title: Fishing

authors: McCormack, Fiona

subjects: Anthropology

abstract: The anthropology of fisheries is a core focus of maritime anthropology. Scholarship in this field is multifaceted, exploring fishing ways of life, fishing knowledge, marine tenures and economies, the gendered nature of fishing, how people cope with danger and risk, and the specificities of how this particular watery nature is manifested in social, political, and cultural systems. Fishing can be defined as a productive activity that takes place in a multidimensional space, depending more on natural or wild processes than manufactured processes. The idea of fishing being closer to nature is an analytical thread, giving the anthropology of fisheries a particular edge on the multispecies and more than human ethnographic turn in contemporary anthropology. Research in fisheries anthropology has long held the connections between fisher and fish to be of central concern. Significant too, however, is the thesis that the construction of commodity fisheries as a natural domain, of which fishers are atomistic extractors to be managed, is a highly politicized process involving the bioeconomic creation of fish stock and broader political economies. Anthropological research on fisheries engages critically with neoliberalizations, the extension of privatizations, and the proliferation of industrial aquaculture, thus challenging Blue Economy attempts to reconfigure nature–culture relationships and reposition the marine environment as a locus for the enactment and perpetuation of inequality.

text: Fishing The anthropology of fisheries is a core focus of maritime anthropology. Scholarship in this field is multifaceted, exploring fishing ways of life, fishing knowledge, marine tenures and economies, the gendered nature of fishing, how people cope with danger and risk, and the specificities of how this particular watery nature is manifested in social, political, and cultural systems. Fishing can be defined as a productive activity that takes place in a multidimensional space, depending more on natural or wild processes than manufactured processes. The idea of fishing being closer to nature is an analytical thread, giving the anthropology of fisheries a particular edge on the multispecies and more than human ethnographic turn in contemporary anthropology. Research in fisheries anthropology has long held the connections between fisher and fish to be of central concern. Significant too, however, is the thesis that the construction of commodity fisheries as a natural domain, of which fishers are atomistic extractors to be managed, is a highly politicized process involving the bioeconomic creation of fish stock and broader political economies. Anthropological research on fisheries engages critically with neoliberalizations, the extension of privatizations, and the proliferation of industrial aquaculture, thus challenging Blue Economy attempts to reconfigure nature–culture relationships and reposition the marine environment as a locus for the enactment and perpetuation of inequality.

year: 2020

title: Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting: Towards a framework for Pakistan

