Conceptual and Theoretical Frameworks for Organised Violence

The possibility of violence is ubiquitous in human social relations, its forms are manifold and its causes complex. Different types of violence are interrelated but in complex ways, and they are studied within a wide range of disciplines, so that a general theory, while possible, is difficult to achieve. This paper acknowledges that violence can negate power and that all forms of social power can entail violence, proceeds on the assumption that the organisation of violence is a particular source of social power. It therefore explores the general relationships of violence to power, the significance of war as the archetype of organised violence, the relationships of other types (revolution, terrorism, genocide) to war, and the significance of civilian-combatant stratification for the understanding of all types of organised violence. It then discusses the problems of applying conceptual types in analysis, and the necessity of a historical framework for theorising violence. The paper concludes by offering such a framework in the transition from industrialised total war to global surveillance war.

Book Review of “At Risk: Social Justice in Child Welfare and Other Human Services” by Karen J. Swift and Marilyn Callahan, 2009, Toronto: University of Toronto Press

The newest book by Canadian social work scholars Karen Swift and Marilyn Callahan is exemplary of how other disciplines can invigorate social work theory. “At Risk” uses child welfare practice as an entry point for exploring the continuing movement away from addressing needs and towards the management of risk in the human services.

Is VHB-JOURQUAL2 a Good Measure of Scientific Quality? Assessing the Validity of the Major Business Journal Ranking in German-Speaking Countries

This study examines the question of whether the journal ranking VHB-JOURQUAL 2 can be considered as a good measure for the construct “scientific quality”. Various rankings in business research provide the database for the analysis. The correlations between theses rankings are used to assess the validity of VHB-JOURQUAL 2 along various validity criteria. The correlations with rankings that measure the same construct based on different methods show that VHB-JOURQUAL 2 has acceptable, but moderate convergent validity. The validity varies considerably across disciplines, showing that the heterogeneity of business administration is not sufficiently represented by this overall ranking. The variability is related to the variation in members per discipline represented by the German Association for Business Research. Furthermore, the measure shows a weak correlation with acceptance rates as an indicator of nomological validity in some disciplines.