Suchergebnisse

This research aims to know the potential effect of Intellectual Capital Performance (ICP) to the intensity of Intellectual Capital Disclosure (ICD). The independent variables used in this research are the components of ICP that consists of Value Added Human Capital (VAHU), Value Added Capital Employed (VACA), and Structural Capital Value Added (SCVA) that is measured by using the Value Added Intellectual Coefficient (VAIC™). While, the dependent variable used in this research is ICD that measured by a disclosure index and relevant scoring system. Company size and leverage are also used in the regression model as moderating variables. One year annual reports (2017) of banking sector companies registered on the Indonesia Stock Exchange (IDX) are analyzed in quantitative research type. The samples that listed on the IDX in 2017 are selected by using purposive sampling method with certain criteria and 33 banking sector companies are obtained. The analysis is made by multiple regression analysis and the data testing is conducted by using SPSS 22 and Eviews 9 which previously has been carried out the classic assumption test first. Results of this study indicate that: (1) Simultaneously, ICP component significantly affect ICD. However, each component of VAHU and SCVA does not significantly affect the ICD, only VACA significantly affects the ICD; (2) Simultaneously, with the moderation of company size, ICP does not significantly affect the ICD. Similarly, each component of VAHU, VACA and SCVA does not significantly affect ICD; and (3) Simultaneously, with the moderation of company leverage, ICP significantly affects ICD. However, each component of VAHU and SCVA does not significantly affect the ICD, only VACA significantly affects the ICD.Keywords: Intellectual Capital Performance (ICP), Intellectual Capital Disclosure (ICD), Value Added Human Capital (VAHU), Value Added Capital Employed (VACA), Structural Capital Value Added (SCVA).Abeysekera, I. (2010). The Influence of Board Size on Intellectual Capital Disclosure by Kenyan Listed Firms. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 11 (4), pp. 504-518.Abeysekera, I., & Guthrie, J. (2004). Human Capital Reporting in a Developing Nation. British Accounting Review, 36 (3), pp. 251-268.Aditya Reza, R. (2010). Pengaruh Gaya Kepemimpinan, Motivasi, dan Disiplin Kerja terhadap Kinerja Karyawan PT. Sinar Santosa Perkasa Banjarnegara. Semarang: Universitas Diponegoro.Agnes, U. (2008). Sebuah Tinjauan Akuntansi Atas Pengukuran dan Pelaporan Knowledge. The 2nd National Conference UKWMS. Surabaya.Al-Ali, N. (2003). Comprehensive Intellectual Capital Management. New Jersey, Hoboken: Wiley.Alfaih, M. (2016). The Effectiveness of Board of Directors' Characteristics in Mandatory Disclosure Compliance. Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance, 24 (2), pp. 154-176.Alfraih, M. (2018). Intellectual Capital Reporting and Its Relation to Market and Financial Performance. International Journal of Ethics and Systems, 34 (3), pp. 266-281.Alwert, K., Bornemann, M., & Kivikas, M. (2004). Intellectual Capital Statement - Made in Germany. Berlin: Federal Ministry for Economics and Technology.Andriessen, D. (2004). Making Sense of Intellectual Capital: Designing a Method for the Valuation of Intangibles. Oxford: Elsevier Butterworth.Andriyanto, R., & Metalia, M. (2011). Perbandingan Tingkat Kelengkapan Mandatory Disclosure dan Voluntary Disclosure Informasi Akuntansi. Jurnal Akuntansi dan Investasi, 12 (1), pp. 15-35.Arjuwati, B. (2016). Pengaruh Kinerja Intellectual Capital Terhadap Intellectual Capital Disclosure pada Perusahaan yang Listing di Bursa Efek Indonesia. Padang: Kementerian Riset, Teknologi dan Pendidikan Tinggi Politeknik Negeri Padang.Ballow, J., Burgman, R., & Molnar, M. (2004). Managing for Shareholder Value: Intangibles, Future Value and Investment Decisions. Journal of Business Strategy, 25 (3), pp. 26-34.Barney, J. (1991). Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage. Journal of Management, 17 , pp. 99-120.Barney, J., & Arikan. (2001). The Resource-based View: Origins and Implications. Strategic Management Journal, 7 (16), pp. 124-188.Barney, J., & Clark, D. (2007). Resource-based Theory: Creating and Sustaining Competitive Advantage. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc.Bestivano, W. (2013). Pengaruh Ukuran Perusahaan, Umur Perusahaan, Profitabilitas, dan Leverage Terhadap Perataan Laba pada Perusahaan yang Terdaftar di BEI (Studi Empiris pada Perusahaan Perbankan di BEI). Padang: Universitas Negeri Padang.Boedi, S. (2008). Pengungkapan Intellectual Capital dan Kapitalisasi Pasar. Semarang: Universitas Diponegoro.Bontis, N., Keow, W., & Richardson, S. (2000). Intellectual Capital and Business Performance in Malaysian Industries. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 1 (1), pp. 85-100.Brigham, E., & Houston, F. (2001). Manajemen Keuangan. Jakarta: Erlangga.Brooking, A. (1996). Intellectual Capital: Core Assets for the Third Millennium Enterprise. London: Thomson Business Press.Bruggen, A., Vergauwen, P., & Dao, M. (2009). Determinants of Intellectual Capital Disclosure: Evidence from Australia. Management Decision, 47 (2), pp. 233-245.Cahyati, A. (2012). Intellectual Capital: Pengukuran, Pengelolaan dan Pelaporan. Jurnal Riset Akuntansi & Komputerisasi Akuntansi, 3 (1).Carlucci, D., Marr, B., & Schiuma, G. (2004). The Knowledge Value Chain: How Intellectual Capital Impacts on Business Performance. International Journal of Technology Management, 27 (6/7), pp. 575.Chen, M., Cheng, S., & Hwang, Y. (2005). An Empirical Investigation of the Relationship Between Intellectual Capital and Firm's Market Value and Financial Performance. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 6 (2), 159-176.Chu, S. K., Chan, K. H., & Wu, W. W. (2011). Charting Intellectual Capital Performance of the Gateway to China. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 12 (2), pp. 249-276.Connelly, C., Zweig, D., Webster, J., & Trougakos, J. (2012). Knowledge Hiding in Organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33, pp. 64-88.Cresswell, J. (2009). Research Design Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (Third ed.). United States: SAGE Publications, Inc.Crilly, D., & Sloan, P. (2013). Autonomy or Control? Organizational Architecture and Corporate Attention to Stakeholders. Organization Science, 25, pp. 339-355.Deegan, C. (2004). Financial Accounting Theory. Sydney: McGraw-Hill Book Company.Denziana, A., & Yunggo, E. (2017). Pengaruh Profitabilitas, Struktur Aktiva, dan Ukuran Perusahaan Terhadap Struktur Modal Perusahaan pada Perusahaan Real Estate and Property yang Terdaftar di Bursa Efek Indonesia Tahun 2015. Jurnal Akuntansi & Keuangan, 8 (1), pp. 51-67.Dewi, D. (2010). Pengaruh Jenis Usaha, Ukuran Perusahaan dan Financial Leverage Terhadap Tindakan Perataan Laba Pada Perusahaan Yang Terdaftar di Bursa Efek Indonesia (Studi Empiris di Bursa Efek Indonesia). Semarang: Universitas Diponegoro.Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. (1995). The Stakeholder Theory of the Corporation: Concepts, Evidence, and Implications. Academy of Management Review, 20, pp. 65–91.Edvinson, L. (1997). Developing Intellectual Capital at Skandia. Long Range Planning, 30 (3), pp. 366-373.Edvinsson, L., & Malone, M. (1997). Intellectual Capital: Realizing your Company's True Value by Finding Its Hidden Brainpower. New York: Harper Business.Evans, T. G. (2003). Accounting Theory: Contemporary Accounting Issues . South-Western, Thomson, Australia.Fama, E., & Jensen, M. (1983). Separation of Ownership and Control. Journal of Law and Economics, 26 (2), pp. 301-325.Ferdinand, A. (2006). Metode Penelitian Manajemen. Semarang: Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro.Freedman, M., & Jaggi, B. (2005). Global Warming, Commitment to The Kyoto Protocol, and Accounting Disclosures by The Largest Global Public Firms from Polluting Industries. The International Journal of Accounting, 40 , pp. 215-232.Freeman, R. (1984). Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Boston: Pitman.Freeman, R., & Reed. (1983). Stockholders and Stakeholders: A New Perspective on Corporate Governance. Californian Management Review, 25 (2), pp. 88-106.Freeman, R., Harrison, J., & Wicks, A. (2007). Managing for Stakeholders: Survival, Reputation, and Success. London and New Haven: Yale University Press.Garcia-Ayuso, M. (2002). Factor explaining the in ethical valuation of intangibles. Sevilla: Department of Accounting and Financial Economics, Universidad De Sevilla.Gates, S., & Langevin, P. (2010). Human Capital Measures, Strategy and Performance: HR Managers' Perceptions. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 23 (1), pp. 111-132.Ghozali, I. (2013). Aplikasi Analisis Multivariate dengan Program SPSS Cetakan VII. Semarang: Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro.Ghuthrie, J., & Petty, R. (2001). Intellectual Capital: An Australian Annual Reporting. Journal of Inttelectual Capital, 8 (2), pp.272-87.Goh, P., & Lim, K. (2004). Diclosing Intellectual Capital in Company Annual Reports: Evidence from Malaysia. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 5 (3), pp. 500-510.Guthrie, J., & Petty, R. (2000). Intellectual Capital: Australian Annual Reporting Practices. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 1 (3), pp. 241-251.Guthrie, J., Cuganesan, S., & Ward, L. (2006). Legitimacy Theory: A Story of Reporting Social and Environmental Matters Within the Australian Food and Beverage Industry. Sydney: The University of Sydney.Guthrie, J., Petty, R., Yongvanich, K., & Ricceri, F. (2004). Using Content Analysis as a Research Method to Inquire to Intellectual Capital Reporting. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 5 (2), pp. 282-293.Hafni, A. (2018). Pengaruh Pengungkapan Sustainability Reporting dan Intellectual Capital Terhadap Nilai Perusahaan (Studi Empiris Perusahaan Sektor Pertambangan yang Terdaftar di BEI Tahun 2011-2015). Yogyakarta: Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta.Haji, A. A., & Mubaraq, S. (2012). The Trends of Intellectual Capital Disclosures: Evidence from the Nigerian Banking Sector. Journal of Human Resource Costing & Accounting, 16(3), pp. 184-209.Hall, M., Millo, Y., & Barman, E. (2015). Who and What Really Counts? Stakeholder Prioritization and Accounting for Social Value. Journal of Management Studies, 52 (7), pp. 907-934.Haniffa, R., & Cooke, T. E. (2005). The Impact of Culture and Governance on Corporate Social Reporting. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 24 , pp. 391-430.Harisnawati, R., Ulum, I., & Syam, D. (2017). Pengaruh Intellectual Capital Performance Terhadap Intensitas Pelaporan Modal Intelektual. Jurnal Reviu Akuntansi, 7 (1), pp. 941-950.Hariyanto, W., & Hermawan, S. (2012). Pengaruh Intellectual Capital Terhadap Business Performance Dan Competitive Advantage Pada Perusahaan Farmasi Di Jawa Timur. Sidoarjo: Universitas Muhammadiyah Sidoarjo.Healy, P., & Palepu, K. (2001). Information Asymmetry, Corporate Disclosure, and the Capital Markets. Journal of Accounting & Economics, 31 (1/3), pp. 405-440.Henri, J. (2006). Management Control Systems and Strategy: A Resource-based Perspective. Accounting, Organizations, and Society, 31, pp. 529-558.Husin, N., Ahmad, N., & Sapingi, R. (2011). Intellectual Capital: A Focus on Human Capital Reporting Practices of Top Malaysian Listed Companies. The South East Asian Journal of Management, 5 (1), pp. 51-71.Ikatan Akuntan Indonesia. (2017). Standar Akuntansi Keuangan. Jakarta: Ikatan Akuntan Indonesia.Indonesian Institute of Accountants. (2009). PSAK. Jakarta: IAI.Jawahar, I., & McLaughlin, G. (2001). Toward a Descriptive Stakeholder Theory: An Organizational Life Cycle Approach. The Academy of Management Review, 26, pp. 397–414.Jensen, M., & Meckling, W. (1976). Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, agency Costs and Ownership. Journal of Financial Economics, 3 (4), pp. 305-360.Jiao, Y. (2011). Corporate Disclosure, Market Valuation, and Firm Performance. Financial Management, 40 (3), pp. 647-676.Jihene, F., & Robert, P. (2013). The Effect of Intellectual Capital Disclosure on the Value Creation: An Empirical Study Using Tunisian Annual Reports. International Journal of Accounting and Financial Reporting, 3 (1), pp. 81-107.Kaufmann, L., & Schneider, Y. (2004). Intangibles: A Synthesis of Current Research. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 5 (3), pp. 366-388.Kementerian Keuangan Republik Indonesia Badan Pengawas Pasar Modal dan Lembaga Keuangan. (2012). Keputusan Ketua Badan Pengawas Pasar Modal dan Lembaga Keuangan Nomor: KEP-347/BL/2012.Khan, H. U., & Ali, M. M. (2010). An Empirical Investigation and Users' Perceptions on Intellectual Capital Reporting in Banks. Journal of Human Resource Costing & Accounting, 14 (1), pp. 48-69.Lev, B. (1999). The Inadequate Public Information on Intellectual Capital and Its Consequence. Conference Proceeding: Measuring and Reporting Intellectual Capital, Experience, Issues and Prospects, An International Symposium. Amsterdam: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development.Li, Z., Chen, Z., Lui, T., & Chu, S. (2016). The Impact of Intellectual Capital on Company's Performances: A Study Based on MAKE Award Winners and non-MAKE Award Winner Companies. Procedia Computer Science 99, pp. 181 – 194.Lin, C. Y., & Edvinsson, L. (2011). National Intellectual Capital: a Comparison of 40 Countries. Berlin, Germany: Springer.Muttakin, M., Khan, A., & Belal, R. (2015). Intellectual Capital Disclosure and Corporate Governance: An Empirical Examination. Victoria: Deakin University.Nurcholisah, K., & Yadiati, H. W. (2017). Intellectual Capital Disclosure and Information Asymmetry in General Banking Listed in Indonesia Stock Exchange. International Business Management, 11 (4), pp. 972-983.Oktavia, M., & Daljono. (2014). Pengaruh Intellectual Capital Terhadap Kinerja Keuangan, Pertumbuhan Dan Nilai Pasar Perusahaan (Studi Empiris pada Perusahaann Konstruksi, Property & Real Estate yang Terdaftar di Bursa Efek Indonesia Tahun 2009-2012). Diponegoro Journal of Accounting, 3 (3), pp. 1-15.Oktavianti, H., & Wahidahwati. (2014). Faktor-faktor yang Mempengaruhi Pengungkapan Intellectual Capital. Jurnal Ilmu & Riset Akuntansi, 3 (5), pp. 1-18.Otoritas Jasa Keuangan. (2017). Undang-Undang Nomor 20 Tahun 2008 Tentang Usaha Mikro, Kecil, dan Menengah. Otoritas Jasa Keuangan.Petty, R., & Guthrie, J. (2000). Intellectual Capital Literature Review: Measurement, Reporting, and Management. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 1 (1), pp. 155-176.Prabowo, D. (2014). Analisis Faktor-Faktor yang Mempengaruhi Intellectual Capital Disclosure dan Pengaruh Intellectual Capital Disclosure terhadap Market Capitalization (Studi Empiris pada Perusahaan Real Estate dan Properti di BEI Periode 2010-2012). Semarang: Universitas Diponegoro.Priyanti, S. (2015). Determinan Pengungkapan Modal Intelektual Berdasarkan Variabel Keuangan dan Non Keuangan (Studi Empiris pada Perusahaan Perbankan yang Listing di BEI Tahun 2011-2013). Semarang: Universitas Negeri Semarang.PT Bursa Efek Indonesia. (2018). Laporan Keuangan dan Tahunan. Retrieved from Bursa Efek Indonesia: http://www.idx.co.id/.Pulic, A. (2000). VAIC – An Accounting Tool for IC Management. International Journal of Technology Management, 20 (5-8), pp. 702-714.Purnamawati, F. (2013). Analisis Intellectual Capital PT Wahyu Kreasi Utama, Jakarta. Jakarta: Universitas Indonesia.Purnomosidhi, B. (2006). Praktik Pengungkapan Modal Intelektual pada Perusahaan Publik di Bursa Efek Jakarta (BEJ). Jurnal Riset Akuntansi Indonesia, 9 (1), pp. 1-20.Puspitasari, A. (2018). The Practice of Disclosing Human Capital in Bank Jawa Barat and Banten: From the Perspective of Political Economy of Accounting. Pontianak: University of Tanjungpura.Ray, G., Barney, J., & Muhana, W. (2004). Capabilities, Business Process, and Competi-tive Advantage: Choosing The Dependent Variable in Empirical Test of The Resource-based View. Strategic Management Journal, 25, pp. 23-37.Razak, R. A., Mohammad, J., & Tobiagi, S. M. (2016). Intellectual Capital Dislosures Practices and Intellectual Capital Performance in Saudi Arabia Financial Institution. Journal of Business Studies Quarterly, 7(4), pp. 1-14.Sawarjuwono, T., & Kadir, A. (2003). Intellectual Capital: Perlakuan, Pengukuran dan Pelaporan (Sebuah Library Research). Jurnal Akuntansi dan Keuangan, 3 (1).Sawarjuwono, T., & Kadir, A. (2003). Intellectual Capital: Perlakuan, Pengukuran dan Pelaporan (Sebuah Library Research). Jurnal Akuntansi dan Keuangan, 5 (1), pp. 35–57.Schroeder, R., Bates, K., & Junttila, M. (2002). A Resource-based View of Manufacturing Strategy and the Relationship to Manufacturing Performance. Strategic Mana-gement Journal, 23, pp. 101-117.Setianto, A. (2014). Analisis Faktor-faktor yang Mempengaruhi Pengungkapan Modal Intelektual (Studi Empiris pada Perusahaan yang Terdaftar di "Indeks Kompas 100" Tahun 2010-2012. Semarang: Universitas Diponegoro.Sjamsulhadi. (2011). Analisis Modal Intelektual Pada Perusahaan Jasa Konstraktor dengan Menggunakan Metode Analytic Hierarchy Process. Jakarta: Universitas Terbuka.Solikhah, B. (2015). How is the Practice of Intellectual Capital Report in Indonesia? International Journal of Business and Management Study - IJBMS, 2 (1), pp. 263-266.Spanos, Y., & Lioukas, S. (2001). An Examination into the Causal Logic of Rent Generation: Contrasting Porter's Competitive Strategy Framework and the Resource-based View Perspective. Strategic Management Journal, 22, pp. 907-934.Stephani, T., & Yuyetta,, E. N. (2011). Analisis Faktor-faktor yang Mempengaruhi Intellectual Capital Disclosure (ICD). Jurnal Akuntansi Dan Auditing, 7 (2), pp. 111-121.Steward, T. (1997). Intellectual Capital: The New Wealth of Organizations. New York: Doubleday/Currency.Sugiyono. (2003). Metode Penelitian Bisnis. Bandung: Alfabeta.Sugiyono. (2017). Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, dan R&D. Bandung: Alfabeta.Suhardjanto, D., & Wardhani, M. (2010). Praktik Intellectual Capital Disclosure Perusahaan yang Terdaftar di Bursa Efek Indonesia. JAAI, 14 (1), pp. 71-85.Suwardjono. (2014). Teori Akuntansi: Perkayasaan Pelaporan Keuangan (3 ed.). Yogyakarta: BPFE.Sveiby, K. (1997). The Intangible Assets Monitor. Journal of Human Resource Costing & Accounting, 2 (1), pp. 73-97.Taliyang, S., & Jusop, M. (2011). Intellectual Capital Disclosure and Corporate Governance Structure: Evidence in Malaysia. International Journal of Business and Management, 6 (12), pp. 109–117.Tan, H., Plowman, D., & Hancock, P. (2007). Intellectual Capital and Financial Returns Of Companies. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 8 (1), pp. 76-95.Tandra, H. (2018). Pengaruh Likuiditas, Ukuran Perusahaan, dan BI-Rate terhadap Yield Obligasi Korporasi (Studi Kasus Pada Sektor Industri Perbankan Yang Terdaftar di Bursa Efek Indonesia Periode 2012-2016). Pontianak: Universitas Tanjungpura.Toms, S. (2010). Value, Profit, and Risk: Accounting and the Resource-based View of the Firm. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 23 (5), pp. 647-670.Tristanti, L. (2012). Analisis Pengaruh Karakteristik Perusahaan Terhadap Kelengkapan Pengungkapan Sukarela (Studi Empiris pada Perusahaan Manufaktur yang Terdaftar di Bursa Efek Indonesia Tahun 2006-2010). Semarang: Universitas Diponegoro.Ulfa, M. (2014). Pengaruh Modal Intelektual Terhadap Nilai Perusahaan dan Kinerja Keuangan pada Perusahaan Perbankan yang Terdaftar di Bursa Efek Indonesia (BEI) Tahun 2008 - 2011. Surabaya: Sekolah Tinggi Ilmu Ekonomi Perbanas.Ulum, I. (2012). Investigasi Hubungan antara Kinerja Modal Intelektual dan Praktik Pengungkapannya dalam Laporan Tahunan Perusahaan. Jurnal Ekonomi Bisnis, 17(1), pp. 36-45.Undang Undang Nomor 13 Tahun 2016.Undang Undang Nomor 15 Tahun 2001.Undang Undang Nomor 19 Tahun 2002.Viedma Marti, J. M. (2001). ICBS - Intellectual Capital Benchmarking System. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 2 (2), pp. 148-165.Wahdikorin, A. (2010). Pengaruh Modal Intelektual Terhadap Kinerja Keuangan Perusahaan Perbankan Yang Terdaftar di Bursa Efek Indonesia (BEI) Tahun 2007-2009. Semarang: Universitas Diponegoro.Watts, R., & Zimmerman, Z. (1986). Positive Accounting Theory. Prentice-Hall. Englewood Cliffs. NJ.Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A Resource-Based View of the Firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5 (2), pp. 171-180.Widarjo, W. (2011). Pengaruh Modal Intelektual dan Pengungkapan Modal Intelektual Pada Nilai Perusahaan yang Melakukan Initial Public Offering. Jurnal Akuntansi dan Keuangan Indonesia, 8 (2), pp. 157-170.Widyaningdyah, A., & Aryani, Y. (2013). Intellectual Capital dan Keunggulan Kompetitif (Studi Empiris Perusahaan Manufaktur versi Jakarta Stock Industrial Classification-JASICA). Jurnal Akuntansi dan Keuangan, 15 (1), pp. 1-14.Wijaya, M., & Amanah, L. (2017). Pengaruh Intellectual Capital Terhadap Kinerja Perusahaan Otomotif di Bursa Efek Indonesia. Jurnal Ilmu dan Riset Akuntansi, 6 (1), 296-311.Wijayanti, P. (2013). Pengaruh Intellectual Capital Terhadap Harga Saham Melalui Kinerja Keuangan pada Perusahaan Perbankan yang Terdaftar di Bursa Efek Indonesia (BEI) pada Tahun 2009-2011. Jurnal Ilmiah Mahasiswa FEB, 1 (2).William, S. (2001). Is Intellectual Capital Performance and Disclosure Practices Related? Journal of Intellectual Capital, 2 (3), pp. 192–203.Williams, S. (2000). Is a Company's Intellectual Capital Performance and Intellectual Capital Disclosure Practices Related?: Evidence from Publicly Listed Companies from the FTSE 100. Journal of Intellectual Capital, pp. 1-41.Windri, & Januarti, I. (2010). Pengaruh Kinerja Intellectual Capital terhadap Kinerja Intellectual Capital pada Perusahaan Manufaktur yang Terdaftar di BEI. Jurnal Akuntansi & Auditing, 7 (1), pp. 49 - 61.Wolk, C., Bresnan, J., Rosenbach, A., & Szmrecsanyi, B. (2013). Dative and Genetive Variability in Late Modern English: Exploring Cross-Constructional Variation and Change. Diachronica, 30 (3), pp. 382-419.Wolk, et al. (2013). Signaling, Agency Theory, Accounting Policy Choice. Accounting and Business Research, 18 (69), pp. 47-56.Yasin, S. (2016). Pengertian Budaya Perusahaan Menurut Para Ahli. Retrieved from Sarjanaku.com: http://www.sarjanaku.com/.Zhang, M. (2012). Board Structure, Ownership Concentration and Intellectual Capital. Wellington: Victoria Unversity.Zogning, F. (2017). Agency Theory: A Critical Review. European Journal of Business and Management, 9 (2), pp. 2-8.

