Social inclusion, social movements, and the characteristics of late modernity

In discussing the ideology of social inclusion, this paper demonstrates that the composition of community groups in a period of late modernity is worthy of consideration. Although it would appear, on the surface at least, that previously stable community institutions, such as family, organised religion, trade unions, occupation and residential stability, and so on, are being challenged by a broad rejection of the once powerful tool of tradition, society's attachment to a belief in the symbolic value of community remains strong. In an environment however, in which the interaction and interdependence of human activity is subject to continual re-evaluation as the current processes of industrialisation and globalisation unfold, the template of what constitutes 'community' may need to be re-defined. It is to this end that the present paper is concerned, in that it seeks to identify new community formations. Of particular interest, is the rise and reach of modern day 'social movements', and why, when analysing the subject from a macro-sociological perspective, they have come to assume such a pivotal role in occupying community spaces left vacant by the demise of traditional social institutions. The paper is exploratory in its focus, using relevant literature to posit some broad theoretical themes, with the aim of presenting such themes to encourage a shift in community debates away from traditional concerns about 'who' and 'how many', towards questions of why new community forms are emerging.

Learning from history : social movements, arts and crafts and anti-consumption

Contemplating the lCAR Agenda, I wondered what value was to be found in history and is historical research an appropriate methodology for this contemporary discussion? I reviewed articles from social sciences and marketing literature that discuss history as a research methodology and present some of the criticisms and benefits. Social movements like the Arts and Crafts contain themes and agendas that resonate today, including protest and boycott, sustainable solutions, and technophobia that can be found in contemporary crafts movements like Stitch'nBitch. Researchers, heeding some cautions, can use history to build agendas that contribute directly to the study of anti consumption

Fighting the digital divide with microfinance : building social capital and socio-economic development

Unlike other technology, lCT has the tremendous capacity to eliminate various social and economic barriers impeding the poor, helping them discover their potential. Wider access and use of lCT can improve social networks and increase civic engagement, thereby improving social fabric and developing social capital. Thus, scholars now have realized lCT plays a primary role in the formation and maintenance of social network. This paper identifies microfinance programs as an agent with unparalleled capacity to facilitate access to lCT and thus the formation of social capital and socio-economic development of the poor. In this paper, we also discuss the role of MFls in developing social capital in
South Asia and present an analytical model of how the intervention of microfinance can facilitate access to lCT by the poor with the result of an improved both socio-economic situation and social capital.

Sustainable development in developing countries: the role of social entrepreneurs

This article adds to the ongoing debate on the relationship between poverty reduction, profits, and environmental sustainability. Drawing from the literature, it presents a conceptual model with propositions to explain how social entrepreneurs can lead to sustainable development in developing countries. These propositions are further strengthened by using a descriptive case of Waste Concern—an initiative of social entrepreneurs—in Bangladesh. Findings illustrate that, despite contextual constraints in developing countries, it is possible to have sustainable development with no trade-off between poverty reduction and environmental sustainability. This win-win outcome is possible through the innovative approaches and creative thinking of social entrepreneurs who, rather than being hindered by contextual constraints, act as catalysts for sustainable development. The findings have implications for academics and policy-makers, highlighting the significance of supporting social entrepreneurs to come up with innovative methods for sustainable development.

From design for ecologically sustainability to facilities management through building intelligence and knowledge management

Ecological sustainability basically concerns environmental protection and social benefits. An ecologically sustainable development is based upon reduced energy usage, increased efficiency, and upheld social responsibility; and it should be properly evaluated by financial, environmental and social aspects. Council House 2 (CH2) is claimed to change the way of Australia approaches in ecologically sustainable design and construction. This is the ‘Six-Star design and built’ green star facility assessed by the Green Building Council of Australia (GBCA), and the 10-story city council building was completed and opened in 2006, totally A$11.3 million was invested for the sustainability features. CH2 protects the environment, when it compares with the old council house, and is expected to reduce electricity consumption by 85%; reduce gas consumption by 87%; produce only 13% of the emissions; and reduce water mains supply by 72%. In this paper, the author examines its design reports and the researches paper, in the form of knowledge base, to case-study how the sustainability, effectiveness and efficiency of CH2 work. By leveraging the existing CH2 sustainability knowledge, design and building professions can learn and imitate it in further ‘green’ design without ‘re-inventing the wheel’; facilities executives can also use the existing knowledge to identify steps to boost up the facilities’ operating efficiency.

