|
|
| |
Western institutions report that more than 30 million people in the contemporary world system can reasonably be described as slaves (International Labor Organization [ILO], 2012), and this number has increased dramatically with the COVID-19 pandemic and the consolidation of 'slavery modern' from a managerial perspective - “it was, is and will probably continue to be a business” involving victims, exploiters, large corporations and consumers” (Michaloiva, 2020). An 'umbrella' term that has been contested by many, and which includes slavery, human trafficking, forced labor, slavery-like labor and other forms of exploitation (Kara, 2017), modern slavery, has been institutionalized in the global North as an issue emerging from contemporary capitalism (Bales, 2005) and therefore
The US-led field of Management and Organizational Studies (EGO) reaffirms the dominant and enduring idea in the US and other Western countries (Baptist, 2016) that black slavery is a matter of the past with remnants lingering in the late South In contrast, decolonial and aphrodiaspora perspectives from the South and the North, incorporating epistemologies and cosmologies of black slavery, frame 'modern' slavery as a changing continuation of the longue durée of colonial/racial/patriarchal slave capitalism inaugurated in the 16th century with the 'discovery' of the Americas by Eurocentric conquerors/discoverers (Marable, 2015; Mignolo, 2011). Modern slavery as a 'management problem' emerges in the North in conjunction with the resurgence of movements of de-occidentalization, decolonization and deracialization on a global scale, accompanied by counter-movements and renewed alternatives and increasingly radical dynamics of expropriation against the 'other invaders' alike. in the North and in the South (Stoler, 2017). The denial of slavery/enslavement as constitutive of modern management and organizations, of an increasingly heterogeneous, discriminatory and unequal Global North (Boatca, 2015) is cited by critical authors (Cooke, 2004), aphrodiasporic voices in general (Nkomo,
A growing 'global' Northern EGO literature on modern slavery denies these contributions by embracing a renewed 'managerial' agenda on sustainable development and human rights (Voss et al., 2019), which frames modern slavery as a contingent administrative problem for organizations and supply chains that is triggered by the globalization of modern capitalism in crisis (Gold, Trautrims & Trodd, 2015; New, 2015). This managerial agenda that embodies contested claims of Western/North civilizational superiority over the 'rest of the world' (Davis, 2011; Gonzalez, 2020; Wynter, 2003) has been presented by North Atlantic research institutions shaping de-westernized re-articulations of debates, universalist agendas, narratives and policies (Bales, 2005). In our opinion, the 'globalization' of modern slavery puts a growing, heterogeneous and unequal population of the enslaved and the planet at risk by denying the constitutive relationship between capitalism and black slavery highlighted by decolonial and Aphrodiaspora literature. After all, it is a mere coincidence that in Latin America “people who descend, partially or totally, from populations colonized by Europeans, are for the most part dominated and discriminated against wherever they live?” (Quijano, 1993, p. 205).
Despite and in response to the radicalization of Westernist geopolitics of knowledge and the dominance of the myth of racial democracy in Brazil, studies in various areas such as Anthropology, Sociology, History (Fernandes, 2008; Ferraro, 2019; Nascimento, 1978; Ribeiro, 1995) , Architecture and Urbanism (Gomes, 1990; Santos, 2013, 2016) show how and why Brazilian capitalism continues to challenge and reproduce discriminatory traits and structures of the colonial slave period/system (Baptist, 2016; Gonzalez, 2020; Sousa, 2017 ). These lasting dynamics incorporate everyday situations of racial, class and gender oppression and discrimination, as well as struggles against the unequal distribution of opportunities (Fernandes, 2008) inside and outside higher education institutions and organizations (Bento, 2002; Jaime, Barreto & Oliveira, 2018; Silva,
These remnants of black slavery have been shaped by the confusing classification and perception of race in Brazilian society, which varies according to social context and factors such as emotional ties and social class (Sansone, 1996). The intricate process of miscegenation called morenization (Ribeiro, 1995) implied favoring some blacks and marginalizing others according to their skin tone.
Unfortunately, management education organizations and institutions have reinforced these problems, repeating stereotypes harmful to minority groups (Paim & Pereira, 2018), ignoring and even trivializing the racialization of relationships and differences in privileges between white professionals and individuals belonging to minority groups (Bento, 2002).