Throughout, the history of the Latin America and Caribbean (LAC) region, natural resource wealth has been critical for its economies. Production of precious metals, sugar, rubber, grains, coffee, copper, and oil have at various periods of history made countries in Latin America-and their colonial powers-some of the most prosperous in the world. In some ways, these commodities may have changed the course of history in the world at large. Latin America produced around 80 percent of the world's silver in the 16th through 19th centuries, fueling the monetary systems of not only Europe, but China and India as well. The dramatic movements in commodity markets since the early 2000s, as well as the recent economic crisis, provide new data to analyze and also underscore the importance of a better understanding of issues related to boom-bust commodity cycles. The current pattern of global recovery has favored LAC so far. Countercyclical policies have supported domestic demand in the larger LAC economies, and external demand from fast-growing emerging markets has boosted exports and terms of trade for LAC's net commodity exporters. Prospects for LAC in the short term look good. Beyond the cyclical rebound, however, the region's major longer-run challenge going forward will be to craft a bold productivity agenda. With LAC coming out of this crisis relatively well positioned, this may well be possible, especially considering that the region's improved macro-financial resiliency gives greater assurance that future gains from growth will not be wiped out by financial crises. In addition, LAC has been making significant strides in the equity agenda and this could help mobilize consensus in favor of a long overdue growth-oriented reform agenda. But it remains to be seen whether the region will be able to seize the opportunity to boost long-run growth, especially considering the large gaps that LAC would need to close in such key areas as saving, human capital accumulation, physical infrastructure, and the ability to adopt and adapt new technologies.

