scholarly journals Faculty Work as Philanthropy or Philanthropy as Faculty Work?

2016 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 66-74
Author(s):  
Cagla Okten ◽  
Kerim Peren Arin
Keyword(s):  
Public Good ◽  
Review Essay ◽  
Resource Constraints ◽  
Institutional Structure ◽  
Voluntary Action ◽  
Faculty Work ◽  
Cultural Contexts ◽  
The Public ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The U.S

Employing Robert Payton’s (1988) definition of philanthropy, “Voluntary action for the public good” (p. 4), Faculty Work and the Public Good:  Philanthropy, Engagement, and Academic Professionalism offers a fresh look at faculty work as philanthropy. The purpose of this review essay is to provide a brief review of some of the key propositions in this book and to explore how faculty work as philanthropy may be understood in non-U.S. cultural contexts. We start our exploration of faculty work as philanthropy in non-U.S. contexts by examining this construct in the U.S. as presented by Faculty Work and the Public Good and by laying out key forces that it sets forth as shaping faculty work as philanthropic practice: institutional structure and employment frameworks, resource constraints, and discretionary constraints.

scholarly journals Closing the Regulatory Gap for Synthetic Nicotine

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patricia Zettler ◽  
Natalie Hemmerich ◽  
Micah L. Berman
Keyword(s):  
New Product ◽  
The United States ◽  
Tobacco Product ◽  
The Public ◽  
Comprehensive Plan ◽  
Federal Food ◽  
Potential Benefits ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Nicotine Regulation ◽  
The U.S

In July 2017 the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced a new “comprehensive plan for tobacco and nicotine regulation.” This plan is focused on making cigarettes less addictive while facilitating the development of alternative nicotine-containing products that are far less harmful. This approach holds promise, and the public health stakes could not be higher—smoking is the leading cause of preventable death in the United States, causing roughly 480,000 deaths per year. But a new product is emerging that could upset the FDA’s plans for a well-balanced regulatory scheme: synthetic nicotine. These products currently fall into a regulatory gap because they fall outside the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act’s (FDCA) definition of a tobacco product. If this gap remains in place, it is likely that more companies will exploit it in order to evade regulation, undoing the potential benefits of the FDA’s plan for tobacco and nicotine regulation. This Article argues that the FDA can, and should, address this problem by regulating synthetic nicotine products as drugs. After reviewing the science of nicotine addiction and the FDA’s past and present regulatory schemes for nicotine, it explains how the FDA could establish that synthetic nicotine satisfies the FDCA’s definition of a drug. It concludes with a discussion of the policy benefits of categorizing synthetic nicotine as a drug.Citation: Patricia J. Zettler, Natalie Hemmerich, & Micah L. Berman, Closing the Regulatory Gap for Synthetic Nicotine, 59 B.C. L. Rev. ___ (forthcoming 2018).

scholarly journals Psychology, counseling psychology, and professional counseling: Shared roots, challenges, and opportunities

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-62 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peggy Brady-Amoon ◽  
Kathleen Keefe-Cooperman
Keyword(s):  
Counseling Psychology ◽  
Historical Analysis ◽  
Professional Counseling ◽  
Call To Action ◽  
The Public ◽  
Challenges And Opportunities ◽  
Narrow Definition ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Counseling Psychologists

Psychology, counseling psychology, and professional counseling are at a crossroad. The growing movement to establish professional counseling as a distinct profession, based on an increasingly narrow definition of professional identity, is particularly relevant to counseling psychologists and professional counselors and has implications for the broader field of psychology. A brief systematic historical analysis of these professional specialties in the U.S. provides the context to examine current challenges, including proposed restriction of master’s level training, licensure or other authorization to practice, and employment to graduates of programs accredited by the Council for the Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Programs (CACREP). These restrictions reduce services to the public and threaten the viability of counseling psychology and professional counseling in the U.S. These challenges also have significant implications for counseling psychologists in Europe and internationally given similar efforts. Going beyond a call to action, the article concludes with recommendations for counseling psychologists and allied professionals to address shared challenges, maximize shared opportunities, and foster enhanced intra- and inter-professional collaboration and cooperation.

scholarly journals Elonis v. United States: The Doctrine of True Threats: Protecting Our Ever-Shrinking First Amendment Rights in the New Era of Communication

