• Canada
• Research dataclose
• Research softwareclose
• Other research productsclose
• Scholarship@Western close

Over the past two decades, globalization, digitization, and the rise of the Internet have each contributed to a new prominence for intellectual property law in public policy debates around the world. Questions about how intellectual property is controlled, licensed, used, and reused are all part of a growing public discourse that now engages far more than an elite cadre of lawyers. Because intellectual property law now trenches so deeply on issues of economics, culture, health, commerce, creativity, and intellectual freedom, it is no surprise that there is also a burgeoning literature on intellectual property issues that comes, not just from legal academics or lawyers, but from those trained in other disciplines. In the spring of 2012, the Centre for Law, Technology, and Society at the University of Ottawa hosted a workshop that sought to bring together academics from different disciplines interested in intellectual property law in order to stimulate discussion across disciplines, to encourage the development of collaborative efforts, and to produce a body of research that explores intellectual property law issues from explicitly interdisciplinary perspectives. The collection of papers in this book is the product of this workshop.

In this chapter, I ask two interrelated questions. First, how do leaders judge what is a responsible course of action? Second, and relatedly, how do others judge what constitutes responsibility in leadership action? The core argument I put forward is that thinking with Hannah Arendt deepens our comprehension of what it might mean to lead responsibly. She encourages us to recognize that leading in a responsible manner is, above all, a judgment call. From an Arendtian perspective, to judge responsibly entails taking the time to reflect upon a decision so as to weigh up the different sides of an argument. Thus, a measured response requires a willingness to approach an issue from multiple perspectives, and to engage in the kind of reflective thinking that Donna Ladkin (2010) argues is critical to leadership.

This article critically analyses the role that criminological theory and specific policy formulations of culture play in New Zealand's state response to Māori crime. We begin by charting policy responses to the "Māori problem" during the 1980s to the 2000s, with a particular focus on policies and interventions based on theorising that Māori offending is attributable to loss of cultural identity, through to the current preference for risk factor and criminogenic needs approaches. The second part of the article critiques strategies employed by administrative criminologists who, in partnership with the policy sector, attempt to elevate their own epistemological constructions of Indigenous reality in the policy development process over that of Indigenous knowledge and responses to social harm.

This chapter examines the future of environmental degradation in Africa. While acknowledging the relative role of population growth and unsustainable agriculture practices in environmental degradation in the region, the chapter considers the role played by excess consumption, poverty and HIV/AIDS, corrupt African states and international capital in determining the future of natural resources in Africa as critical. The relationship between states and international business corporation has been particularly detrimental to the region’s environment, and will continue to present a formidable threat to natural resources, especially as the World Trade Organization becomes more influential in ensuring unrestricted movement of international capital. Alternative imagination by the New Partnership for Africa Development (NEPAD) that sees Africa’s development beyond the current economic and political order is critical for arresting future environmental degradation.