|Calls for Papers|
Call for Proposals: Lessons in Social Equity: A Case Study Book
In the 21st century, the most pressing, wicked problems all involve issues of social equity. Whether global climate change, natural disasters, development and resource usage, political oppression, police killings, genocide, COVID-19, and more, social inequities abound. If the world is to be more equitable throughout the 21st century and into the 22nd century, administrators in all sectors must be competent in how to promote fairness for all.
Still, classical training in public administration has often emphasized skills like planning, organizing, staffing, directing, coordinating, reporting, and budgeting. Historically, teaching equity has not been a priority for many MPA and doctoral programs. Yet in order to better train administrators in how to foster social equity, they must be exposed to the complex dynamics involved in diagnosing, understanding, and resolving inequities, and reading and debating case studies is often the best way to facilitate classroom education on social equity. Still, to date, no accessible compilation of social equity case studies is in print.To address these gaps, we invite case studies that explore social equity dimensions across sectors, governments, and topics, including but not limited to:
1. Administrative or policymaker responses to specific examples of enduring inequities
2. Public or nonprofit responses to COVID-19
3. Police brutality and killings
4. Equity issues in administrative and policymaker responses to global climate change, natural disasters, sustainable development, and more
5. Case studies implicating disciplines like business, history, and social work
6. How nonprofits, including globally, affect social equity
7. How philanthropy impacts social equity
8. Global discussions of social equity across sectors, including case studies on social equity as political oppression, censorship, relations between states and marginalized populations, and genocide
Additional option---given the new normal of video conferencing as part of the college learning environment, we are open to the idea of having a video component be part of the case presentation. Birkdale Publisher would host the video for student viewing. The videos could for example be interviews of some of the people involved in the case, or of a third person providing an analysis of the situation. Please note that this is only an option and is not mandatory.
Proposals of no more than 500 words should be submitted by October 15, 2020 to: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1cCfUAAyyb3wLQLdCL9c4yApUC1hhqL46d0qqDPXx-Y8/edit?ts=5f640383. Proposals, no longer than 500 words, should clearly identify: a) the case the author proposes to discuss; b) why the case study would make a good teaching addition to a classroom environment; c) concepts implicated in the case; and d) the major equity issues raised by the case. For questions on how to write a case study, authors should read Hatcher, McDonald, & Brainard (2018) “How to write a case study for public affairs”, which can be accessed here.
Editors will inform authors of the status of their proposal by October 17, 2020. Full case studies accepted for development will be due to the above Google address. Authors of proposals accepted for development will receive detailed instructions from the editors on the preferred format for the case study. Acceptance of a proposal does not guarantee case study publication.
Questions should be directed to lead editor Dr. Richard Greggory Johnson III: firstname.lastname@example.org.
To learn more, click here.
Call for contributions for an edited book on Southern-led programming of CSO development collaboration
Deadline for abstracts 1st November 2020! We are looking for contributions for an edited volume tentatively titled: Starting from the South: Reimagining programming in development collaboration of civil society organizations” . Editors: Margit van Wessel, Wageningen University & Research, the Netherlands; Tiina Kontinen, University of Jyväskylä, Finland; and Justice Bawole, the University of Ghana Business School, Ghana. Click here for the full call.
Conference « Taxation and philanthropy »
Conference « Taxation and philanthropy »
Geneva Centre for Philanthropy, University of Geneva
CALL FOR PAPERS for Junior Scholars Workshop,
26 November 2020
About the Conference
Organised by the Geneva Centre for Philanthropy (the “GCP”), University of Geneva, the conference will gather the most prominent scholars, as well as government representatives and other important stakeholders in the field of philanthropy and taxation to discuss the fundamental justification, different forms, measurement, and possible improvements of tax incentives for philanthropic activities.