2015 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 197-223
Author(s):  
Mary Margaret Roark
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
First Amendment ◽  
Free Speech ◽  
Freedom Of Speech ◽  
The United States ◽  
New Era ◽  
The Public ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The U.S

The First Amendment protects one of our most precious rights as citizens of the United States—the freedom of speech. Such protection has withstood the test of time, even safeguarding speech that much of the population would find distasteful. There is one form of speech which cannot be protected: the true threat. However, the definition of what constitutes a "true threat" has expanded since its inception. In the new era of communication—where most users post first and edit later—the First Amendment protection we once possessed has been eroded as more and more speech is considered proscribable as a "true threat." In order to adequately protect both the public at large and our individual right to free speech, courts should analyze a speaker’s subjective intent before labeling speech a "true threat." Though many courts have adopted an objective, reasonable listener test, the U.S. Supreme Court now has the opportunity, in deciding Elonis v. United States, to take a monumental step in protecting the First Amendment right to free speech. By holding that the speaker’s subjective intent to threaten is necessary for a true threat conviction, the Court will restore the broad protection afforded by the First Amendment and repair years of erosion caused by an objective approach.

Planning guidelines and legislation

1987 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 103-108
Author(s):  
D. C. Hardwick
Keyword(s):  
Voluntary Action ◽  
Agricultural Practice ◽  
Dual Approach ◽  
The Public ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Good Agricultural Practice ◽  
Legislative Control ◽  
Polluter Pays Principle ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Town

AbstractIn the United Kingdom, environmental protection is based on a dual approach. Guidelines and voluntary action have generally proved effective but, increasingly, Community of Europe directives as well as public pressure are resulting in legislation.Water pollution is largely regulated by Part II of the Control of Pollution Act 1974 and odour by the Public Heath Act 1936 and subsequent subsidiary legislation. Planning is controlled under the Town and Country Planning Acts and dependent General Development Orders. The Order relevant to agriculture is being amended to bring in a greater measure of planning requirement where piggeries are near human housing. Alongside these laws, the Ministry has produced a Code of Good Agricultural Practice and Guidelines on Housed Livestock to establish appropriate standards.Other countries are also developing their legislative control, most notably Germany, the Netherlands and Denmark. It is notable that, although the ‘polluter pays principle’ is often referred to, all countries have found practical problems in any simple-minded attempt to apply the principle to the effects of animal farming.The paper reviews these areas in detail and suggests that research is needed on the effects of small quantities of straw on slurry systems and to produce a definition of the minimum of straw needed for welfare purposes. Other research which is already in hand is also mentioned.

scholarly journals Global Civil Society Is Not Utopian, But Feasible: The World After the COVID-19 Pandemic

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (10) ◽  
pp. 47
Author(s):  
Junyuan Peng ◽  
Jing Shi
Keyword(s):  
Civil Society ◽  
Public Good ◽  
Global Governance ◽  
Global Civil Society ◽  
The Public ◽  
Transnational Organizations ◽  
Economic Organizations ◽  
The World ◽  
State And Market ◽  
Definition Of

At the beginning of 2020, the COVID-19 Pandemic has swept the world, which raises the awareness of global governance and global civil society. This paper attempts to prove global civil society is feasible and analyses its main functions during the period of resistance of the COVID-19 Pandemic. The paper unfolds in four parts. The First part is a brief introduction to the question this paper tends to address after the COVID-19 Pandemic. After that, it is the definition of civil society. Civil society can be defined as a complementary arena for state and market to ensure common welfare and public good through non-violent, voluntary and bottom-up process. However, this definition encompasses different connotations with the passage of time. In the third part, it states that civil society is inevitably globalized in the challenge of globalization. Quite a number of problems go beyond borders and the reaches of states, which leaves a vacuum for a corresponding force to regulate them. Also, global social movement-the main actor of global civil society, as an important agent, ensures the economy liberalism-embedded transnational economic organizations, as the main structure of global governance, accountable. In addition, the development of convenient communication and value convergence provide the objective conditions for the emergence of global civil society. Global civil society makes transnational organizations accountable, solves problems beyond state borders and ensures the public good and welfare. In a nutshell, global civil society is an indispensable part of today’s global governance.

