Suchergebnisse

This article is concerned with retro retailing; specifically with how retro retailers talk about themselves, their shops and the commodities they sell. Retro retailing is argued to exist in a profoundly ambiguous space, between the mainstream and the alternative (as imagined). Whilst retro retailers operate in self-styled 'alternative' shopping spaces and talk about themselves and their work in ways that are readily identifiable with others who work in the creative industries, in terms of an imagined alternative, these ways of talking are simultaneously interwoven with facets of the mainstream-as-imagined. This article looks at the ways retro retailers negotiate these tensions and ambiguities. More broadly, it reflects on the importance of analyses of talk within research on the creative industries and on the alternative/mainstream boundary, focusing particularly on the limitations of this boundary as an imaginary for thinking through difference.

We develop a particular approach to the analysis of retailing, one in which the importance of retailers' talk/practice and the connections between talk/practice and its displacement within retail organisations is emphasised. Displacement means that executive talk is not necessarily powerful, but must be reworked, forged anew, in the specifics of particular stores. Retail (executive) talk/practices have to be translated, and this is the source of their potential instability. We use a particular example to illustrate this argument: that of charity retailing. The authors examine how charity retailing has been reimagined and reworked in head offices, and how this is displaced through charity retail chains. We show the instabilities of charity retailers' (head office) talk, particularly with respect to implementation, and argue that charity retailers' ability to effect the changes they seek to make are limited by the copresence in charity shops of multiple understandings of charity which, themselves, map into particular in-store zones: back rooms, front sales areas, and shop windows. These are: charity as gift; acting charitably (towards other deserving cases or causes); and charity as fundrasing. We also reflect on the likely implications of these findings for the charity retail project; the significance of these findings with respect to future analyses of conventional retailing, its talk and practice; and on the complex intersections between talk/practice, discourse, and space.

While international agreements and legislation call for incorporation of four pillars of sustainability, the social (including cultural), economic and institutional aspects (the 'human dimension') have been relatively neglected to date. Three key impediments have been identified: a relative lack of explicit social, economic and institutional objectives; a general lack of process (frameworks, governance) for routine integration of all four pillars of sustainability; and a bias towards biological considerations. Practical integration requires a 'systems' approach with explicit consideration of strategic and operational aspects of management; multidisciplinary or transdisciplinary evaluations; practical objectives for the four pillars of sustainability; appropriate participation; and a governance system that is able to integrate these diverse considerations in management. We challenge all involved in fisheries to immediately take five practical steps toward integrating ecological, economic, social and institutional aspects: (1) Adopt the perspective of the fishery as a 'system' with interacting natural, human and management elements; (2) Be aware of both strategic and operational aspects of fisheries assessment and management; (3) Articulate overarching objectives that incorporate all four pillars of sustainability; (4) Encourage appropriate (and diverse) disciplinary participation in all aspects of research, evaluation and management; and (5) Encourage development of (or emulate) participatory governance.