What: GCP International Conference on Taxation and Philanthropy
When: 26-27 November 2020
Where: Geneva, Switzerland
About the Workshop
In addition to convening international experts on philanthropy and taxation, the GCP seeks to enrich the current body of research. The Workshop of Junior Scholars will be the first scientific event of this conference and will take place on 26 November 2020. The GCP invites junior scholars (graduate and PhD students, postdoctoral fellows, and untenured junior faculty) to submit papers that explore the opportunities and challenges of tax incentives for philanthropic activities. The objective of this workshop is to highlight the work of emerging scholars and to advance the GCPs mission studying the domain of philanthropy in an interdisciplinary perspective. Therefore, perspectives from any discipline, such as humanities, social sciences, including therefore economics, law, economics, sociology, and business studies are encouraged. Papers can be either empirical – using quantitative, qualitative, or mixed method approaches – or theoretical.
Prize for the best paper of junior scholars
We are pleased to announce that the Lombard Odier Foundation will be awarding a prize of CHF 5,000 to honour the best paper presented during the junior scholars’ workshop. In order to be considered for the prize by the prize jury, it is important that the paper, which you will submit by 30 September 2020, be as close to final as possible. The prize jury will determine the winner according to the following criteria: soundness of the conceptual development, originality and new contribution, methodology and relevance to practice and policy. In addition to the cash prize, the winner will be publicly presented with a commemorative certificate and recognition at the Conference. Uni Dufour - 24 rue Général-Dufour - CH-1204 Geneva Tel. + 41 22 379 76 18 - www.unige.ch/philanthropie 2
What: GCP Junior Scholars Workshop on Taxation and Philanthropy
When: 26 November 2020
Where: Geneva, Switzerland
Call for Papers: We are accepting papers related to one of the scientific topics listed below. If your paper focuses on a topic that does not fall into any of those categories but you consider that it could be of interest in the general framework of the conference please submit your abstract with a brief explanation. Papers selected for the workshop will be pre-circulated and read in advance by all participants. We aim to select 10-15 papers, which will be placed in sessions complementary to the research focus. The scientific topics are as follows:
Justification of tax incentives for philanthropy
Forms and efficiency of tax incentives for philanthropy
Cross-border philanthropy and tax barriers
The role of tax incentives in corporate philanthropy and social entrepreneurship
For more information about the conference and its scientific scope, please visit our conference’s website at https://www.unige.ch/conference-philanthropy-taxation/.
For the GCP Junior Scholars Workshop on Taxation and Philanthropy, submissions of a short abstract and the full working paper are required. Please submit your abstract at: email@example.com
Length: max. 500 words (excluding title, author information, and references)
Structure: Abstracts do not have a set structure. However, an outline of the purpose of the research, research questions, methods, data sources, a brief description of the results, and its importance and contribution to existing research is highly appreciated.
Format: Microsoft Word
Abstract deadline: 31 May 2020
First draft of paper: 30 September 2020
Practical information and further instructions:
Dates of the Conference: 26 and 27 November 2020
Date of the Workshop: 26 November 2020
Venue: University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
The New 4 Es: Fostering Engagement, Empathy, Equity, and Ethics in an Era of Uncertainty
A Public Integrity symposium in partnership with ASPA’s Section on Democracy and Social Justice
Guest Editors: Dr. Richard Greggory Johnson III (University of San Francisco), Dr. Sean McCandless (University of Illinois Springfield), and Dr. Seth Meyer (Bridgewater State University)
The world once again finds itself in uncertain times. We are currently living through the double pandemic of COVID-19 and racism. Both pandemics disproportionately affect historically marginalized communities, especially communities of color. These disproportionalities are made possible by racism at multiple levels, white supremacy, patriarchy, and more. Furthermore, income inequality within the United States has grown over the past several years to its highest levels. Internationally, attacks on freedom of the press as well as on historically marginalized groups such as the Roningya and Uighars have lead to questions of how public and nonprofit organizations both create and make these issues worse and how they help foster equity in these situations.
As a discipline, public administration faces a reckoning regarding its roles in creating, maintaining, and perpetuating these inequities. The discipline must respond justly, especially to ensure that voices it has historically marginalized in public discourses are no longer silenced but are diversified, heard, respected, included, and acted upon. The traditional “Es” espoused by public administration--efficiency, effectiveness, and economy--must be augmented by other values. Public administrators must promote the “New Es”: They must be engaged (reach out to and incorporate historically marginalized communities), empathetic (able to understand and share others’ feelings), equitable (fair to all, especially through correcting injustices), and ethical (act morally and promote the public interest).
