The Sentier Strike in Paris (1980): The Mobilization of Immigrant Workers as an Anti-Imperialist Struggle

Global Development, Converging Divergence and Development Studies: A Rejoinder

What’s in a Term: Can Feminism Look beyond the Global North/Global South Geopolitical Paradigm?

Across the globe, climate warming is projected to lead to decreased water quality and availability. This is due to several factors, including melting glaciers, changing precipitation patterns, and increased evaporation. As a result, water resources will become scarcer and water quality will decline, which will have negative impacts on ecosystems, land use, and human health. Adaptation strategies depend on human behavior shifts and are crucial to combat the climate crisis (Climate change and human behaviour 2022). However, less effort has been made to study, research, and communicate climate change impacts on aquatic ecosystems in the Global South compared to countries in the Global North. A group of five Ph.D. students and early career researchers, connected through the Association for the Sciences of Limnology and Oceanography (ASLO), joined together to discuss the challenges of communication, research, and education from climate change perspectives and develop ideas on how to foster diversity, equity, inclusion, and justice in the aquatic sciences community (Fig. 1). We briefly outline these challenges to communication, research, and education in this introductory Viewpoint, and then discuss each further in separate Viewpoints included in this issue of the L&O Bulletin. An important part of science is reproducibility and communication to the broader scientific and nonscientific community, especially when we are discussing climate change and the effects it will have on our global society. The majority of studies that make claims of global climate change impact do not incorporate regional and local issues from Global South countries (Callaghan et al. 2021), yet climate change disproportionally threatens low-income countries, including many in the Global South (Levy and Patz 2015). We believe that factors contributing to this bias include the lack of Open Access science from the Global South due to language barriers and high publication and translation costs that increase the systemic issues related to diversity and inclusion from underrepresented research groups. To overcome these challenges, we propose solutions, including citing work from scientists in the Global South, outline how international societies can better promote regional journals, and indicate how we can all use social media to better our understanding and connection between research in the Global North and South. It is critical to expand our understanding of climate change across all regions of the world, and learning from scientists in the Global South will likely support more underrepresented and underfunded researchers. To address the climate-driven challenges facing the globe—both North and South—we need research to understand the effects that are going to manifest in a future world. A promising new technology to monitor species' movement, behavior, and interactions is eDNA. The use of eDNA may be especially beneficial for studying climate change effects on aquatic ecosystems. However, the costs of eDNA monitoring can be prohibitive for underfunded researchers, especially those in the Global South, where the research budget is approximately a third of that of the Global North. For example, the research and development expenditure in Sub-Saharan Africa is only 0.5% of the Gross Domestic Product based on records from the World Bank (https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/GB.XPD.RSDV.GD.ZS); despite the fact that Niger, Somalia, and Chad are some of the most vulnerable countries to climate change according to the Notre Dame-Global Adaptation Index (https://gain.nd.edu/our-work/country-index/rankings/). To address this knowledge gap, we propose that more funding should be allocated to the countries' most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. Is climate literacy approached the same way across the world? There are many barriers in reaching students, including lack of personal connection and differing religious and cultural beliefs. To reduce these barriers, we suggest more interdisciplinary collaborations should be fostered to expand scientific knowledge and interest around the globe at all levels of education. Sharing existing resources and knowledge between the Global North and South may introduce new discussions in early stages of education and promote climate literacy. Solutions to issues in climate literacy include using university archives to create lessons and to build connections to local communities and sharing generational knowledge. Expanding climate change literacy will only improve capacity for global research. The impacts of climate change on water resources will have negative consequences globally. There is a need for improved communication, research, and education from climate change perspectives, especially to bridge the gaps between the Global North and South. In the following articles, we describe inequalities in communicating climate change impacts and propose solutions to overcome them. We introduce the importance of technology and eDNA in climate change research and how to make this promising applied science standardized and useful, especially for countries already impacted by climate warming. Finally, we discuss how to reach students in all stages of education and under different cultural and religious backgrounds to build knowledge and information in a climate changing world. The goal of our discussions is to bring attention to important social and scientific aspects of climate change consequences around the world and how to face those challenges. The authors acknowledge the ASLO through the Limnology and Oceanography Research Exchange (LOREX) Program that fostered the initiative of the writing groups, and especially the support of Brittany Schieler and Adina Paytan. The authors are grateful to Clara Mendoza-Lera and Laura Falkenberg for helpful suggestions on early versions of the pieces.