This report highlights the great potential of the agribusiness sector in Africa by drawing on experience in Africa as well as other regions. The evidence demonstrates that good policies, a conducive business environment, and strategic support from governments can help agribusiness reach its potential. Africa is now at a crossroads, from which it can take concrete steps to realize its potential or continue to lose competitiveness, missing a major opportunity for increased growth, employment, and food security. The report pursues several lines of analysis. First, it synthesizes the large body of work on agriculture and agribusiness in Africa. Second, it builds on a diagnosis of specific value chains. As part of this effort, the value chain for Africa's largest and fastest-growing food import, rice, is benchmarked in Senegal and Ghana against Thailand's rice value chain. Third, 170 agribusiness investments by the Commonwealth Development Corporation (CDC) in Africa and Southeast Asia are analyzed to gain perspective on the elements of success and failure. Fourth, the report synthesizes perspectives from the private sector through interviews with 23 leading agribusiness investors and a number of other key informants. In conclusion, the report offers practical policy advice based on the experience of countries from within and outside Africa. The huge diversity of Africa's agro-ecological, market, and business environments, however, necessarily means that each country (and indeed regions within countries) will need to adapt the broad guidance provided here to the local context. Annex 1, concerning the rice value chain, was authored by John Orchard, Tim Chancellor, Roy Denton, Amadou Abdoulaye Fall, and Peter Jaeger. Annex 2, containing interviews with 23 leading agribusiness players in Africa, was authored by Peter White.

Botswana has been one of the most successful countries in the developing world over the last 40 years by many measures. Incomes have grown at a sustained pace, poverty has fallen, and the citizenry has become more educated. To be sure, poverty and income inequalities remain a problem, but rising standards of living have meant a better life for this generation of Batswana than any before it. The question facing the country leadership is whether this commendable performance can be sustained into the next generation. There are clouds on the horizon that cannot be ignored. Diamond earnings, the life blood of decades of prosperity, have flattened out. In per capita terms they are falling. Moreover, because revenues from diamonds going to the public sector have been falling for more than a decade, a growth model predicated upon an ever expanding state presence is not viable. Diamond earnings accruing to the state for subsequent redistribution have peaked. Employment and wages in the public sector have reached their natural limits as a share of Gross Domestic Product (GDP); recycling revenues from mining into the private sector, either directly or through the financial sector, has been inefficient with low social returns; and redistributive mechanisms to support social safety nets are also likely be approaching their limits. The country confronts the challenge of looking for new sources of growth outside of government.