DEFINING THE PUBLIC GOOD IN THE U.S. GILDED AGE, 1883–1898: “FREEDOM OF CONTRACT” VERSUS “INTERNAL POLICE” IN THE TORTURED HISTORY OF EMPLOYMENT LAW AND REGULATION

2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 241-275 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary O. Furner
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Public Good ◽  
Gilded Age ◽  
New York State ◽  
National Level ◽  
Productive Capacity ◽  
York State ◽  
The Public ◽  
Freedom Of Contract ◽  
The U.S

Long recognized as a case that left tenement cigar workers in New York City unprotected from hazards to their health, the New York State high court'sIn re Jacobsruling in 1885 also raised anew disagreements regarding the extent of legislative powers known as “police” that were reserved to the states by the federal constitution. Upholding unfettered freedom of contract, theJacobsruling prevailed as a governing precedent through a string of related cases until its reversal inHolden v. Hardy, 1898, a working hours law for Utah miners and smelter workers. BetweenJacobsandHolden, new thinking emerged on the meaning of class, the role of government, and the drivers of the wealth of nations. InHolden, drawing fromMunn v. Illinois, the U.S. Supreme Court located a public interest in sustaining the health and strength of such workers on the grounds that the entire public depended on their productive capacity to ensure the public good of a strong and growing state economy. This precedent did not hold for New York State bakers inLochner v. New York, but it became controlling again inWest Coast Hotel v. Parish, which elevated the broadened conception of “police” fromHoldento the national level. As labor union membership along with other vital structures of the New Deal order have declined during the New Gilded Age, employment regulation has tended to relapse toward the individualist, contractarian regime of the Old Gilded Age announced inIn re Jacobs.

Good Farming and the Public Good

1994 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald Worster
Keyword(s):  
Public Good ◽  
Agricultural Productivity ◽  
Men And Women ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Earth ◽  
Good Will ◽  
Environmental Balance ◽  
Good For ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
American Agriculture

Rain is a blessing when it falls gently on parched fields, turning the earth green, causing the birds to sing. But when it rains and rains, for forty days and nights, as it did for Noah, then the waters rise and destroy. Life is everywhere like that. Too little is a curse, too much is a plague. For thousands of years, the philosopher’s task has been to discover an optimum point where men and women can live modestly and securely, avoiding the extremes. The philosopher may seek a point of environmental balance where there is neither too little nor too much of nature’s gifts. Or he may try to define the point where private ambitions and collective needs are in harmony, where individual appetites do not overrun the commonwealth and society’s demands do not cut too deeply into individual freedoms. When philosophy is applied to the definition of a society’s welfare, we call that point the "public good." Farmers, more than most people, ought to be responsive to that philosophical quest for a harmonious, balanced good, for it has been their aim over a long history to seek moderation from nature and cooperation from their neighbors. Yet it has been a while since American agriculture, as a whole, has enjoyed a feeling of balance. The problem has not been in nature so much as in our society. We have not had a feeling of balance because we have come to hold extravagant ideas of what agriculture should contribute economically to the nation and the farmer. These days we are not a people noted for moderate thinking, so perhaps we have no reason to expect the idea of moderate farming to thrive. The most serious consequence of an immoderate culture, I will argue, is that the public good will not be well understood and therefore will not be achieved—in agriculture or in other areas. Another consequence is that farmers in the aggregate will suffer immensely and so will the practice of farming. That has indeed happened in America, and we can blame it on our extreme dedication to the goal of maximizing agricultural productivity and wealth.

Constitutionalism, Conflict, and Consent: Jefferson on the Impeachment Power

2008 ◽  
Vol 70 (4) ◽  
pp. 572-594 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeremy D. Bailey
Keyword(s):  
Public Good ◽  
The Public ◽  
The People ◽  
Liberal Constitutionalism ◽  
The Law ◽  
Legal Understanding ◽  
Political Understanding ◽  
The U.S

AbstractA problem within liberal constitutionalism is determining whether the majority actually consents to its government, and, in particular, to those extraordinary acts that take place in the silence of the law. This paper explores this problem in the U.S. context by presenting Thomas Jefferson's understanding of the impeachment power. Jefferson preferred a theory of impeachment that, like his theory of coordinate review, would allow each department to participate in the impeachment process, because he believed that executive participation would improve the law bringing its own character, or will, to it. As an alternative to the more common political understanding of impeachment, which leans toward legislative exclusivity, and the dominant legal understanding, which tends toward judicial finality, Jefferson's theory offers a way for the people to judge whether a particular act of lawlessness is in the public good.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document