The gay subject in business and its discursive formation: an exploration on power, knowledge and sexuality

Issues related to the reality of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) individuals are being incorporated into institutional and social discourses, and show the challenges that must be overcome towards citizenship. The inclusion of gay rights in the domain of institutions like the United Nations and the Brazilian Secretariat of Human Rights are a response to broader movements that places the gay subject as an important topic of debate in the social-political sphere. In this scenario, some institutions deserve close attention from researchers related to gay issues, the business environment being a good example. In this domain, diversity has become an important topic of debate between scholars, where the question of sexual identity in most cases does not appear. The literature that actually focuses on the theme is explored through approaches that are not able to break with universalisms and a normatized vocabulary. Therefore, this research explores discursive structures related to sexuality and examines the meanings construed throughout these structures as described by gay individuals working in business. Furthermore, it investigates patterns of discursive normative structures and consequential challenges faced by gay people in the working environment, and also complements the current debate both in the socio-political sphere and in academic reality on LGBT challenges. The Foucauldian notions of discourse, knowledge and power, and the main concepts of queer theory are incorporated to the analysis, as well as concepts related to the politics of post-colonial sexuality, subordination, and hegemonic forces, together with role of reflexivity in modernity and its impacts on secularized mental structures. The research design takes a phenomenological approach and bases its knowledge claim on a participatory perspective, where the sample chosen for data collection consisted of gay individuals working in the business environment, aiming at generate categories of meanings through the description of their experiences.

International civil society actors in Genetically Modificied Organisms as a field of struggle: a neo-gramscian study in Brazil and the United Kingdom

Since the international financial and food crisis that started in 2008, strong emphasis has been made on the importance of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) (or “transgenics”) under the claim that they could contribute to increase food productivity at a global level, as the world population is predicted to reach 9.1 billion in the year 2050 and food demand is predicted to increase by as much as 50% by 2030. GMOs are now at the forefront of the debates and struggles of different actors. Within civil society actors, it is possible to observe multiple, and sometime, conflicting roles. The role of international social movements and international NGOs in the GMO field of struggle is increasingly relevant. However, while many of these international civil society actors oppose this type of technological developments (alleging, for instance, environmental, health and even social harms), others have been reportedly cooperating with multinational corporations, retailers, and the biotechnology industry to promote GMOs. In this thesis research, I focus on analysing the role of “international civil society” in the GMO field of struggle by asking: “what are the organizing strategies of international civil society actors, such as NGOs and social movements, in GMO governance as a field of struggle?” To do so, I adopt a neo-Gramscian discourse approach based on the studies of Laclau and Mouffe. This theoretical approach affirms that in a particular hegemonic regime there are contingent alliances and forces that overpass the spheres of the state and the economy, while civil society actors can be seen as a “glue” to the way hegemony functions. Civil society is then the site where hegemony is consented, reproduced, sustained, channelled, but also where counter-hegemonic and emancipatory forces can emerge. Considering the importance of civil society actors in the construction of hegemony, I also discuss some important theories around them. The research combines, on the one hand, 36 in-depth interviews with a range of key civil society actors and scientists representing the GMO field of struggle in Brazil (19) and the UK (17), and, on the other hand, direct observations of two events: Rio+20 in Rio de Janeiro in 2012, and the first March Against Monsanto in London in 2013. A brief overview of the GMO field of struggle, from its beginning and especially focusing in the 1990s when the process of hegemonic formation became clearer, serves as the basis to map who are the main actors in this field, how resource mobilization works, how political opportunities (“historical contingencies”) are discovered and exploited, which are the main discourses (“science” and “sustainability” - articulated by “biodiversity preservation”, “food security” and “ecological agriculture”) articulated among the actors to construct a collective identity in order to attract new potential allies around “GMOs” (“nodal point”), and which are the institutions and international regulations within these processes that enable hegemony to emerge in meaningful and durable hegemonic links. This mapping indicates that that the main strategies applied by the international civil society actors are influenced by two central historical contingencies in the GMO field of struggle: 1) First Multi-stakeholder Historical Contingency; and 2) “Supposed” Hegemony Stability. These two types of historical contingency in the GMO field of struggle encompass deeper hegemonic articulations and, because of that, they induce international civil society actors to rethink the way they articulate and position themselves within the field. Therefore, depending on one of those moments, they will apply one specific strategy of discourse articulation, such as: introducing a new discourse in hegemony articulation to capture the attention of the public and of institutions; endorsing new plural demands; increasing collective visibility; facilitating material articulations; sharing a common enemy identity; or spreading new ideological elements among the actors in the field of struggle.

Mhealth entrepreneurship: an exploratory research for a managerial model for mhealth start ups in low and middle income countries

Since some years, mobile technologies in healthcare (mHealth) stand for the transformational force to improve health issues in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Although several studies have identified the prevailing issue of inconsistent evidence and new evaluation frameworks have been proposed, few have explored the role of entrepreneurship to create disruptive change in a traditionally conservative sector. I argue that improving the effectiveness of mHealth entrepreneurs might increase the adoption of mHealth solutions. Thus, this study aims at proposing a managerial model for the analysis of mHealth solutions from the entrepreneurial perspective in the context of LMICs. I identified the Khoja–Durrani–Scott (KDS) framework as theoretical basis for the managerial model, due to its explicit focus on the context of LMICs. In the subsequent exploratory research I, first, used semi-structured interviews with five specialists in mHealth, local healthcare systems and investment to identify necessary adaptations to the model. The findings of the interviews proposed that especially the economic theme had to be clarified and an additional entrepreneurial theme was necessary. Additionally, an evaluation questionnaire was proposed. In the second phase, I applied the questionnaire to five start-ups, operating in Brazil and Tanzania, and conducted semi-structured interviews with the entrepreneurs to gain practical insights for the theoretical development. Three of five entrepreneurs perceived that the results correlated with the entrepreneurs' expectations of the strengths and weaknesses of the start-ups. Main shortcomings of the model related to the ambiguity of some questions. In addition to the findings for the model, the results of the scores were analyzed. The analysis suggested that across the participating mHealth start-ups the ‘behavioral and socio-technical’ outcomes were the strongest and the ‘policy’ outcomes were the weakest themes. The managerial model integrates several perspectives, structured around the entrepreneur. In order to validate the model, future research may link the development of a start-up with the evolution of the scores in longitudinal case studies or large-scale tests.