Search results

This paper outlines the current state of international textile trade between developed and developing countries and traces the history of textile trade agreements over the past three decades. Possible future policy scenarios for world trade in these commodities are presented. The general views of different country groups are examined, as well as the perspective of groups within the US. Implications for government policy‐makers and those marketing textile and apparel products are discussed in an effort to meet the challenge of designing an equitable system of trade and achieving the beneficial exchange of textile and apparel products worldwide.

Disputes in everyday life – Social and moral orders of children and young people has papers written by researchers whose interests lie in studying children's everyday interactions, with a balance of papers from emerging and well-established researchers in this field. The volume draws on scholarship from Australia, England, New Zealand, Sweden, Turkey, United States of America (USA), and Wales, investigating everyday practices of children's disputes in Australia, England, Italy, Sweden, USA, and Wales. The papers themselves speak to the theme of the volume, so we only briefly summarize their contents.

Purpose – This chapter explicates the categorical resources and practices used in some disputes involving two children.

Methodology – The data on which the study is based consists of a transcript of an audio recording of the naturally occurring talk-in-interaction during a family meal. This data is analyzed using the approach of membership categorization analysis (MCA).

Findings – We show that it is neither the category collection “children” nor the category collection “siblings” that is relevant for the organization of these disputes but rather a number of asymmetrical standardized relational pairs, such as “rule-enforcer” and “offender” or “offender” and “victim.” It is these pairs of categories that are demonstrably relevant for the members, providing for and making intelligible their disputes. We then consider the question of the demonstrably relevant “wider context” of the disputes to which the disputants are actually oriented. This wider context is an omnirelevant oppositional social relationship between the children. We demonstrate that the disputes reflexively constitute the character of their oppositional relationship and show how these are instantiations of an omnirelevant category collection, namely, “parties to an oppositional relationship.”

Value of chapter – This chapter contributes to the corpus of ethnomethodological studies on children's culture in action and more particularly on the categorical organization of children's (and others’) disputes. It also contributes to MCA more generally in respect to its focus on the issues of omnirelevance and the “occasionality” of category collections.

Purpose – The overall aim of the chapter is to explore how disputes between family members are accomplished and how the actions of copresent members (the mother and elder brother) contribute to the unfolding dispute.

Methodology – Selected from video recordings of the family breakfast, three extended sequences of mealtime talk were transcribed using the Jeffersonian system and analyzed using the analytic resources of conversation analysis and ethnomethodology.

Findings – This analysis establishes how both the mother and elder sibling intervene in matters to do with who has access to some bookclub brochures. Appeals to rules such as “you’ve got to share” are used by the mother to manage the local issue of the dispute. In intervening to resolve and settle disputes, the mother makes visible particular moral orders, such as sharing. Intervention is accomplished through directions, increasing physical proximity to the dispute, topic shift, and physical intervention in the dispute, such as gently removing a child's hand from the brochures. Justifications for sharing proffered by the mother that work to establish an alignment with one child are challenged by the other sibling, thus contributing to an escalation of the dispute. Also explicated is how an older sibling buys into the dispute, making visible his view about how sharing is accomplished; that is, you “just cope with it.”

Practical implications – This chapter has some practical implications for adults who interact with children (teachers, parents) highlighting that in some way, adults, through their actions may contribute to the continuation of a dispute and second, how adult attempts to settle or end a dispute may result only in a temporary settlement rather than a cessation of the dispute.

Value of chapter – The chapter contributes understandings about how family members manage disputes interactionally and how social and moral orders are accomplished during family mealtime. Additionally, it shows how some disputes are temporarily settled and connected across a section of action rather than ended.

Karin Aronsson is a professor at the Department of Child and Youth Studies, Stockholm University, and before that at Linköping University (1988–2008). Her work focuses on how talk is used to build social organization, with a particular focus on children's peer groups, institutional encounters, and identity-in-interaction. Other research interests include children's play, informal learning, and bilingual conversations. She publishes internationally, and her most recent papers appeared in Language in Society and Discourse & Society. A recent book is: Hedegaard, M., Aronsson, K., Højholt, C., & Skjær Ulvik, O. (Eds.). Children, childhood and everyday life: Children's perspectives. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

It is well established that the service system has a poor history of responding holistically to address the needs of children and families living with co-occurring complexities such as domestic violence, parental mental health and/or substance use. The purpose of this conceptual paper is to primarily describe the developmental process used to create guidelines to inform practice at the intersections of domestic violence, mental health and alcohol and other drug services, ensuring that the tactics of coercive control are visible in contexts of complexity.

The guidelines were developed through undertaking a literature review, followed by a practice-led research approach with practitioners from 33 organisations across three Australian states, Safe & Together consultants and researchers. Communities of practice composed of practitioners providing interventions to children and families were central to the approach. Data that informed the development of the guidelines included a literature review, ethnographic notes, qualitative interviews, quantitative surveys and reflections.

Practice-led research engaged practitioners in the development of guidelines to promote an integrated response to working with families experiencing domestic violence, substance use and mental health issues. The integrated approach drew from the Safe & Together model, emphasising partnering with women survivors, pivoting to the perpetrator, focusing on children’s safety and well-being, promoting worker safety, collaborating across agencies and influencing organisational change. The process demonstrated the usefulness of this integrated approach, using practitioner-based examples.

Successful iterative processes to develop the guidelines were undertaken to support cultural change towards holistic and collaborative work across multiple sectors and organisations.

Historically, citizen input into the capital budgeting planning and project selection process has been sporadic and often limited to the most politically-attentive, “connected” individuals and groups. The near-sightedness of such an approach has become apparent as the public’s cynicism toward government has intensified, along with its reticence to support bond referenda, and its propensity to file equity-oriented lawsuits criticizing capital project decisions. To combat these problems, local governments across the U.S. are broadening constituent involvement in their capital budget process, especially at the front-end where possible projects are identified and selected for inclusion in the capital improvement plan. This article examines the four major approaches that are being utilized: decentralizing public hearings; using community-wide public opinion surveys to gauge public support for various projects and revenue-raising options; expanding citizen access and input to, and feedback from, government interactive data bases; and creating more formalized roles for citizens on capital budget planning committees. Each of these approaches has its own assets and liabilities which are delineated.