The Malaysian economy maintained a vigorous pace in the first nine months of 2012 despite external headwinds. Continuing a trend in the past two years, Malaysia's stronger-than-expected Gross Domestic Product, or GDP growth in the first nine months of 2012 was driven by rapid expansion of domestic demand while external demand (and export-oriented industries) stagnated due to continuing global uncertainty. Malaysia's low participation of women in labor markets is linked to a pattern whereby women do not return to work after marriage and childbearing. Education alone is not sufficient to close gender gaps as social norms and formal institutions continue to affect the choices of all women. In the long-term, norms need to evolve for gender gaps to be bridged; in the meantime measures can be put in place to help men and women balance responsibilities. Changing prevailing social norms takes time. In the medium-term, supportive measures at all stages of the life-cycle can be put in place, ranging from flexi-work arrangements and expanded childcare options, to incentives for more female participation in 'non-female' educational fields and job types. While current initiatives to leverage on women's talent are laudable, other policy options must be explored, evaluated, and tailored, to enable Malaysian women to fully contribute to Malaysia's transformation towards a high-income, inclusive and sustainable economy.

Mongolia's prospects in the medium term look excellent from a growth perspective as well as a fiscal management perspective. Staying the course in the medium term means implementing the landmark Fiscal Stability Law (FSL) passed last year, and adopting a supportive integrated budget law this spring session of parliament. The economy grew 6.1 percent year-on-year (yoy) in 2010, following a contraction of 1.3 percent in 2009. The last quarter of 2010 ended with a broad-based recovery, supported by transportation, construction and wholesale and retail trade. The latest survey conducted in informal labor markets in March 2011 revealed no changes in the total number of casual workers compared to December. Mongolia has promising growth prospects. It has the opportunity now to exercise prudent fiscal and macroeconomic policies so it can steer clear of the mistakes made by other resource rich economies and achieve its potential.

Chile could well have space to increase its growth potential by 2 percentage points of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per year. To do this, it would need to pay more attention to new sources of growth in natural resources, manufacturing, and services. In an increasingly globalized world, first-mover advantages have become more numerous and larger. Chile risks losing out, as a few recent high-profile cases suggest. Chile's total factor productivity growth can be raised by driving within-firm technological change closer to the global best-practice frontier more rapidly, especially in manufacturing. This would encourage the diversification of exports and boost Chile's supply response to global demand changes. Chile confronts obstacles in its processes of innovation, human capital accumulation, and investment. To overcome them, deep institutional changes are needed to develop a national innovation system, stronger and more equitable educational achievement, more flexible labor markets, and focused public investments that crowd in private business. Such an inclusive growth strategy is likely to yield better social outcomes than a strategy that attempts to confront social inequities head-on through more equitable access to public services without paying adequate attention to the demand for labor and generation of income. Chile could also try a new policy towards innovation, but it would need to be bolder in terms of the institutional design to maximize the chances of success.

0
0
1
14
81
School of Global Studies/University of Gothenburg
1
1
94
14.0









Normal
0




false
false
false

EN-US
JA
X-NONE









































































































































































/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0cm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Calibri;}





Siddharth Mallavarapu on International
Asymmetries, Ethnocentrism, and a View on IR from India












How is the rise of the BRICs in the international
political and economic system reflected in our understanding of that system?
One key insight is that the discipline of International Relations that has
emanated from the northern hemisphere is far less 'international' than is
widely thought. Scholars from the 'Global South' increasingly raise important
challenges to the provincialism of IR theory with a universal pretense.
Siddharth Mallavarapu's work has consistently engaged with such questions. In
this Talk, Mallavarapu, amongst
others, elaborates on IR's ethnocentrism, the multitude of voices in the Global
South, and why he rather speaks of a 'voice from India' rather than an 'Indian
IR theory'.




Print version of this Talk (pdf)






What is, according to you, the biggest challenge / principal debate in
current IR? What is your position or answer to this challenge / in this debate?



One of the things I constantly contend with in my work
is to think of ways of how we can widen our notion of the international. IR has been too closely linked to the fortunes of
the major powers, and this has been to our detriment, because it has
impoverished our sense of international. I think the spirit of what I contend
with is best captured by what Ngugi wa Thiong'o in his book Globalectics:
Theory and Politics of Knowing concerns himself with, namely '…the
organization of literary space and the politics of knowing'. My interest is to
grapple with the manner in which the discipline of International Relations in
its dominant mainstream idiom orchestrates and administers intellectual space
and the implications this carries for the broader politics of knowledge. Simply
put, the principal challenge is to confront various species of ethnocentrism –
particularly Anglo-American accents of parochialism in the mainstream account
of International Relations.



I am also keenly sensitive to some disciplinary biases
and prejudices, which I think sometimes take on tacit forms and sometimes more
explicit forms, and in which provincial experiences are passed off as universal
experiences. The whole question of 'benchmarking' is problematic, in that a
benchmark is set by one, and others are expected to measure up to that
benchmark. Then there is the question of certain theories, for example the idea
that hegemony is desirable from the perspective of international stability –
think of the Hegemonic Stability Theory in the 1970s, or the Democratic Peace Theory that assumes that liberal democracy is an unsurpassed
political form from the perspective of peace. Then there is human rights
advocacy of a particular kind, and the whole idea of the 'Long Peace' applied
to the Cold War years. In reality, this was far from a 'long peace' for many
countries in the Third World during the same era.



I am also interested right now in the issue of the
evolution of IR theory, and was really intrigued by the September 2013 issue of
the EuropeanJournal of International Relations, with its focus on 'the End of International Relations Theory': I find
this fascinating, because just at a time when there are new players or re-emerging and re-surfacing
players in the international system, there is a move to delegitimize IR Theory
itself. So I am curious about the conjuncture and the set of sociologies of
knowledge that inform particular terms and turns in the discipline.



My response to this challenge
is to consciously work towards inserting other voices, traditions and
sensibilities in the discipline to problematize its straightforward and
simplistic understanding of large chunks of the world. My work is informed by
what international relations praxis looks
like in other places and how it is locally interpreted in those contexts. There
are gaps in mainstream narratives and I am interested in finding ways to create
space for a more substantive engagement with other perspectives by broadening
the disciplinary context. This is not merely a matter of inclusive elegance but
a matter of life and death because poor knowledge as evident from the
historical record generates disastrous political judgments that have already
resulted in considerable loss of human life, often worst impacting the former
colonies.



The global south holds a particular attraction for me
in this context, especially given its often problematic representations in
mainstream IR discourse. The underlying premise here is that the discipline of
IR will stand to be enriched by drawing on a much wider repertoire of human
experiences than it currently does. The normative imperative is to nudge us all
in the direction of being more circumspect before we pronounce or pass quick
and often harsh political assessments about sights, sounds, smells and
political ecologies we are unfamiliar with. IR as a discipline needs to reflect
the considerable diversity.  