Where are the animals in sustainable development? Religion and the case for ethical stewardship in animal husbandry

The rights of livestock that are designated as food/farm animals have been a blindspot across development discourse and policies in spite of compelling moral (and socio-ecological) factors. They are regarded as 'resources' to sustain growth, leading to food production systems that support factory farming and invasive animal husbandry practices. The paper argues that religion and sustainable development are unlikely partners in the commodification of animals in these policies. Capitalist-driven interpretations of religion support the objectification of animals. Sustainable development, an efficiency-driven growth paradigm, is concerned with the preservation of finite natural resources. Sentient factory farmed animals are seen as infinite resources.Using Christianity and Hinduism as examples, the paper argues that religion can also shape alternative animal husbandry/food production practices, and expand the social justice element of sustainable development to encompass what I term 'sociozoological justice' in economic systems that heavily involve animals.

Social movement unionism and networked technology

From a European perspective, the wide-ranging social, economic, and political effects of networked computers have generated tensions between 'new' social movements and the 'old' labour movement. From an American perspective on social movements, there is no such tension between old and new social movements. A study of social-movement unionism in Sweden offers a interesting means of testing this emerging American perspective against the European perspective because the labour movement has long been particularly effective and networked technology has been embraced whole-heartedly throughout all aspects of the society, the economy, and the polity. The paper introduces the contrasting European and American perspectives on social movements and presents examples of the practice of social-movement unionism among Swedish social democrats, unionists, and diverse local activists. These examples support conclusions that eschew utopian theories of 'cyberunionism' in favour of developing a theory of articulated unionism in which local unions branches articulate vertically with national and global union bodies, and articulate horizontally with social movements in other arenas of conflict.

The multifaith movement : global risks and cosmopolitan solutions

This book documents the ultramodern rise of the multifaith movement, as mulitfaith initiatives have been increasingly deployed as cosmopolitan solutions to counter global risks such as terrorism and climate change at the turn of the 21st century. These projects aim to enhance common security, particularly in Western societies following the events of September 11, 2001 and the July 2005 London bombings, where multifaith engagement has been promoted as a strategy to counter violent extremism. The author draws on interviews with 56 leading figures in the field of multifaith relations, including Paul Knitter, Eboo Patel, Marcus Braybrooke, Katherine Marshall, John Voll and Krista Tippett.
Identifying the principle aims of the multifaith movement, the analysis explores the benefits—and challenges—of multifaith engagement, as well as the effectiveness of multifaith initiatives in countering the process of radicalization. Building on notions of cosmopolitanism, the work proposes a new theoretical framework termed ‘Netpeace’, which recognizes the interconnectedness of global problems and their solutions. In doing so, it acknowledges the capacity of multi-actor peacebuilding networks, including religious and state actors, to address the pressing dilemmas of our times. The primary intention of the book is to assist in the formation of new models of activism and governance, founded on a ‘politics of understanding’ modeled by the multifaith movement.

Building G20 outreach: The role of transnational policy networks in sustaining effective and legitimate summitry

G20 outreach processes, in the form of the Think 20, Labour 20, Business 20, and Civil 20, Youth 20, and Women 20, are a formal attempt by G20 leaders to engage various social sectors with G20 policymaking. This essay contends that G20 outreach processes are best understood as transnational policy networks, which are involved in widening the field of policy communication and deliberation. The importance of these transnational policy networks rest upon their role in developing and disseminating G20 policy priorities and principles; and are an attempt to enhance the legitimacy and influence of the G20 and its policy proposals.