This paper primarily aims to provide a citation-based method for exploring the scholarly network of artificial intelligence (AI)-related research in the information science (IS) domain, especially from Global North (GN) and Global South (GS) perspectives. Three research objectives were addressed, namely (1) the publication patterns in the field, (2) the most influential articles and researched keywords in the field, and (3) the visualization of the scholarly network between GN and GS researchers between the years 2010 and 2020. On the basis of the PRISMA statement, longitudinal research data were retrieved from the Web of Science and analyzed. Thirty-two AI-related keywords were used to retrieve relevant quality articles. Finally, 149 articles accompanying the follow-up 8838 citing articles were identified as eligible sources. A co-citation network analysis was adopted to scientifically visualize the intellectual structure of AI research in GN and GS networks. The results revealed that the United States, Australia, and the United Kingdom are the most productive GN countries; by contrast, China and India are the most productive GS countries. Next, the 10 most frequently co-cited AI research articles in the IS domain were identified. Third, the scholarly networks of AI research in the GN and GS areas were visualized. Between 2010 and 2015, GN researchers in the IS domain focused on applied research involving intelligent systems (e.g., decision support systems); between 2016 and 2020, GS researchers focused on big data applications (e.g., geospatial big data research). Both GN and GS researchers focused on technology adoption research (e.g., AI-related products and services) throughout the investigated period. Overall, this paper reveals the intellectual structure of the scholarly network on AI research and several applications in the IS literature. The findings provide research-based evidence for expanding global AI research.

A challenge noted by engineering education (EE) researchers in the Global South (GS) is that literature addressing their context specific needs is primarily produced in the Global North (GN). In seeking to gain a better understanding of the literature resources available to support EE in a GS context, this study aimed to: (a) provide a broad-based quantitative overview of differences in representation between the GN and GS in education literature, and (b) to investigate the thematic differences between GN and GS publications in EE literature. A scientometric analysis of education-themed publications was firstly conducted in terms of publication volume and citations with a focus on the GN/GS divide. Secondly, a body of EE literature (consisting of >500 studies selected over a 7-year period for their relevance to the EE context in South Africa) was analysed using the Legitimation Code Theory (LCT) dimension of Specialisation to interrogate the thematic differences between GN & GS. The GS was found to be underrepresented in terms of the volume of education research and research impact. A level of relative parity between GN and GS was revealed in terms of themes studied and a general orientation towards the elite code on the LCT specialization plane. Distinct thematic differences were also observed, such as the GS focussing more explicitly on understanding the challenges at statistical and curricular levels, in contrast to the well-developed GN showcasing innovative learning practices in better-resourced contexts. The thematic comparison may be useful to educators in both the GN and GS. Identifying ‘what matters to whom’ offers the opportunity for more efficient collaboration based on strengths, so that we as a global community of practice can tackle the challenges of our time.

There is an extensive body of work on global work and cross-cultural collaboration. However, there is reason to believe that unique dynamics emerge when work occurs across and between the Global North and Global South, a phenomenon which has been understudied in management scholarship. The research in this symposium seeks to explore those dynamics. When considering dynamics between the Global South and Global North, management research has often focused on the mechanisms by which status hierarchies between the Global South and Global North are maintained. This symposium moves scholarship on collaboration between the Global South and Global North beyond the status hierarchies that have importantly been examined to consider a more scope of questions and uncover dynamic processes. For example: How do the Global North and South influence one another as individuals and organizations in each seek to build capacity? How do the Global South and Global North shape one another’s imaginations, work identities and sense of the meaning of their work? In what ways do work interactions and collaborations challenge and frustrate respective parties, and in what ways do these interactions empower and enrich participants?

