Managerial perseptions on corporate social responsbility: A Transatlantic comparison between forest products companies in Europe and North America

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) addresses the responsibility of companies for their impacts on society. The concept of strategic CSR is becoming increasingly mainstreamed in the forest industry, but there is, however, little consensus on the definition and implementation of CSR. The objective of this research is to build knowledge on the characteristics of CSR and to provide insights on the emerging trend to increase the credibility and legitimacy of CSR through standardization. The study explores how the sustainability managers of European and North American forest companies perceive CSR and the recently released ISO 26000 guidance standard on social responsibility. The conclusions were drawn from an analysis of two data sets; multivariate survey data based on one subset of 30 European and 13 North American responses, and data obtained through in-depth interviewing of 10 sustainability managers that volunteered for an hour long phone discussion about social responsibility practices at their company. The analysis concluded that there are no major differences in the characteristics of cross-Atlantic CSR. Hence, the results were consistent with previous research that suggests that CSR is a case- and company-specific concept. Regarding the components of CSR, environmental issues and organizational governance were key priorities in both regions. Consumer issues, human rights, and financial issues were among the least addressed categories. The study reveals that there are varying perceptions on the ISO 26000 guidance standard, both positive and negative. Moreover, sustainability managers of European and North American forest companies are still uncertain regarding the applicability of the ISO 26000 guidance standard to the forest industry. This study is among the first to provide a preliminary review of the practical implications of the ISO 26000 standard in the forest sector. The results may be utilized by sustainability managers interested in the best practices on CSR, and also by a variety of forest industrial stakeholders interested in the practical outcomes of the long-lasting CSR debate.

Automated design of self-stabilization

Self-stabilization is a property of a distributed system such that, regardless of the legitimacy of its current state, the system behavior shall eventually reach a legitimate state and shall remain legitimate thereafter. The elegance of self-stabilization stems from the fact that it distinguishes distributed systems by a strong fault tolerance property against arbitrary state perturbations. The difficulty of designing and reasoning about self-stabilization has been witnessed by many researchers; most of the existing techniques for the verification and design of self-stabilization are either brute-force, or adopt manual approaches non-amenable to automation. In this dissertation, we first investigate the possibility of automatically designing self-stabilization through global state space exploration. In particular, we develop a set of heuristics for automating the addition of recovery actions to distributed protocols on various network topologies. Our heuristics equally exploit the computational power of a single workstation and the available parallelism on computer clusters. We obtain existing and new stabilizing solutions for classical protocols like maximal matching, ring coloring, mutual exclusion, leader election and agreement. Second, we consider a foundation for local reasoning about self-stabilization; i.e., study the global behavior of the distributed system by exploring the state space of just one of its components. It turns out that local reasoning about deadlocks and livelocks is possible for an interesting class of protocols whose proof of stabilization is otherwise complex. In particular, we provide necessary and sufficient conditions – verifiable in the local state space of every process – for global deadlock- and livelock-freedom of protocols on ring topologies. Local reasoning potentially circumvents two fundamental problems that complicate the automated design and verification of distributed protocols: (1) state explosion and (2) partial state information. Moreover, local proofs of convergence are independent of the number of processes in the network, thereby enabling our assertions about deadlocks and livelocks to apply on rings of arbitrary sizes without worrying about state explosion.

Through the back door : Melungeon literacies and 21st century technologies

The Melungeons, a minority recognized in Southern Appalachia where they settled in the early 1800s, have mixed heritage—European, Mediterranean, Native American, and Sub-Saharan African. Their dark skin and distinctive features have marked them and been the cause of racial persecution both by custom and by law in Appalachia for two centuries. Their marginalization has led to an insider mentality, which I call a “literacy” of Melungeon-ness that affects every facet of their lives. Just a century ago, while specialized practices such as farming, preserving food, hunting, gathering, and distilling insured survival in the unforgiving mountain environment, few Melungeons could read or write. Required to pay property taxes and render military service, they were denied education, suffrage, and other legal rights. In the late 1890s visionary Melungeon leader Batey Collins invited Presbyterian homemissionaries to settle in one Tennessee Melungeon community where they established a church and built a school of unparalleled excellence. Educator-ministers Mary Rankin and Chester Leonard creatively reified the theories of Dewey, Montessori, and Rauschenbusch, but, despite their efforts, school literacy did not neutralize difference. Now, taking reading and writing for granted, Melungeons are exploring their identity by creating websites and participating in listserv discussions. These online expressions, which provide texts for rhetorical, semiotic, and socio-linguistic analysis, illustrate not solidarity but fragmentation on issues of origins and legitimacy. Armed with literacies of difference stemming from both nature and nurture, Melungeons are using literacy practices to embrace the difference they cannot escape.