Глобализация в сфере международных торговых отношений
In March 2011 scholars met in Prague at the conference Interculturalism, Meaning and Identity. This event revitalised this important theme related to Diversity and Recognition. The terms 'interculturalism' and 'integration' are experiencing a renaissance. As the extent of human movement between nations increases attempts are made to balance cultural difference and social cohesion. In some contexts immigration and settlement policies are becoming more draconian in response. Because of this, interculturalism can take on many meanings. However, pivotal to the way interculturalism is understood is identification. As the relationship between nation, ethnicity and language becomes more complex so too do the ways in which people represent them selves. The cultural resources drawn on and the processes used to form identities are examined in this truly international collection. So too are the implications of these developments for how we theorise culture, meaning and identity.
This paper examines how export and export destination stimulates innovation by Russian manufacturing firms. The discussion is guided by the theoretical models for heterogeneous firms engaged in international trade which predict that, because more productive firms generate higher profit gains, they are able to afford high entry costs, and trade liberalization encourages the use of more progressive technologies and brings higher returns from R&D investments. We will test the theory using a panel of Russian manufacturing firms surveyed in 2004 and 2009, and use export entry and export destinations to identify the causal effects on various direct measures of technologies, skill and management innovations. We find evidence on exporters’ higher R&D financing, better management and technological upgrades. Exporters, most noticeably long-time and continuous exporters, are more active in monitoring their competitors, both domestically and internationally, and more frequently employ highly qualified managers. Exporters are more active in IT implementation. When it comes to export destination, we find that non-CIS exporters are more prone to learning. However, we cannot identify that government or foreign ownership shows any impact on learning-by-exporting effects.
This paper begins by outlining the two-sided ‘ethical challenge’ that international sociology faces in the 21st century. First, formulating the ethical stance of a sociologist towards the subject of disciplinary inquiry and the potentially involved social groups. Second, elaborating the adequate research tools for studying the ethical dimension of globalizing social reality. We conduct a critical analysis of the current literature on these issues from the Global Sociology perspective. We show that the ‘value-involved’ Global Sociology is the only possible mode of successful and appealing international disciplinary practice. However, existing ‘value-involved’ approaches are Eurocentric by nature and lack sensitivity to the ethically diverse global social reality. We propose the conceptual framing of ‘Ethically Responsible Global Sociology’ as a new vision of our discipline in the global world.