The Society of States under siege? An English School perspective on the emergence of global civil society

In this article I critically examine the theoretical and empirical relationship between world society, whereby global civil society is taken to be its physical or empirical counterpart, and the society of states. This relationship is typically portrayed as contradictory or confrontational, and I contend that this mainstream perspective is reliant on a superficial analysis of the relationship. If one examines the deeper dynamics, viewed in their contemporary international normative context, then one can identify the more constructive and permissive aspects of the relationship. Rather than being wholly incompatible I argue that world society and international society are mutually constitutive and mutually dependent regimes, whose relationship is more often marked by cooperation than by conflict. English School theory provides the conceptual framework for this analysis. The relationship between international and world society presents a core ontological tension within this theory, and again they tend to occupy polarised positions. A synthesis of four international theories - pluralist international society theory, solidarist international society theory, critical international theory, and the discourse of global civil society - informs the hypothesis that the relationship can be normatively and empirically reconciled. In order to empirically support this explanation I analyse two phenomena in world politics - transnational advocacy networks and humanitarian intervention - where there is an apparent tension between international and world society.

Estimates of global and regional potential health gains from reducing multiple major risk factors

Background Estimates of the disease burden due to multiple risk factors can show the potential gain from combined preventive measures. But few such investigations have been attempted, and none on a global scale. Our aim was to estimate the potential health benefits from removal of multiple major risk factors. Methods We assessed the burden of disease and injury attributable to the joint effects of 20 selected leading risk factors in 14 epidemiological subregions of the world. We estimated population attributable fractions, defined as the proportional reduction in disease or mortality that would occur if exposure to a risk factor were reduced to an alternative level, from data for risk factor prevalence and hazard size. For every disease, we estimated joint population attributable fractions, for multiple risk factors, by age and sex, from the direct contributions of individual risk factors. To obtain the direct hazards, we reviewed publications and re-analysed cohort data to account for that part of hazard that is mediated through other risks. Results Globally, an estimated 47% of premature deaths and 39% of total disease burden in 2000 resulted from the joint effects of the risk factors considered. These risks caused a substantial proportion of important diseases, including diarrhoea (92%-94%), lower respiratory infections (55-62%), lung cancer (72%), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (60%), ischaemic heart disease (83-89%), and stroke (70-76%). Removal of these risks would have increased global healthy life expectancy by 9.3 years (17%) ranging from 4.4 years (6%) in the developed countries of the western Pacific to 16.1 years (43%) in parts of sub-Saharan Africa. Interpretation Removal of major risk factors would not only increase healthy life expectancy in every region, but also reduce some of the differences between regions, The potential for disease prevention and health gain from tackling major known risks simultaneously would be substantial.

Civil-Military Relations in Croatia: Politicisation and Politics of Reform.

This article argues that since 2000 successive Croatian governments have shown themselves increasingly dedicated to reforming civil-military relations. However, their efforts have been hampered by four key obstacles. First, the need to implement defence reforms in the context of an unwieldy set of civil-military relationships, political and institutional rivalries, a lack of civil and military defence expertise and a continuing legacy of politicisation. Second, the need to cut defence spending as a proportion of the overall budget whilst taking on new military roles and improving the capability of the armed forces. Third, the need to balance the demands of the NATO accession process while implementing a balanced and fundamental reform of the armed forces as a whole. Finally, the need to implement root and branch personnel reforms and downsizing in the OSRH while simultaneously recruiting and retaining quality personnel and addressing the wider social issue of unemployment.

Knowledge, economy, technology and society: The politics of discourse

The WSIS is centrally interested in knowledge and has defined for itself a mission that is broadly humanitarian. Its development ‘talk’ is, rightly, replete with notions of equity, preserving culture, justice, human rights and so on. In incorporating such issues into knowledge society and economy discussions, WSIS has adopted a different posture towards knowledge than is seen in dominant discourses. This study analyses the dominant knowledge discourse using a large corpus of knowledge-related policy documents, discourse theory and an interrelational understanding of knowledge. I show that it is important to understand this dominant knowledge discourse because of its capacity to limit thought and action in relation to its central topic, knowledge. The results of this study demonstrate that the dominant knowledge discourse is technocratic, frequently insensitive to the humane mission at the core of the WSIS, and is based on a partial understanding of what knowledge is and how knowledge systems work. Moreover, I show that knowledge is inherently political, that the dominant knowledge discourse is politically oriented towards the concerns of business and technology, but that an emancipatory politics of knowledge is possible.

Dual paths to performance: the impact of global pressures on MNC subsidiary conduct and performance

Over the last decade, the international business literature has placed ever-greater emphasis on the role that learning and innovation play in determining multinational and multinational subsidiary performance. The present research seeks to understand the organizational paths leading to such desirable outcomes as greater learning, increased innovation and improved performance. Using a model tested with data collected through a survey of managers in subsidiaries of multinational firms, we find dual, independent paths to improved performance - one through networking and inter-unit learning and the other through subsidiary autonomy and innovation. A particular feature of these findings is that they can be shown to be robust after controlling for a wide range of environmental pressures and firm and industry factors. However, in the absence of environmental controls the dual path finding is rejected. These conflicting findings support the imperative to test models that include a diverse range of environmental pressures so that the true effects of organizational factors on learning, innovation and performance can be identified.

Postcolonialism and the politics of qualitative research in international business

This paper offers a re-configuration of international business research by subjecting it to a postcolonial critique. This critique sees international business research as exhibiting continuities with the colonial project in the way it appropriates the Other. Qualitative research in international business often reproduces a neopositivist separation of theory and method, which can marginalize discussion of the important ontological, epistemological and political issues inherent in any research process