We invite empirical and/or theoretical papers exploring how to foster these news Es, including but not limited to these topics:
Proposals of no more than 500 words should be submitted by 11:59pm (Eastern Time) on December 1, 2020 using this Google Form . Editors will inform authors of decisions on proposals by 11:59pmET on December 18, 2020. Full papers accepted for development will be due in Public Integrity’s Editorial Manager system by 11:59pm (Eastern Time) on May 1, 2021. Acceptance of a proposal does not guarantee publication.
Questions should be directed to lead editor Dr. Richard Greggory Johnson III at firstname.lastname@example.org .
JANUARY 1, 2021
Building the conceptual and theoretical foundation for fundraising’s professional ethics
For such a major component of the discipline of nonprofit marketing, fundraising doesn’t have a lot in the way of professional ethics underpinning it. This is not to suggest for a moment that fundraising is in any way unethical; just that there are few theories of professional ethics on which to found ethical best practice.
One problem for the fundraising profession is that it attempts to apply ethics to professional dilemmas – such as how much to intrude into a person’s personal space in the course of a solicitation – without a sound understanding of which normative theory it is attempting to apply. When it does attempt this, it usually applies – perhaps ‘shoehorns’ would be a better description – one of the classic normative theories such as Kantian ethics or Utilitarianism on to the problem.
To read the full call, click here.
Critical theory, qualitative methods and the nonprofit and voluntary sector
A special issue of Voluntary Sector Review
Dr Jon Dean (Sheffield Hallam University, UK) | email@example.com
Dr Kim Wiley (University of Florida, USA) | firstname.lastname@example.org
Over recent years, there have been moves to take what scholars have labelled a more ‘critical’ approach to studies of nonprofit organisations, philanthropy and giving behaviours, and the wider voluntary sector. Such a move has come from a view of the subject area as failing to examine political, systemic, and structural issues that may be shaping organisations and behaviours, and instead tries to ‘reveal the most profoundly buried structures’ (Bourdieu, 1996: 1) of the nonprofit world.
By taking a critical approach, perhaps drawing on feminist, queer, post-colonial, or postmodern theories, we can identify sources of discrimination and injustice in the sector and elevate ways of tackling them. Practically, these are messages that certain sections of the nonprofit sector – due to crises in safeguarding revealed by the Oxfam Haiti abuse scandal, or challenges to the lack of representation of people of colour in nonprofit leadership roles – are increasingly aware of and indicate some increased willingness to act on. At a time of interlocking social crises – of welfare, democracy, inequality, and more – theory can move from aloof observer to engaged friend (Law, 2015), helping us understand how what may be happening in a voluntary organisation today links to wider historical trends and social structures (Mills, 1959).
At the heart of much of this shift towards critical approaches has been a wider and greater belief in the value of qualitative research. Sometimes unhelpfully seen as a challenge to hegemonic academic ideas, especially in certain disciplines where nonprofit studies are generally located, applications of qualitative methodology supported by critical theory are used by some to pay attention to the everyday realities which produce statistical relationships between quantitative variables (Alasuutari, 2010). Others however view qualitative methods as merely different methodological tools that serve to answer different research questions. Ontologically positioned to help reveal the socially constructed nature of social relations, and epistemologically critically realist or interpretive ways of knowing, qualitative methods provide researchers with the tools to better reveal the ‘verstehen’ of people’s experiences and practices and make direct links between action occurring within and outside nonprofits.
Fundamentally, such approaches argue that if we know differently about society and its structures, then we are more likely to do differently (Eikenberry, Mirabella and Sandberg, 2019). Despite this, and as revealed by multiple panels at leading nonprofit research conferences, doctoral candidates and newer researchers especially have been frustrated by the lack of support for qualitative work in their disciplines, and that the value of this work gets overlooked. This is despite some of the most highly recognised scholarship in the field in recent years utilising both qualitative methods and critical theory, such as Eliasoph’s (2011) ethnography of volunteering and Krause’s (2014) interview-based exploration of aid agency’s logics of practice.