authors: Taimur, Muhammad

subjects: Corporate Social Responsibility

abstract: Corporations disseminate Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting (CSRR) to discharge accountability and transparency to their stakeholders and achieve corporate legitimacy in society. Originating from the developed countries, CSRR practices have been mainly dominated by the ideas and practices from the United States, United Kingdom, Germany, and Australia, etc., which have influenced CSRR practices in developing countries. Several scholars argue that CSRR is a context-specific concept, and therefore it should incorporate the contextual factors including the socio-economic, political, religious, and cultural factors of the country, and should be based on the perspectives of local stakeholders. The call to incorporate contextual factors provides the impetus for this study to develop a context-specific CSRR framework and to evaluate current CSRR practices of public listed companies in Pakistan. The three interrelated objectives of the study are, (a) to construct a stakeholder-based CSRR index for Pakistani corporations, (b) to evaluate the extent and quality of CSRR practices of Pakistani listed companies, and (c) to examine the factors influencing CSRR practices in Pakistan. To achieve the objectives of the study, a sequential mixed-methods approach was employed and the investigation was completed in three stages. In the first stage, a CSRR index consisting of 70 items was developed in consultation with 50 Pakistani stakeholders from eight groups representing corporate managers, customers, religious clerics, investors, auditors and accountants, corporate employees, government regulators, and academicians. In the second stage, the stakeholders-based CSRR index was applied to the annual reports of 25 listed Pakistani corporations to evaluate the extent and quality of CSRR practices in Pakistan. Finally, statistical techniques, including the correlation and multiple regression analysis, were employed to determine the impact of twelve company-specific factors on the CSRR practices of the Pakistani corporations examined.
To provide insights on the findings, the study adopts an integrated theoretical framework including stakeholder theory, legitimacy theory, institutional theory, signaling theory, and agency theory. The interpretation with reference to the theoretical framework provides insights into the CSRR practices of Pakistani corporations. In addition, the study also examines the theories in light of the empirical findings. The findings of the study suggest a considerably low extent and quality of CSRR practices in Pakistan. It points to a significant information gap between the expectations of Pakistani stakeholders and the actual CSRR disclosed by the Pakistani corporations. It is argued that low stakeholders’ activism, the weak influence of normative and coercive forces, and the absence of context-specific CSRR framework and guidelines lead to the low extent and quality of CSRR observed in this study. The regression analysis reveals that firm size, industry, the board size, family ownership, and government ownership significantly influence the CSRR practices in Pakistan. However, this association was not evident with respect to profitability, financial leverage, audit type, firm age, independent and women directors, and foreign ownership. The empirical findings, which are interpreted through the theoretical lenses adopted in this study, indicate that CSRR in Pakistan is used for reputational and impression management, window-dressing, and greenwashing purposes rather than to discharge accountability and transparency to the extended stakeholder groups.    
The study makes several contributions to the field of CSRR from multiple perspectives. First, the study contributes in the form of a CSRR framework that would guide the CSRR practices and enable the regulatory authorities to make policies and statutory recommendations for the enforcement of CSRR in Pakistan. Second, it contributes to the extant literature by suggesting a systematic method and approach to construct a CSRR index and evaluate CSRR practices in line with the stakeholders’ perspectives and contextual factors. Third, this study highlights the implications of CSRR practices in an Islamic context and therefore contributes to the Islamic scholarship on CSRR. Finally, the study provides new empirical insights on CSRR theories in light of the specific context of a predominantly Islamic country.

text: Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting: Towards a framework for Pakistan Corporations disseminate Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting (CSRR) to discharge accountability and transparency to their stakeholders and achieve corporate legitimacy in society. Originating from the developed countries, CSRR practices have been mainly dominated by the ideas and practices from the United States, United Kingdom, Germany, and Australia, etc., which have influenced CSRR practices in developing countries. Several scholars argue that CSRR is a context-specific concept, and therefore it should incorporate the contextual factors including the socio-economic, political, religious, and cultural factors of the country, and should be based on the perspectives of local stakeholders. The call to incorporate contextual factors provides the impetus for this study to develop a context-specific CSRR framework and to evaluate current CSRR practices of public listed companies in Pakistan. The three interrelated objectives of the study are, (a) to construct a stakeholder-based CSRR index for Pakistani corporations, (b) to evaluate the extent and quality of CSRR practices of Pakistani listed companies, and (c) to examine the factors influencing CSRR practices in Pakistan. To achieve the objectives of the study, a sequential mixed-methods approach was employed and the investigation was completed in three stages. In the first stage, a CSRR index consisting of 70 items was developed in consultation with 50 Pakistani stakeholders from eight groups representing corporate managers, customers, religious clerics, investors, auditors and accountants, corporate employees, government regulators, and academicians. In the second stage, the stakeholders-based CSRR index was applied to the annual reports of 25 listed Pakistani corporations to evaluate the extent and quality of CSRR practices in Pakistan. Finally, statistical techniques, including the correlation and multiple regression analysis, were employed to determine the impact of twelve company-specific factors on the CSRR practices of the Pakistani corporations examined.
To provide insights on the findings, the study adopts an integrated theoretical framework including stakeholder theory, legitimacy theory, institutional theory, signaling theory, and agency theory. The interpretation with reference to the theoretical framework provides insights into the CSRR practices of Pakistani corporations. In addition, the study also examines the theories in light of the empirical findings. The findings of the study suggest a considerably low extent and quality of CSRR practices in Pakistan. It points to a significant information gap between the expectations of Pakistani stakeholders and the actual CSRR disclosed by the Pakistani corporations. It is argued that low stakeholders’ activism, the weak influence of normative and coercive forces, and the absence of context-specific CSRR framework and guidelines lead to the low extent and quality of CSRR observed in this study. The regression analysis reveals that firm size, industry, the board size, family ownership, and government ownership significantly influence the CSRR practices in Pakistan. However, this association was not evident with respect to profitability, financial leverage, audit type, firm age, independent and women directors, and foreign ownership. The empirical findings, which are interpreted through the theoretical lenses adopted in this study, indicate that CSRR in Pakistan is used for reputational and impression management, window-dressing, and greenwashing purposes rather than to discharge accountability and transparency to the extended stakeholder groups.    
The study makes several contributions to the field of CSRR from multiple perspectives. First, the study contributes in the form of a CSRR framework that would guide the CSRR practices and enable the regulatory authorities to make policies and statutory recommendations for the enforcement of CSRR in Pakistan. Second, it contributes to the extant literature by suggesting a systematic method and approach to construct a CSRR index and evaluate CSRR practices in line with the stakeholders’ perspectives and contextual factors. Third, this study highlights the implications of CSRR practices in an Islamic context and therefore contributes to the Islamic scholarship on CSRR. Finally, the study provides new empirical insights on CSRR theories in light of the specific context of a predominantly Islamic country.