Global impacts of climate change have been investigated around the world; however, the discussion in academic literature has generally focused on the work of scientists in the Global North (Corbera et al. 2016). We suggest that this focus may be due in part to adversity faced by scientists in the Global South when attempting to publish in high-impact, Open Access (OA) journals. Language and financial barriers can limit the options of scientists in the Global South, resulting in them publishing in their native language journals, or in journals with lower publication costs. If these journals have a lower impact score, paywalls, or are published in a language other than English, the work of these researchers may not be thoroughly disseminated. This limited dissemination is a major concern when researching climate change, as this is a global issue. To better understand climate change, other global issues, and recognize the work of underrepresented scientists, we call on the whole aquatic science community to increase awareness and support of research conducted in the Global South. The phrase “publish or perish” is used to describe the pressure scientists face to publish their research—employment, promotion, tenure, grants or other funding opportunities can often be contingent on the number of articles published in high impact journals. However, trying to publish in high impact journals can be expensive due to article processing charges. The recent push for OA science, now a requirement for federally funded research in the United States, makes science more accessible to the public, but comes at expense to the researcher, with some journals charging fees over US$4000 (Audrey et al. 2022). Such publication costs may prove challenging to scientists in the Global South where research programs may not be as well funded. For perspective, US$69.6 billion was spent on basic research in the United States in 2017 (https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/2019/nsf19321/overview.htm), compared to US$898 million in Brazil (Angelo 2017). A similar trend exists for many countries in the Global South where funds for research and development (as a function of percent gross domestic product; GDP) is much lower relative to countries in the Global North (Fig. 1). Beyond North America, there are some countries like the Republic of Korea and Israel with a research and development expenditure of 4.81% and 5.44% of GDP respectively, driving up the global average. In areas where science is often under-funded, it becomes difficult for research groups to afford publishing their results in high impact, OA journals. The exorbitant costs of publishing alone are likely part of the reason we do not have a fuller picture of climate change impacts around the globe. Scientists in the Global South may encounter another barrier: publishing in English. Most high impact journals are published in English, yet less than 17% of the world's population are native English speakers. English is often learned as a second language, a feat impressive in itself, but writing a manuscript that meets the standards of an English-based journal may prove challenging. Many research groups may find themselves needing to hire a translator, adding yet another major expense to publishing. Resources like AuthorAID (https://www.authoraid.info/) can provide free or affordable support for researchers in low- and middle-income countries to help with checking and improving the quality of their writing in English, but that will not always be enough to overcome such ingrained barriers. We can increase inclusivity in the scientific community by supporting, searching for, citing, and promoting science conducted by researchers from the Global South. Increasing awareness of these publications will have the dual benefits of providing a better understanding of the impacts of global issues like climate change and amplifying the work of underrepresented scientists from the Global South that may otherwise go unnoticed. With many scientists in the Global South working in regions with limited financial support for their research or being non-native English speakers, they face extraordinary challenges to publish their work in high impact, OA journals. In our push toward inclusivity and bettering our understanding of global issues, we must work to eliminate these financial and language barriers. Only with a united understanding between the Global North and South can we effectively understand the future of aquatic ecosystems under a changing climate.

This chapter highlights how gender perspectives on peace education are not monolithic and have evolved differently in the global north and south. They are marked by both dialogue and dissidence. While feminist peace education scholars, both in the global north and south, acknowledge the need to pay attention to banal, everyday violence, feminists in the global south do not necessarily use the language of peace education that is scripted in the global north, as they believe such language does not reflect their world/consciousness which is mediated by experiences of coloniality/postcoloniality and intersectionality. This chapter proceeds in two parts. The first part discusses the trajectory of the field of gender and peace education, and how it evolved differently in global north and south. The second part explains what is critical peace education, and how it converges with feminist thinking in the global south. It provides insights from the South Asian region to elucidate why the frames of postcoloniality, intersectionality, power, and agency are significant from a global south perspective on gender and peace education.