"We agree that, in order to strengthen its ability to build and sustain the political consensus needed to respond to challenges, the G20 must remain efficient, transparent and accountable. To achieve this, we decide to … pursue consistent and effective engagement with non-members, regional and international organisations, including the United Nations, and other actors, and we welcome their contribution to our work as appropriate. We also encourage engagement with civil society.G20 Cannes Summit Final Declaration 2011 (G20 2011)"

The difficulty in balancing the effectiveness and representativeness of the Group of Twenty (G20) has led to sustained questions about its legitimacy (Cooper 2010; Rudd 2011; Cooper and Pouliot 2015). Consequently, while leaders have long sought external advice about the agendas of Group of Seven (G7) summits since 1975, and about the G20 finance ministers and central bank governors’ meetings (G20 FM/CBG) since 1999, there has been intensification, elaboration, and institutionalization of transnational networks of policymakers with respect to the G20 in recent years. These networks are especially evident in the form of the G20 working groups and G20 outreach processes involved in the G20 FM/CBG and the G20 leaders’ forum created in 2008.

G20 working groups include transgovernmental groups of government officials and outside experts within a specific policy area who are charged with preparing material for G20 deliberations. G20 outreach processes are a recent and more formal attempt by G20 leaders to engage various social sectors with the policymaking activity of the G20 and were first considered by the G20 membership in 2010 with a more formal engagement with business interests. This led to the formal development of G20 outreach groups in 2013 in the form of the Think 20 (think tanks), Labour 20, Business 20, Civil 20 and Youth 20, which include representatives from these sectors. In 2015, a Women 20 outreach group was also added. These outreach processes are best understood as transnational policy networks which have been built to support the G20’s capacity to be effective and legitimate.

This essay focuses on G20 outreach processes and examines why and how the G20 has sought to augment its intergovernmental summitry and transgovernmental working groups with transnational policy networks, purposely involving a range of societal interests. Transnational policy networks demonstrate the existence of policymaking practices which include the policy influence of experts and advocates outside government. These networks also indicate the ways in which governments, International Governmental Organizations (IGOs) and summits like the G20 engage society, or where elements of society engage themselves with the policymaking process (Stone 2008). These networks intersect with the intergovernmental activities of leaders and key diplomats, and overlap with the transgovernmental relationships of various levels of government bureaucrats (Baker 2009). One of the principle features of transnational policy networks is the way they create and channel the communication of political ideas and priorities. However, it is important to keep in the mind the purpose and power of actors involved in the network and consider who has the discretion and motivation to create the network in the first instance. As the G20 members stated in 2012, the aspiration for outreach is founded upon an intent to strengthen the G20’s capacity “to build and sustain the political consensus”. Consequently, it is important to consider how the development of transnational policy networks in the form of G20 outreach processes are able to sustain the effectiveness and legitimacy of the G20.

This essay contends that G20 outreach processes are best understood as transnational policy networks. These networks have been built to widen the field of policy communication and deliberation. Furthermore, these outreach processes and networks are an attempt to enhance the legitimacy and influence of the G20 and its policy proposals. While there is no doubt that outreach practices are “ad hoc responses to the widespread charge that the G20 reproduces the politics of exclusion in global governance” (Cooper and Pouliot 2015, 347), these practices have the potential to improve both the effectiveness and legitimacy of the G20. The G20 possesses uncertain legitimacy and members of the G20 demonstrate an awareness of this and a corresponding willingness to actively develop various political practices to support the capacity and legitimacy of the G20.

However, G20 outreach also enables the G20 to place some limit upon the policy narratives and ideas that develop within these policy networks. The G20 is liable to be misunderstood without examining the activity of these transnational networks because the G20 is fundamentally a deliberative policy forum rather than a negotiating forum of binding regulations. Transnational policy networks have the potential to scrutinize and amplify relevant policy ideas and thereby enhance the legitimacy of the G20 and strengthen the capacity of the G20 to address an array of global economic and social problems. However, while some narrative control is important to amplify the G20 agenda, too much narrative control will undermine its legitimacy and capacity to develop broad-based responses to global problems. This essay explores the formation of these transnational policy networks by first outlining the evolution of the purpose and configuration of the G20, then it considers the ways G20 outreach processes constitute transnational policy networks and why they have been established, and lastly, analyses how these networks operate to enhance the legitimacy and effectiveness of the G20.