. It argues that the ideological narratives within the Bhagavad Gita are concomitant with the logic of capitalism.

The paper draws its methodological lineage to nonlinear historical narrative around the concept and construction of Asiatic modes of production debate. The paper follows discourse analysis to locate how the Hindu religion as outlined in Bhagavad Gita provides philosophical foundation to capitalism in India.

The Bhagavad Gita (Songs of God) gives social and spiritual legitimacy to a specific form of production and accumulation processes by rationalizing and justifying socio-economic stratification based on eternal inequality. The paper focuses on the interface between cardinal principles of Hindu religion as outlined in the Bhagavad Gita and capitalist modes of social and economic processes in India.

The paper aims to advance a new concept called “Hindu modes of accumulation” by advancing the theoretical understanding of the theological processes in the Hindu religion, which reinforces capitalism and capitalist social relations in India.

The purpose of this paper is to deal with the Eurocentric conceptualisation of “risk” which reinforces rent-seeking language, culture and practices of doing business that are alien to non-European societies. This paper also attempts to engage with Eurocentric methods and strategies that sustain hegemony in international business by promoting “risk” and perpetuating “uncertainty” within the non-European business culture. Such territoriality within basic conceptualisation of in international business is central to manufactured “risks” that reinforces crisis, while state deals successfully or fails to deal with it, the global corporations extract resources and expand their capital and market base in non-European societies while doing business. This paper is divided into two parts: the first part presents the philosophical basis of risks and its historical foundations and the second part deals with the neo-colonial business methods, languages, cultures and strategies which are Eurocentric by nature. This paper argues that manufacturing risk is the Eurocentric business strategy.

This paper draws its methodological lineages to nonlinear historical narrative around the concept and construction of the idea and language of “risk” and “uncertainty”. This paper follows discourse analysis (Fairclough, 2003) to locate the way in which the Eurocentric concept of risk was exported and incorporated within the language of international business in non-Western business traditions. While engaging with conceptual discourses, it focusses on the power of language in the process of conceptualisation where “authority comes to language from outside” (Bourdieu, 1991, p. 109). As a result of which the concept does not reflect the objective reality of non-European business culture and its uniqueness while assimilating it within the Western European theoretical traditions of “risk and uncertainty” in international business practice.

The understanding of risk in business within the non-European context needs new ways of conceptualising risk. The updated version of Eurocentric theories, languages and methods of international business and associated risk narrative can never be a starting point. The duality of philosophy in which “economic growth” and “backwardness” measures progress and reduces human experience and objectives of business to seek and expand profit. The starting point of any theoretical analysis on risk in doing business in non-European societies must acknowledge the specificities of their context in terms of local ideas, knowledge, history, language and methods of business practice which is different from Europe.

This paper outlines the Eurocentric conceptualisation of “risk” which reinforces rent-seeking language, culture and practices of doing business that are alien to non-European societies. It engages with the Eurocentric methods and strategies that sustain hegemony in international business by promoting “risk” and perpetuating “uncertainty” within the non-European business culture. Such territoriality within basic conceptualisation of in international business is central to manufactured “risks” that reinforces crisis; while state deals successfully or fails to deal with it; the global corporations extract resources and expand their capital and market base in non-European societies while doing business. This paper is divided into two parts: the first part presents the philosophical basis of risks and its historical foundations; the second part deals with the neo-colonial business methods, languages, cultures and strategies which are Eurocentric by nature. This paper argues that manufacturing risk is the Eurocentric business strategy. This paper argues for a new language, a new method and a new strategy of doing business by decolonising the discipline of international business.

The purpose of this paper is to reject the essentialist and neoliberal approach to public–private partnerships (PPPs) by critically evaluating both normative and empirical arguments within existing literature on PPPs. It explores different dynamics of PPPs in theory and practice within global public policy.

The paper draws its methodological lineages to nonlinear historical narrative around the concept and construction of the idea and language of “PPPs”. The paper follows discourse analysis (Fairclough, 2003) to locate the way in which the PPPs were incorporated within the language of global public policy.

The paper finds that most of the existing literature is looking at managerial, operational, functional and essentialist aspects of PPPs. Therefore, the paper argues that critical success of PPPs depends on its social value for common good with an emancipatory outlook. The study encourages future researchers to move beyond functional aspects of PPPs and locate emancipatory possibilities within the praxis of PPPs from a holistic perspective of global public policy.

The existing literature on the concepts and history of PPPs locate its relevance for budgeting and development planning in developed countries and developing countries. Such literature often draws out the advantages and disadvantages of these concepts with a strong focus on the financial implications to the shareholders. However, there appears to be less emphasis on the effects of these concepts and gaps between theory and practice of PPPs.

The paper rejects the essentialist and neoliberal approach to PPPs and argues for an emancipatory approach to understand and implement PPPs.

The paper provides historical outlook on different trends in PPPs in global public policy. The purpose of this paper is to reject the essentialist and neoliberal approach to PPPs by critically evaluating both normative and empirical arguments within existing literature.

The paper draws its methodological lineages to nonlinear historical narrative around the concept and construction of the idea and language of “PPPs”. The paper follows discourse analysis (Fairclough, 2003) to locate the way in which PPPs were incorporated within the language of global public policy.

The paper finds that most of the existing literature looks at managerial, operational, functional and essentialist aspects of PPPs. Therefore, the paper argues that critical success of PPPs depends on its social value for the common good with an emancipatory outlook.

The paper argues to move beyond functional aspects of PPPs and locate emancipatory possibilities within the praxis of global public policy.