year: 2022

title: Indigenous service programs plus indigenous evaluator equals Whitestream evaluation - What's wrong with this picture? (Reflections from my PhD)

authors: Masters-Awatere, Bridgette

abstract: For the past 100 or so years, formal evaluation has taken its lead from frameworks that originate from a culturally blind standpoint. Worldwide the major influence on evaluation practice comes from the United States of America. The absence of non-dominant (or indigenous) culturally constructed frameworks has been replicated around the world.
Before the formation of the Aotearoa New Zealand Evaluation Association (ANZEA), as a NZ specific evaluation group, practitioners generally belonged to the Australasian Evaluation Society (AES) and joined in the sharing, adoption and adaptation of USAs Program Evaluation Standards. However, the context of evaluation in New Zealand has been somewhat different from the rest of the world, becoming more culturally centred than other countries. The role and place of the Treaty of Waitangi has been acknowledged as an attributing factor by ANZEA.
Four indigenous, externally evaluated “By Maori for Maori”, health & wellbeing programmes were used as case studies within my research. I draw upon examples from the cases studies to highlight the vulnerable and contentious position indigenous service providers and indigenous evaluators were in. Adapting Sandra Grande’s (2003) analysis, I critiqued the context of the case study evaluations that commissioners considered as Kaupapa Maori. In this presentation I argue that while stakeholders perceived the work to be an indigenous evaluation, the case studies demonstrate that whitestream evaluation was prevalent.

text: Indigenous service programs plus indigenous evaluator equals Whitestream evaluation - What's wrong with this picture? (Reflections from my PhD) For the past 100 or so years, formal evaluation has taken its lead from frameworks that originate from a culturally blind standpoint. Worldwide the major influence on evaluation practice comes from the United States of America. The absence of non-dominant (or indigenous) culturally constructed frameworks has been replicated around the world.
Before the formation of the Aotearoa New Zealand Evaluation Association (ANZEA), as a NZ specific evaluation group, practitioners generally belonged to the Australasian Evaluation Society (AES) and joined in the sharing, adoption and adaptation of USAs Program Evaluation Standards. However, the context of evaluation in New Zealand has been somewhat different from the rest of the world, becoming more culturally centred than other countries. The role and place of the Treaty of Waitangi has been acknowledged as an attributing factor by ANZEA.
Four indigenous, externally evaluated “By Maori for Maori”, health & wellbeing programmes were used as case studies within my research. I draw upon examples from the cases studies to highlight the vulnerable and contentious position indigenous service providers and indigenous evaluators were in. Adapting Sandra Grande’s (2003) analysis, I critiqued the context of the case study evaluations that commissioners considered as Kaupapa Maori. In this presentation I argue that while stakeholders perceived the work to be an indigenous evaluation, the case studies demonstrate that whitestream evaluation was prevalent.

year: 2015