Forced labor and precarious working conditions are increasingly visible in high‐income economies of the Global North. Mostly perpetrated by the private business sector, immigrant workers are disproportionately affected. However, most management literature has focused on labor exploitation and human rights abuses connected to global supply chains in the Global South. Yet, in industries or activities not easily offshored, low‐cost business models contribute to labor market exploitation in high‐income economies. The ability to implement such models depends on the institutional context as well as corporate capabilities. This insight does not, however, resolve the issue why also democratic welfare societies with strong legal systems see such practices. Using Sweden as a case, we ask what a sociological lens can contribute to our understanding. It suggests that forced labor is an emergent outcome of interlocking market, state, and institutional logics, reinforced by increasingly restrictive migration regimes. Conversely, an appreciation of the business side could inform sociological studies of migration and labor exploitation. Bridging management, sociology, and migration perspectives, this review contributes to the growing recognition that combating modern slavery requires not only better corporate compliance but also a rethinking of the institutional and social foundations upon which contemporary business models depend.

Recent studies on the global value chain (GVC) have highlighted the need to better integrate the value chains of developing countries of the global South with that of the global North regions, which are more highly developed. This is aimed at enhancing the economic and social sustainable upgrading of the value chains of the global South regions. The paper thus seeks to answer a critical question as to whether the existing GVC set-up pertaining to global North and South countries is equitable and whether it would yield the needed socio-economic and wider sustainable benefits, particularly to global South countries. a conceptual Global Value Chain (GVC) model is developed based on the economy-wide and system-based Multi-Regional Input–Output methodology to achieve this goal. Subsequently, this was empirically tested to measure embodied flows in capital and labour for sustainable development between global North and South regions. These are achieved using the GVC networks of the UK (from the global North) and some countries in sub-Saharan Africa (from the global South) to exemplify these developments. With implications for equitable, sustainable development, our study shows significant imbalances exist in the flows of value added activities from the global South to the global North, particularly in the primary industries, which produce low-value products in their raw state. Subsequently, this creates a disproportionate economic disadvantage for South countries. As such, if global South countries are to fully benefit from GVC, the study shows that these imbalances must be addressed, such as through structural changes in the economies of global South countries from their dependencies on the primary industries.

Purpose Existing research on corporate responsibility (CR) initiatives suggests that Global North (GN) economies with high gross domestic product (GDP) per capita appear to have high environmental awareness. Our study examines this observation, exploring its impact on corporate environmental responsibility (CER) on the one hand and the rise of radical environmentalism on the other. It further examines the implications of these dynamics for environmental justice in the Global South (GS). Design/methodology/approach A critical review of existing literature and statistical testing using secondary data is employed to assess how the GN corporate actors operating in the GS may have implicit interests in maintaining low environmental awareness regarding the environmental and societal impacts in the GS. The study also employs and applies a normative ethical framework to demonstrate the importance of CER in the context of environmental, intergenerational and social global justice. Findings Our findings suggest that while a high GDP per capita fosters stronger CER in the GN, GDP per capita is also associated with the frequency and intensity of radical environmentalism. Movements that resulted in adverse outcomes, such as violence and deaths, are more likely to occur in the GS compared with the GN. Additionally, GN corporations exhibit a higher proportion of high-quality environmental performance, indicating greater environmental awareness than those in the GS. However, this heightened environmental awareness in the GN often excludes corporate considerations of equity and environmental justice in the GS. From a normative ethical standpoint, economies in the GN have responsibilities toward communities and ecosystems in the GS. Research limitations/implications This study initiates a scholarly discourse based on secondary data. Future research should incorporate empirical case studies and larger data sets to assess corporate practices in the GS and their implications for environmental justice. Practical implications The findings underscore the need for corporate accountability mechanisms that move beyond symbolic CR efforts or environmental, social, governance (ESG) compliance to address systemic environmental inequalities in the GS. Social implications Addressing environmental justice requires interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary collaboration to bridge the awareness gap between the GN and the GS, ensuring more equitable sustainability efforts. Originality/value This article offers a novel critique of the intersection between economic development, corporate strategic interests, and environmental impact from a GN and GS perspective, supported by both statistical testing and a normative ethical framework.