Despite the ethical commitment to the creation of quality scientific knowledge, both in research and in education, we observe a lasting disengagement with the extraordinary contributions historically produced by the 'enslaved' and diasporas engaged in decolonial and anti-racist struggles, inside and outside organizations and in academy (Bernardino-Costa, Maldonado-Torres & Grosfoguel 2018; Robinson, 2000). Thus, by denying the long duration of black slavery and the crucial contributions of decolonial and aphrodiaspora praxis and epistemes to social justice in general, the academy tends to perpetuate a racist, colonialist and patriarchal structure in the EGO and business schools that need decolonial and aphrodiaspora methods in the South and North (Dar et al., 2020; Faria & Abdalla, 2017; Jaime et al., 2018; Rosa, 2014).
Due to this colonialist and frankly 'racist' denial of the legacy of black slavery (Cooke, 2003; Godfrey, Hassard, O'Connor, Rowlinson & Ruef, 2016), Northern agendas on 'modern slavery' gain traction. In this scenario, the process of reconstruction and reporting of memories of the slave period/system is usually carried out by privileged individuals who do not identify with the events and consequences of the slave-colonial system that reaffirms the dynamics of epistemic-material expropriation (Santos, 2008) .
Parallel to the radicalization of coloniality and the Eurocentric mechanisms of appropriation of liberating knowledge unleashed by the globalization of US-led counter-revolutionary neoliberalism, a resurgent decolonial and aphrodiaspora praxis challenged this epistemic-material brutality of more than five centuries of capitalist slavery (Bernardino-Costa et al., 2018). Along with researchers from other parts of the Global South in general, Brazilian researchers have resisted, re-existed and recognized other voices, bodies and epistemes in their quest for transformative knowledge engaged with the oppressed majority that personifies such an ambivalent legacy.
Organizations, universities, individuals, communities and society challenge and reproduce the ambivalent legacy of black slavery, which is supported by intersectional anti-racist struggles, accompanied by the radicalization of the recolonizing dynamic.
This call for articles therefore aims to engage a growing population that struggles against the radicalization of slave capitalism in the North and the South, promoting a transformative engagement of black slavery with EGOs from decolonial and aphrodiaspora perspectives (Mignolo, 2020; Quijano, 2000), recognizing the remnants of black slavery in management and organizations and recovering decolonial and aphrodiasporic epistemes.
Thus, we welcome different theories, cosmologies, methodologies and ideas to answer a variety of questions, such as:
• How can decolonial and Aphrodiaspora perspectives help the field of Management and Organization Studies (EGO) to combat slavery, structural racism and abysmal social inequality?
• 'Slavery', 'enslavement', or 'enslavement'? How do these conceptualizations allow (or not) the radical analysis of the colonial/slavery period in the EGO and in the geohistorical evolution of theories and practices in the field?
• To what extent do predominantly Eurocentric EGOs contribute to global capitalism in general and large companies in particular benefiting from different modalities of slavery, racism and prejudice against blacks and other minorities and from the 'democratization' of social injustice-inequality in the South and In the north ?
• What decolonial and Aphrodiaspora voices and perspectives have been denied and appropriated by predominantly Eurocentric EGOs? How can EGO researchers change these dynamics?
• What decolonial and aphrodiaspora initiatives in EGO, education and research are helping to transform the contradictory realities of peripheral societies in the Global South?
• How do large companies, government organizations, and third sector organizations respond to criticisms of the involvement and complicity of 'organisations' of global capitalism in dynamics of recolonization via slavery, forced labor or human trafficking?
• What is the role of the different actors of heritage tourism in the dynamics of dismantling-re-articulation of the dominant narratives about the colonial period in historical tourist enterprises? (Araújo & Carneiro, 2020; Buzinde, 2010).
• What are the biggest challenges for combating slave labor in countries of the South and North marked by the continuous re-articulation of the hegemony of slave capitalism?
• What are the remnants of black slavery in corporate change and resistance practices linked to the concepts of diversity and inclusion in organizations, universities and business schools? (Araújo & Carneiro, 2020).
• To what extent does the continuity of the period of slavery in modern capitalism influence and challenge contemporary labor relations in organizations?
• What is the role of predominantly Eurocentric Critical Accounting in analyzing the processes of legitimization of black slavery from decolonial and aphrodiasporic perspectives? (Silva, 2014).
• What is the role of large companies and economic sectors that benefit most from the black slavery regime and in maintaining systems of domination and patriarchal and racial stratification within and outside academic organizations and institutions? (Nkomo, 1992).
We hope that this call for papers promotes dialogues with other movements, both within and outside Management and Organization Studies, engaged in transforming decolonial and Afro-diasporic perspectives in and towards a pluriversal world in which different worlds coexist. We expect the participation of academics, professionals and the 'general public' for the recovery and co-construction of possibilities that continue to be denied and appropriated-contained by systems that reaffirm coloniality via black slavery.
