About this publication: What is the correlation among the creative industries, creative industry policies, new media paradigms and capitalism as colonial relations of dominance? What is the role of these industries in the prioritization of the interests of capital at the expense of those of society and how can these paradigms be criticized in the context of the actual, neoliberal, flexible regime of reproduction of capital? To what measure is this regime ‘flexible’ and to what measure it is just an extension of rigid, feudal and racial logics that underline (post)modern representational discourses? To what measure do the concepts of creativity, transparency, openness and flexibility conceal the hegemonic nature of modern hierarchies of exploitation?This publication brings together six essays that offer a critique of the relationship between the creative industries and capital. It treats ‘the networked world’ — its democracies, cognitivities, its attention and its paradigmatic cultural discourses — as one of the domains wherein and by which capitalism and its colonial relations of dominance are being reproduced, reorganized, perpetuated and ‘modernized’.The Gray Zones of Creativity and Capital (eds. Gordana Nikolić and Šefik Tatlić) consists of works from a diverse range of authors from around the globe: Jonathan Beller, Josephine Berry Slater, Marc James Léger, Ana Vilenica, Sandi Abram & Irmgard Emmelheinz. The book first appeared in Serbian in 2015.
MULTIFILE
Purpose: The purpose of this study is to find determinants about risk resilience and develop a new risk resilience approach for (agricultural) enterprises. This approach creates the ability to respond resiliently to major environmental challenges and changes in the short term and adjust the management of the organization, and to learn and transform to adapt to the new environment in the long term while creating multiple value creation. Design/methodology: The authors present a new risk resilience approach for multiple value creation of (agricultural) enterprises, which consists of a main process starting with strategy design, followed by an environmental analysis, stakeholder collaboration, implement ESG goals, defining risk expose & response options, and report, learn & evaluate. In each step the organizational perspective, as well as the value chain/area perspective is considered and aligned. The authors have used focus groups and analysed literature from and outside the field of finance and accounting, to design this new approach. Findings: Researchers propose a new risk resilience approach for (agricultural) enterprises, based on a narrative about transforming to multiple value creation, founded determinants of risk resilience, competitive advantage and agricultural resilience. Originality and value: This study contributes by conceptualizing risk resilience for (agricultural) enterprises, by looking through a lens of multiple value creation in a dynamic context and based on insights from different fields, actual ESG knowledge, and determinants for risk resilience, competitive advantage and agricultural resilience.
In today’s intellectual capital literature, we see a shift from identifying intangibles towards understanding the dynamics of value creation. As it is not clear what “dynamic” stands for, the aim of this explorative and conceptual paper is to contribute to a better understanding of the dynamic dimension of IC. Based on a review of the early IC literature, the dynamic dimension (or dynamics) of intellectual capital seems to refer to the logic that value creation is the product of interaction between different types of (intangible) resources. As the idea of value creation through combination of knowledge resources is closely related to the New Growth Theory (Romer, 1990, 1994), this paper explores the New Growth Theory and its implications for the dynamic dimension of intellectual capital. Based on the exploration of the New Growth Theory, a conceptual model is presented in which the elements that constitute the dynamic dimension of intellectual capital are integrated. These elements are ideas, things, the process of knowledge creation, the process of continuous innovation, and institutions. The main conclusion of this paper is that the concept of knowledge is more closely related to the dynamic dimension of IC, than the concept of intellectual capital. Therefore, further research would probably benefit from approaching this topic from a knowledge management point of view. It is suggested that further research should focus on exploring the metaphors that contribute to a better understanding of the dynamics of IC, on the contribution that ideas can make to increase the effectiveness of knowledge management, and finally on the institutional arrangements that support the process of knowledge creation and innovation.