My doctoral research on the role of the International Court
of Justice advisory opinion rendered in July 1996 on the legality of the threat
or use of nuclear weapons provided an opportunity to probe this diversity
further. While advancing a case for categorical illegality of nuclear use under
all circumstances, Judge Christopher Gregory Weeramantry discusses at length the multicultural bases of
international humanitarian law. In doing so, he combines knowledge of world
religions, postcolonial histories and canonical international law to frame his
erudite opinion, which displays a thoughtful engagement with often neglected or
obscured sensibilities.



These examples can be exponentially multiplied. Such a
sentiment is most succinctly captured by Chinua Achebe in Home and
Exile where he argues that '…my hope for the twenty-first [century] is that
it will see the first fruits of the balance of stories among the world's
peoples'. It most critically calls for '…the process of 're-storying' peoples
who had been knocked silent by the trauma of all kinds of dispossession'. I would treat this as an important charter or
intellectual map for anybody embarking on the study of International Relations
today. I would also like to add that this storytelling would inevitably
encounter the categories and many avatars
of race, class, gender and nationality crisscrossing and intersecting in all
sorts of possible combinations generating a whole host of political outcomes as
well.  



The skewed politics of knowledge is most evident when
it comes to theory with a big 'T' in particular. Most theories of International
Relations emanate from the Anglo-American metropole and little from elsewhere.
This is not because of an absence of theoretical reflection in other milieus but
due rather to a not so accidental privileging of some parts of experiential
reality over others. IR has been too caught up with the major powers. I could
think of conscious efforts to theorize both in the past and in the present
elements of reality hidden from conventional vantage points. One recent illustration
of social and political theorizing from the context I am more familiar with is an
account by Gopal Guru and Sundar Sarukkai titled The Cracked Mirror: An Indian Debate on Experience and Theory. There
are on-going theoretical engagements in Africa, the Arab world, Asia and South
America reflecting an intellectual ferment both within and outside of these
societies. International Relations as a discipline has to find ways of
explicitly engaging these texts and relating it to prevailing currents in world
politics rather than carry on an elaborate pretence of their non-existence. I
am more troubled by claims of an 'end of International Relations theory' just
at a moment when the world is opening up to new political possibilities
stemming from the projected growth in international influence of parts of Asia,
Africa, the Arab world and South America. IR has to move beyond its obsession
of focusing on the major powers and seriously democratize its content. The
terms 'global' or 'international' cannot be a monopoly or even an oligopoly.
Such a view has severely impoverished our understanding of the contemporary world.





How did you
arrive at where you currently are in IR?



I cannot really claim that this was a neatly planned
trajectory. I stumbled upon the discipline by chance not design. My initial
curiosity about the world of social cognition emerged from a slice of my medical
history. When I was at school in my early teens, I developed a condition referred
to as Leucoderma or Vitiligo which involved skin depigmentation. I enjoyed
writing from an early stage and recall recording my observations of the world
around me in a piece titled Etiology
Unknown borrowing language from the doctor's diagnosis. I recall an urgency
to comprehend and make sense of what I perceived then as a fast changing world
where old certitudes were dissolving on a daily basis. I felt an outsider at
some remove from my earlier self and it gave me on retrospect a distinct
vantage point to witness the world around me. It was impacting who I thought I
was and thereby compelled me to confront issues of identity – individual and
social. An extremely supportive family made all the difference during these
years.



The turmoil and confusion in those years led me to
develop a deeper interest in understanding more loosely why people reacted in
particular sorts of ways to what was in medical terms merely a cosmetic change.
It also led me to informally forge community whenever I saw anybody else experiencing
similar states of being. I also internalized one of the first ingredients of
good social science – the capacity to be empathetic and put ourselves in others
shoes. I learnt that the discipline of Sociology among the available choices in
my milieu came closest to allowing me to pursue these concerns more
systematically further. I applied to a Sociology master's programme after my
undergraduate years at Jawaharlal Nehru University in Delhi, but I had also
applied simultaneously to the International Relations programme since in my
understanding it after all concerned the wider world – an extension of scale
but similar I imagined in terms of the canvas of concerns. The numbers in India
are large, the competition is stiff: I made it to the IR programme but did not
make it to the Sociology programme.



Having got there, I had some outstanding influences,
and I soon realized that one could also think about issues of identity (then
cast by me in terms of simple binaries – home and the external world, the
relationship of inside and outside, victors and the vanquished) in the
discipline of IR. I decided to stick the course and delve into these questions
more deeply while keeping up with a broader interest in the social sciences.



I could list a few influences that were critical at
various stages of my academic biography: at high school, an economics teacher S.
Venkata Lakshmi was very encouraging and positive and confirmed my intuitive
sense that I would enjoy the social sciences. Subsequently at college I had in
Father Ambrose Pinto a fine teacher of Political Science. He would take us on
small field excursions to observe first hand issues such as caste conflicts in
a neighbouring village, and all that helped me develop a sharper sense of the
political which moved away from the textbook and was strongly anchored in the local
context.



At the graduate level of study, Kanti Bajpai who later also became my mentor and advisor in the doctoral programme
exercised an enormous influence as a role model. I was convinced that a life of
the mind is worth aspiring and working towards once I came into contact with
him in the classroom. He also exposed me to all the basic building blocks of an
academic life – reading, writing, researching, teaching and publishing,
demonstrating at all times both patience and unparalleled generosity. We have
collaborated on two edited volumes on International
Relations in India and I continue to greatly value an enduring friendship.



For over a decade, I have also had the good fortune of
coming into contact with B.S. Chimni who is an exemplary scholar in the Third World Approaches to
International Law (TWAIL) tradition. It has been a great joy bouncing off ideas and discussing
at length various facets of International Relations, International Law and
Political Theory together over the years. I have learnt much from this rich and
continued association. In 2012 we worked jointly on an edited book titled International Relations: Perspectives for
the Global South.



I have also learnt (and continue to do so) from my
students both at Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) and at the South Asian
University (SAU). At JNU, I made my beginnings and continue to take some pride
in being intellectually home spun at one of the foundational and premier
crucibles of International Relations scholarship in India. I have also
thoroughly enjoyed my interactions over the years with the students drawn from
diverse backgrounds. At SAU, I have in the space of a short period been exposed
to some fine students from across the South Asian region. I have often been
impressed by their understanding of politics and on occasion have marvelled at
their demonstration of a maturity beyond their years. There is much I learn
from them particularly from their insider narratives of the unique political
experiences and trajectories of their specific countries.



Himadeep Muppidi has also been a remarkable influence
in terms of clarifying my thinking about the workings of the global IR episteme.
His receptivity to hitherto neglected intellectual inheritances from outside
the mainstream and most evidently his capacity to write with soul, passion and
character while retaining a deep suspicion of the 'objectivity' fetish in the
social sciences has alerted me to a whole new metaphysics and aesthetic of
interpreting IR. The thread that runs through all these interests and
influences is firstly the issue of context, and secondly the question of agency
–what it meant to be marginal in some sense, how could one think about
theorizing questions relating to dispossession, relating to a certain degree of
marginality– and also the broader issue of the politics of knowledge itself: of
how certain attitudes and concepts seem to obscure or deface certain
conditions, which seem to be quite prevalent.