Keywords: Decoloniality. Aphrodiaspora perspective in Management and Organization Studies. Remnants of black slavery in management practices and organizational environments. Contemporary slavery.
|
|
|
|
| |
REFERENCES
Abdalla, MM, & Faria, A. (2017). In defense of the decolonial option in administration/management. EBAPE.BR Notebooks , 15 (4), 914-929.
Araújo, CCS, & Carneiro, E., Jr. (2020). A Bibliometric Analysis of the Intellectual Structure of Studies on Slavery in the 21st Century. International Journal of Professional Business Review , 5 (1), 105–127.
Bales, K. (2005). Understanding global slavery: A reader . Berkeley, California: University of California Press.
Baptist, EE (2016). The half has never been told: Slavery and the making of American capitalism . New York, NY: Basic Books.
Benedict, MAS (2002). Narcissistic pacts in racism: whiteness and power in business organizations and public power (Doctoral Thesis). University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.11606/T.47.2019.tde-18062019-18151
Bernardino-Costa, J., Maldonado-Torres, N., & Grosfoguel, R. (2018). Decoloniality and Aphrodiaspora thought . Belo Horizonte, MG: Authentic Publisher.
Buzinde, CN (2010). Discursive constructions of the plantation past within a travel guidebook. Journal of Heritage Tourism , 5 (3), 219-235.
Caruana, R., Crane, A., Gold, S., & LeBaron, G. (2020). Modern slavery in business: the sad and sorry state of a non-field. Business & Society.
Cooke, B. (2003). The denial of slavery in management studies. Journal of Management Studies , 40 (8), 1895-1918.
Cox, TH, & Blake, S. (1991). Managing cultural diversity: implications for organizational competitiveness. Executive , 5 (3), 45-56.
Crane, A. (2013). Modern Slavery as a Management Practice: Exploring the Conditions and Capabilities for Human Exploitation. Academy of Management Revi ew, 38 (1), 49-69.
Davis, AY (2011). Women, race, & class . New York, NY: Vintage Books.
Fernandes, F. (2008). The Integration of Blacks in Class Society (volume 1) - The legacy of the white race (5th ed.). Rio de Janeiro, RJ: Globe.
Ferraro, MR (2019). Capitalism, slavery and the making of the Brazilian slaveholding class: Debate on world-system perspective. Almanack , 23 , 151-175.
Godfrey, PC, Hassard, J., O'Connor, ES, Rowlinson, M., & Ruef, M. (2016). What is organizational history? Toward a creative synthesis of history and organization studies. Academy of Management Review , 41 (4), 590-608.
Gold, S., Trautrims, A., & Trodd, Z. (2015). Modern slavery challenges to supply chain management. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal , 20 (5), 485-494
Gomes, MAAF (1990). Slavery and the city: notes on the occupation of the outskirts of Salvador in the 19th century. ROAD. Magazine of Architecture and Urbanism , 3 (4/5), 9-19.
Gonzalez, L. (2020). For an Afro-Latin American feminism . São Paulo, SP: Publisher Schwarcz-Companhia das Letras.
Ibarra-Colado, E. (2006). Organization studies and epistemic coloniality in Latin America: thinking otherness from the margins. Organization , 13 (4), 463-488.
International Labor Organisation. (2012). ILO global estimate of forced labour: Results and methodology . Geneva, Switzerland: International Labor Office.
Jaime, P., Barreto, P., & Oliveira, C. (2018). Lest we forget! Presentation of the Special Issue “Racial dimensions in the corporate world”. Organizations & Society , 25 (87), 542-550.
Kara, S. (2017). Modern slavery: A global perspective . New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
Machado, C., Jr. Bazanini, R., & Mantovani, DMN (2018). The myth of racial democracy in the labor market: a critical analysis of the participation of afro-descendants in brazilian companies. Organizations & Society , 25 (87), 632-655.
Marable, M. (2015). How Capitalism Underdeveloped Black America: Problems in Race, Political Economy, and Society. Chicago, Illinois: Haymarket Books.
Michailova, S. (2020). 21 Is Is Irresponsible Business Immune to COVID-19? The Case of Modern Slavery. In MA Marinov, & ST Marinova (Eds.), Covid-19 and International Business: Change of Era . Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
Mignolo, WD (2020). The Geopolitics of Knowledge and Colonial Difference. Revista Lusófona de Educação , 48 , 187-224.
Nascimento, A. (1978). The Genocide of the Brazilian Negro: Process of a Masked Racism (Vol. 60). São Paulo, SP: Editora Paz e Terra.
New, SJ (2015). Modern slavery and the supply chain: the limits of corporate social responsibility?. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal ,20 (6), 697-707.