The disparity between the Global South and the Global North has gained prominence in classifying countries according to economic, social, and governance characteristics rather than historical links. Historically, the Global North has long been regarded as the dominant group of nations, far outperforming Global South countries; however, several Global South nations now surpass and outperform the Global North nations in multiple measures. Traditional measures like GDP per capita often overlook the intricate leadership dynamics essential for understanding developments in both regions. This study presents a novel approach to evaluating global leadership transitions, including economic performance, social mobility, and governance structures, by expanding on the Global South Leadership (GSL) Index. By averaging scores of 18 indices for 192 countries, scatter plots are created to identify relationships and trends between Global North and South countries and among the regions within. This study extrapolates why some Global South countries are overperforming and others are underperforming, and the ones that have overcome obstacles and become role models for other Global South, as well as for Global North countries.

Recent decades have seen large-scale social protection programmes rolled out in countries in the Global South, demonstrating a new political commitment towards goals of welfare on a national scale. This chapter explores the relevance of welfare state concepts and theories originating from or designed to address policies in the Global North to assess such developments in the Global South. The chapter discusses the background of the flow of theories and concepts across contexts and explores perspectives on societal development that span the Global North and South. It further analyses how concepts originally developed in the Global North have been exported to the Global South, focusing on adaptations of theoretical frameworks for comparing welfare states. Lastly, it discusses how experiences with emerging welfare state arrangements in the Global South can offer lessons for the Global North. It is argued that while some notions require adaptation to different contexts, certain concepts and systems of welfare regime classification have broad applicability across disparate regions. Furthermore, the chapter discusses recent trends in the Global North, where welfare states increasingly exhibit elements resembling conditions found in the South. The transformations occurring in the state and labour markets necessitate the adoption of new theories and concepts, including those utilized in the Global South, to effectively scrutinize their implications. In conclusion, the accelerating processes of globalization and transnationalism challenge the methodological nationalism commonly inherent in social policy theorization.

Feminist criminology needs to renovate concepts based explicitly on the experiences of mainly white women in the global North. It also needs to globalize its research agendas and enhance its conceptual horizons, to include the distinctively different gendered patterns of crime and violence that occur across the global South and North, and not only during peacetime but also war and conflict. The chapter takes two issues—violence against women during war and civil conflict and innovative approaches to preventing violence from the global South—to illustrate how feminist criminology can contribute to Southern criminology’s project of democratizing knowledge transfer between the global North and South.

This research highlights the mismatch between food security and climate adaptation literature and practice in the Global North and South by focusing on nested case studies in rural India and the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic. The United States is one of the wealthiest countries in the world, but also has one of the largest wealth gaps. Comparatively, India has one of the largest populations of food insecure people. To demonstrate how adaptive food security approaches to climate change will differ, we first review the unique climate, agricultural, demographic, and socio-economic features; and then compare challenges and solutions to food security posed by the COVID-19 pandemic. While both countries rely on rural, low-income farmworkers to produce food, the COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted how agricultural and food security policies differ in their influence on both food insecurity and global hunger alike. Emphasis on agricultural production in developing regions where a majority of individuals living in rural areas are smallholder subsistence farmers will benefit the majority of the population in terms of both poverty alleviation and food production. In the Global North, an emphasis on food access and availability is necessary because rural food insecure populations are often disconnected from food production.