I have also found excellent academic conversationalists
with sometimes differing perspectives who help sharpen my arguments
considerably. I would like to make special mention of Thomas Fues and the fascinating
global governance school that he offers intellectual stewardship to in Bonn. In
the years to come, I look forward to further intellectual collaborations with
scholars from Brazil and South Africa and other parts of South America and
Africa as well as the Arab world.





What would a
student need to become a specialist in IR or understand the world in a global
way?



The key without a doubt is curiosity. I do my best to
feed that curiosity as a teacher. I also think Gerardo Munck and Richard
Snyder's counsel and interviews in their book, Passion, Craft and Method in Comparative Politics are a useful
resource for students wanting to study International Relations. I also feel
strongly that classics need to be read and engaged with, by bringing them into
play in our contemporary dilemmas. I find that many of the questions we ask
today are not necessarily entirely new questions: there is a history to them
and there has been some careful thought given to them in the past, so it is
important to partake of this inheritance.



Then there is language: it is vital for students to
break out of one particular region or one particular set of concerns which flow
from a limited context, and in this way to become willing to engage with other
contexts. In this sense, language learning potentially opens up other worlds. I also believe that some exposure to quantitative methods is important:
you need to be able
to both contextualize and interpret data with some degree of confidence and not
overlook them when approaching texts. Not
everybody may choose it but we need to make the distinction between The Signal and the Noise as Nate Silverreminds us. I have found Marc Trachtenberg's The Craft of International History (chapter 1 in PDF here) a very useful text in providing
some very practical advice in fine tuning our research designs to weave the
past into our present. D.D. Kosambi's essay on 'combining methods' (PDF here) still
provides important clues to thinking creatively about method.



I also think it is important for students to avoid the
temptations of insularity and also pose questions in a fashion that allows them
to explore the workings of these questions in diverse settings. They should be open to a
diversity of methods from different disciplines such as ethnography, and
develop a deeper historical sensitivity, all these are crucial to shaping up as
a good scholar.



In sum, the importance of classics, fieldwork and
language acquisition cannot be emphasized sufficiently. Classics bring us back
to refined thought concerning enduring questions, language opens up other
worlds, and field work compels one to at least temporarily inhabit the trenches,
dirty your hands and acquire an earthy sense of the issues at hand.





Given the
importance you attach to the learning of language, among other things, and the
linguistic diversity that characterises India, do you often perceive language
to be a barrier to understanding?



I think language works in two ways. On the one hand,
each language has a specific manner of framing issues and a specific set of
sensibilities associated with it which in some respects is quite unique.
However, languages also lend themselves to different cross-cultural
interpretations and adaptations. Kristina S. Ten in an evocative piece titled 'Vehicles for Story: Chinua Achebe and Ngũgĩ wa Thiong'o on Defining African Literature,Preserving Culture and Self' maps some key lines of an enduring debate. Thiong'o
has a particularly strong position on this question of language: he says he no
longer wants to write in the English language, but instead in his native Gikuyu,
as well as Swahili. He argues that language has to do with memory, has to do
with what he calls a soul, and he maintains that language hierarchies are very
real and that we must contribute to enriching our own pools of language to
begin with, if we are to contribute to a much wider, global repertoire of
languages. In contrast, Chinua Achebe whom I mentioned earlier, very often wrote
in English and held the position that it was important to be accessible to more
people and to reach diverse audiences who would not necessarily be from his
home country. He said it was possible to use a language like English and permeate
it with local texture, wisdom and pulse – something he has exemplified in his
own work. I consider his writings a testimony to how well that can be done.



So there is a bit of a divide in terms of how one can
look at this question of language, but teaching in India I know that there are
students who may be very bright but who are constrained by the fact that they
have not had the same access to English schools, and therefore are restricted
to the vernacular. These students may have some very good ideas, but they feel disadvantaged
by the fact that their command of the English language is not sufficient to
guarantee close attention to what they wish to say. Some work hard to overcome
these challenges and meet with considerable success. While I think it is
wonderful to learn another language, it does not need to entail a diffidence or
neglect of one's own native language or any other vernacular language. My
impression is that if unimaginatively pursued something is lost in the process
and students end up feeling diffident and apologetic about their native language
which is entirely undesirable. I believe therefore that while one should enthusiastically
embrace new languages, the challenge is to accomplish this without unconsciously
obscuring one's native tongue. Having said that, all of us in India are keen to
go to English language schools. Vernacular languages have often lost out in the
process. So there is something to be said about this concern about language. We
have to tread carefully and remain attentive to how language hierarchies are
positioned and deployed for advancing particular species of knowledge claims.





From the
language issues flow conceptual questions: Asia is a Western construct, and
South Asia an extension of that. You reluctantly use this term, South Asia, in
what you call shorthand, and similarly terms "nation" and "state". How can we
break away from these concepts if we don't have a new vocabulary?



This really flows from the fact that IR is still very
much an ethnocentric construct. We are also suggesting in the same breath that
there is a particular form in which most concepts and categories tend to be
employed. I think IR language is imbued at least partly with the vocabulary of
the hegemon or of the dominant powers, so that it shares with the area studies' legacy the political connotations that are still very much with us. One
way that I try to break away from this when I introduce students to these
concepts and categories is by focusing on the lineage and the broader
intellectual history and etymology of concepts which come into play in IR.
Students are in any case acutely aware of the fact that there is a strong area
studies tradition which has mapped the world in a particular way which was not an
innocent discursive formation by any stretch of imagination. They also
recognize that this is not the only framing possible. The challenge for us is
of course to introduce new concepts and categories. I noticed for instance that
South Asia has become 'Southern Asia' for some strategic commentators (StevenA. Hoffmann among others) because 'Southern Asia' also includes China. However,
when it is done from the perspective of strategy there are other interests intertwined
such as specific geopolitical assessments.



What I try to do, rather, is to draw on the deeper
histories within the region itself, in order to arrive at concepts and
conceptions which are more germane to our context. I don't think I've succeeded
in this project as yet, but one of the reasons why I think it's important to
historicise these elements and even categories is to open up the possibility of
thinking about different imaginaries and along with that different categories.
I don't want to call it an alternative vocabulary, because I think that some
sensibilities have been given short shrift in history, and some provincial
experiences have more successfully masqueraded as universal experiences. Therefore,
part of the challenge is to call that bluff, while another part of the
challenge is to reconstruct and offer fresh perspectives. These may even be
questions about traditional issues such as order or justice, questions of
political authority, political rule or legitimacy. These are questions which
are of concern to all societies though individual responses may not echo the
language and slants of conventional IR theory. However, they may throw up some
sophisticated formulations on these very issues. A part of the challenge for
the IR scholar, then, is to recover and bring these ideas into the sinews of the
mainstream IR academia.