Nkomo, SM (1992). The emperor has no clothes: Rewriting “race in organizations”. Academy of Management Review , 17 (3), 487-513.
Paim, AS, & Pereira, ME (2018). Judging good appearance in personnel selection. Organizations & Society , 25 (87), 656-675.
Phung, K. & Crane, A. (2018). 'The business of modern slavery: Management and organizational perspectives'. In J. Clark, & S. Poucki (Eds.), The Sage handbook of human trafficking and modern day slavery (pp. 177-197). London, UK: Sage.
Quijano, A. (1993). Latin America in the world context. Del Desarrollo Problems , 95, 43-59.
Quijano, A. (2000). Coloniality of power and Eurocentrism in Latin America. International Sociology , 15 (2), 215-232.
Ribeiro, D. (1995). The Brazilian people - The formation and meaning of Brazil . São Paulo, SP: Global Editora.
Robinson, C. (2000). Black Marxism: The making of the Black radical tradition . Chapel Hill, North Carolina: University of North Carolina Press.
Rosa, AR (2014). Race relations and organizational studies in Brazil. RAC - Journal of Contemporary Administration , 18 (3), 240-260.
Sansone, L. (1996). Not just black or black: The racial classification system in Brazil is changing. Afro-Asia , 8 , 165-187.
Santos, MS (2008). The repressed memory of Brazilian slavery. International Journal of Cultural Studies , 11 (2), 157-175.
Santos, YL (2013). Becoming a court: Slave labor and urban space in Rio de Janeiro. Journal of Comparative History , 7 (1), 262-292.
Santos, YL (2016). Urban slavery as a setting? A critical examination of the historiography of urban slavery in Rio de Janeiro and Havana. Landa Magazine , 5 (1), 500-531.
Silva, AR (2014). Slavery Service Accounting Practices in Brazil: A Bibliographic and Document Analysis. Accounting & Finance Magazine , 25 (spe.), 346-354.
Silva, AR, Vasconcelos, A., & Lira, TA (2021). Accounting inscriptions for the exercise of organizational power: The case of the slave emancipation fund in Brazil. RAE-Review of Business Administration , 61 (1), 1-14.
Souza, J. (2017). The elite of backwardness: from slavery to the Lava Jato . Lisbon, Portugal: Leya.
Stoler, AL (2017). Introduction: The dark logic of invasive others. Social Research: An International Quarterly , 84 (1), 3-5.
Voss, H., Davis, M., Sumner, M., Waite, L., Ras, IA, Singhal, DIVYA, … Jog, D. (2019). International supply chains: compliance and engagement with the Modern Slavery Act. Journal of the British Academy , 7 (s1), 61-76.
Wynter, S. (2003). Unsettling the coloniality of being/power/truth/freedom: Towards the human, after man, its overrepresentation—An argument. CR: The new centennial review , 3 (3), 257-337.
|
|
|
|
| |
The books EBAPE.BR is a periodic online in the area of Administration published in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, by FGV EBAPE (Brazilian School of Public and Business Administration of the Getulio Vargas Foundation) and is an open access journal.
Submissions in Portuguese, English and Spanish will be accepted. All approved works will be published in the original language (Portuguese, English or Spanish) and translated (Portuguese or English) under the responsibility of the authors. The books EBAPE.BR is classified by the CAPES Qualis system as A2 .
|
|
|
|
| |
INSTRUCTIONS FOR SUBMISSION
The author(s) must follow the guidelines for submitting articles to Cadernos EBAPE.BR at: http://bibliotecadigital.fgv.br/ojs/index.php/cadernosebape/normas
Articles must be submitted via the link: https://mc04.manuscriptcentral.com/cebape-scielo
You must register as an author, unless you have previously done so.
Note: please indicate in the “ Authors Cover Letter ” field that your article is for the special issue: “ Debating Black Slavery in Management and Organization Studies from Decolonial and Aphrodiaspora perspectives ”.
For any queries, please do not hesitate to contact the guest editors:
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
OFFICE HOUR
|
|
| |
Prof. Dr. Hélio Arthur Reis Irigaray
Editor-in-Chief
Prof. Dr. Fabrício Stocker
Associate Editor
Fabiana Braga Leal
Assistant Editorial
Jackelyne de Oliveira da Silva
Assistant Editorial
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
Cadernos EBAPE.BR
Rua Jornalista Orlando Dantas, 30 - Botafogo
Rio de Janeiro/RJ | Brazil
+55 21 3083-2731
ISSN 1679 3951
ARTICLE SUBMISSIONS
|
|
|
Stay Informed