Further, while all researchers should be reflexive (Dean, 2017) qualitative studies are generally better at providing researchers with scope for reflexive work examining issues of positionality within data collection and analysis. The intimacy and embedded nature of qualitative work (Khan, 2011) creates ethical quandaries and dilemmas for researchers which can themselves be explored and solutions realised through applications of critical theoretical frameworks. Finally, qualitative methods frequently offer better opportunities for non-hierarchical research relations, including participant and community-led research approaches, meaning we shift from ‘research on’ to ‘research with’ relationships. Such principles underpin efforts to decolonise research methods (Chilisa, 2019; Smith, 2013) and to employ accessible methods (Gauntlett, 2007) that ensure all people can take part in research projects.
Call for papers
For this special issue of Voluntary Sector Review we are looking for articles that fit within such a brief. Any form of rigorous qualitative method can be utilised (e.g. interviews, focus groups, ethnography, visual methods, participatory methods, and others), as long as the project data is interrogated and understood through the application of suitable critical theory (e.g. feminist, post-colonial, queer, Marxist, critical race, postmodern, intersectional, and others). We aim to include about six articles including a geographic and demographic spread of authors and issues discussed, qualitative methods used, and critical theories applied.
If you are interested in submitting a proposal for this edited collection, please email an abstract of up to 500 words, outlining the article’s contents, including its methodology, critical approach and application of theory, and fit with such a special issue, alongside a 50 word author biographical statement, to both editors. All submissions must be received by Friday 17th July. Authors of accepted abstracts will be informed of the decision by 1st August. Full papers are due 1st April 2021.
All submissions elected by the editors will be invited to submit a full article through the Voluntary Sector Review submission system, which will then be subject to the journal’s usual double-blind peer review procedures. Invitation to submit a full article does not guarantee publication, and all decisions are ultimately those of the journal editors.
If you have any questions about potential submissions please contact the special issue editors, Jon Dean (email@example.com) and Kim Wiley (firstname.lastname@example.org). If you want to submit an abstract, but the current COVID-19 crisis is causing you significant problems in this regard, we understand - please do liaise with us about this.
Alasuutari, P. (2010). The rise and relevance of qualitative research, International journal of social research methodology, 13(2), 139-155.
Bourdieu, P. (1996) The state nobility, Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Dean, J. (2017) Doing reflexivity: An introduction, Bristol: Policy Press.
Chilisa, B. (2019). Indigenous research methodologies. Sage Publications, Incorporated.
Eliasoph, N. (2011) Making volunteers: Civic life after welfare's end, Oxford: Princeton University Press.
Gauntlett, D. (2007) Creative explorations: New approaches to identities and audiences, Abingdon: Routledge.
Law, A. (2015) Social theory for today: Making sense of social worlds, London: Sage.
Khan, S. (2011) Privilege: The making of an adolescent elite at St Paul’s School, Oxford: Princeton University Press.
Krause, M. (2014) The good project: Humanitarian relief NGOs and the fragmentation of reason, London: University of Chicago Press.
Mills, C.W. (1959) The sociological imagination, New York: Oxford University Press.
Eikenberry, A., Mirabella, R. and Sandberg, B. (2019) Reframing nonprofit organizations: Democracy, inclusion, and social change, Irvine: Melvin & Leigh.
Smith, L. T. (2013) Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples, London: Zed Books.
April 1, 2021
Covid-19 has given rise to the biggest economic, health and socio-psychological challenges faced by global communities in recent memory. Despite the hardship, the crisis has brought out the best in people. Through numerous fundraising and volunteering efforts, displays of solidarity and generosity across many communities continue. Frontline efforts of the healthcare sector are being supported not just by charities, but by manufacturing firms, local government services, universities, and individuals. The pandemic highlighted the social paradox wherein the individuals despite the financial hardships due to reduced income, worry and anxiety faced by them rallied with their peers in show of solidarity and engaging in donation behaviour. Initial anecdotal evidence suggest that donation behaviour may have remained stable despite the pandemic and even surged for specific charities (e.g. NHS related charities in UK).
To read the full call, click here.