It is equally important to avoid any sort of nativism,
or to suggest that this is necessarily 'the best' approach, but to widen the
inventory before moving on to stimulating a real conversation between divergent
conceptions. We must avoid falling into the trap of what Ulrich Beck among
others has referred to as 'methodological nationalism'. I am by no means
suggesting that there is 'an Indian theory' of IR, but what I am curious about
is how the world is viewed from this particular location. That is quite
different from suggesting that there is a national project or a national school
of IR. I think that distinction needs to be made more subtly and needs to come
through more clearly, but one of the projects I am currently involved in is the
chronicling of a disciplinary history of IR in India and what that tells us
about Indians and their readings of the world outside their home. In that
process, I ask what the key issues that animated particularly an earlier
generation of scholars - how did they present these ideas and why did they
avoid using certain forms of presentation and framing? What were some of the
conspicuous presences and nonappearances in their work? Exploring these sorts
of issues will lead us forward by, firstly, bringing to bear all these pieces
of work which I feel have been ignored or have not received their due, and secondly,
by showing that there is a fair amount of diversity of thinking even in the
earlier generations of IR scholarship. The intent is to avoid a monolithic
conception of IR that emerges from India. I will have to make this point much
more clearly and emphatically in the future, and hope that my focus on
disciplinary history will contribute to some critical ground clearing. Similar
inventories of IR scholarship need to be assembled in different locations from
Africa, South America, other parts of Asia and the Arab world.



Many of these projects then also link up to very
practical questions. One of the issues that is of interest to me in this
context is that of South-South cooperation, such as for instance the IBSA Dialogue Forum, or the grouping known as BRICS, or the broader forum of
the G-20. There is evidence that the traditional structures and ways of doing
things are increasingly suspect and being viewed with suspicion by some actors
within the international system. It is therefore more important now to reopen
some of these questions and to think afresh about such things as institutional
design: what does it mean to be talking about "democratising international
relations"? How can we think of more inclusive and legitimate institutions? How
can we think about ways in which we can cooperate for the provision of global
public goods, but in a manner which is historically more legitimate and fair?
How can we address previous asymmetries that are not necessarily going to just
disappear? How do we deal with old power structures and their residual
influences in terms of the Westphalian state system? What legacy has been
enshrined for instance in the Bretton Woods institutions and what has that
legacy meant? What happened to non-alignment? Vijay Prashad chronicles
vividly the promise and unfulfilled promise of the non-aligned movement in
his fascinating account titled The Darker
Nations: A People's History of the Third World. How the past plays out in
terms of contemporary global governance questions and arrangements is fundamental
to my research interests. I have recently intervened on the Responsibility to
Protect (R2P) doctrine and its practice. I have been rather critical arguing that it
cannot be disassociated from a longer history of interventionism by the major
powers in the global south however benign its dressing. A thread that runs
through my work is to demonstrate how historical asymmetry continues to manifest
in terms of how the contemporary international system is structured. And I ask if
we are to arrive at a more legitimate, inclusive and effective international
system, then what are the mechanisms and steps which we need to work towards?





What do you
imagine that process might look like? Do we need to return to a 'world of
villages' (the 1300s) before we can reinvent IR, the national and the global?
Do we need micro histories before we can reassemble a bigger history or is a
subtle shift possible?



There are two levels on which this can happen: on one
level the changes that seem to work are incremental changes and not
lock-stock-and-barrel fundamental changes. In terms of scale, different
scholars do different things. Some scholars are interested in micro histories,
others are interested in macro histories and asking the big questions.



I imagine both these projects are important and there
should be more scholars from the global south as well who ask the big macro questions.
What has happened for too long is that we have relegated this responsibility to
the traditional post Second World War major powers and they have treated it as
natural to offer us macro-historical narratives and pictures. I think scholars
from the global south need now to attend to both tasks: to write good micro
histories as well as reframe the larger questions of macro history. I would add
that normative concerns such as the content and feasibility of global justice needs
also to be an integral part of contemporary international relations
scholarship. For instance, it would be fair to ask that in a world of plenty,
why do so many people go hungry?



So if you were to ask me about my dreams and my hopes,
I still think that the 1955 Bandung Conference and subsequent nonalignment visions
remain unfinished business. I hope that within the span of the current
generation there is greater egalitarianism accomplished in the international
system and ultimately a balance not just in terms of what Achebe called the stories
of the world, but also in terms of actual institutional designs and political outcomes.
This should translate into much better provision of various public goods to global
citizenry with special attention to those who have been historically
disadvantaged. For assorted reasons there have been deep asymmetries within the
international system which have persisted and resulted in diminishing the life
chances and collective self-esteem of various peoples in the global south. There
is an urgent need to both acknowledge and remedy the situation in the world we
live in.





In your
experience, what is the role of the IR scholar in India in relation to the
foreign policy establishment and the policy makers?



It is quite hard to find traction of one's ideas in
terms of any influence of scholars or groups of scholars on the social or
political establishment. Overall I would say that academia has for  a long time not been taken seriously by the
foreign policy establishment, and that has more to do with the institutional
structure where there is a pecking order and the bureaucracy sees itself as
being better informed. Even in academic conference settings, one could periodically
expect a practitioner of foreign policy to argue that they know best having
been present at a particular negotiation or at the outbreak, duration and
conclusion of any recent episode in diplomatic history. This does not in reality
translate into the best knowledge because there is the possibility that besides
the immediate detail, the absence of a larger historical context or even
unaccounted variables in terms of the contemporary political forces at work
during that moment could be blind spots in the narrative. It is fair to say
therefore that the influence of academia on the Indian foreign policy
establishment by and large has tended to be minimal. However, one could make
the argument today that there are some early stirrings of changes in the offing.




Quite evidently, the Indian Foreign Service is far too
miniscule for a country of India's size and desired influence in the
international system. There is a perceived need from within the foreign policy
establishment to draw on expertise from elsewhere and on occasion they do turn
to the academia to invite counsel on specific issues. From the perspective of
the IR academic, it is perhaps equally important to be not too close to the
corridors of power as it could alter the incentive structure to the detriment
of independent opinion making for securing short or long term political
patronage.





Siddharth Mallavarapu is currently Associate
Professor and Chairperson at the Department of International Relations at the South
Asian University in New Delhi. He is on deputation from the School of
International Studies at Jawaharlal Nehru University. He completed his doctoral
thesis on the politics of norm creation in the context of an Advisory Opinion
rendered by the International Court of Justice in 1996 on nuclear weapon threat
or use. This culminated in his first book, Banning
the Bomb: The Politics of Norm Creation. His principal areas of academic
focus include international relations theory, intellectual histories of the
global south, disciplinary histories of IR, global governance debates and more
recently the implications of recent developments in the field of cognition on
the social sciences. Mallavarapu retains a special interest in issues related
to the politics of knowledge and examines the claims advanced in the discipline
of International Relations through this perspective. His immediate teaching
commitments include a graduate course on 'Cognition and World Politics' and a
doctoral level course on 'Advanced Research Methods'. He has co-edited (with
Kanti Bajpai) two books on recent Indian contributions to International
Relations theory. In 2012 along with B.S. Chimni, he co-edited International Relations: Perspectives for
the Global South.





Related links

Faculty Profile



v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}



0
0
1
5137
29287
School of Global Studies/University of Gothenburg
244
68
34356
14.0









Normal
0
false



false
false
false

EN-US
JA
X-NONE









































































































































































/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0cm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Calibri;}










































































































































































































Read
Mallavarapu's Dissent of Judge
Weeramantry (2006 book chapter) here (pdf)
Read
Mallavarapu's Indian
Thinking in International Relations here (pdf)
Read
Mallavarapu's Because
of America here (pdf)
Read
Mallavarapu's Nuclear
Detonations: Contemplating Catastrophe here (pdf)


Print version of this Talk (pdf)