Let me point to two calls for papers for Special Issues relating to topics regularly covered on this blog that I am involved with as a guest editor.

Cover "Innovation: Organization & Management"

“Creativity and copyright in the shadow of GenAI: Managing and organizing creative content in the digitalization frenzy” in the journal “Innovation: Organization & Management,” co-edited with Konstantin Hondros (HSU Hamburg), Astrid Mager (Austrian Academy of Sciences), Patricia Aufderheide (American University Washington) and Patrick Cohedent (HEC Montréal). Deadline for submission of full papers is September 30, 2026.

Cover Business & Society

“Collective actorhood and organizationality: Recalibrating responsibility in business-society relations” in the journal “Business & Society,” co-edited with Dennis Schoeneborn (Copenhagen Business School), Héloïse Berkowitz (LEST, CNRS, Aix Marseille), Frank de Bakker (IÉSEG School of Management) and Consuelo Vásquez (Université du Québec à Montréal). We will be supported in the editorial work by consulting editor Devi Vijay (IIM Calcutta) as well as Business & Society editor Colin Higgins (Deakin University.

(leonhard)

Since the business school accreditation agency AACSB has recently renounced Diversity, Equity and Inclusive (DEI), it is high time that AACSB accredited business schools renounce their accreditations.

Accreditations are questionable in themselves. Expensive, lots of bureaucracy, hardly any noticeable improvements for students or lecturers. Not much substance, mostly a legitimacy facade. I’ve always found cheers about multiple accreditations absurd.

But when global accreditation of business schools immediately abandons DEI standards in anticipatory submission to an authoritarian US president announcing legally questionable decrees, then all the talk of “academic research principles” (p. 57 in the “Guiding Principles and Standards for Business School Accrediation”) is exactly that: just talk.

Read the rest of this entry »

The title of Doctorow’s “The Lost Cause” is not immediately understandable outside the USA. It refers to a revisionist historical narrative of the US Civil War, according to which the Southern states had honest motives for seceding from the Union beyond maintaining an economic system based on slavery and racial segregation. While the Lost Cause narrative initially served primarily to paint a heroic picture of secession, it experienced a renewed upswing in the second half of the 20th century in reaction to the US civil rights movement. 

Doctorow takes all of this for granted when he describes the near future in a global warming USA in the year 2050. The book is set in Burbank, California, where Doctorow himself lives, and is classified as ‘solarpunk’ or ‘hopepunk’. An entirely appropriate categorization: for as ruthlessly realistic as the description of a world that has clearly missed the 2-degree target in terms of global warming is, the book nevertheless manages to portray life in this world as hopeful and meaningful.

Read the rest of this entry »

The Berlin-based re:publica conference series deals with what Felix Stalder calls “The Digital Condition” of our society and attracts about 10.000 peopel each year. At this year’s conference themed “Who cares?” I had the honor to meet UCLA Professor and Philantropist (Arcadia Fund) Peter Baldwin for a Fireside Chat.

Under the headline “Public Domain in the Digital Age: a Paradox”, Baldwin sketched some of his partially countervailing expectations with respect to how the state of the public domain will change in the (not too far) future and how this future might be brought closer to the present due to the advent of LLMs and generative AI. A recording of our chat is available on YouTube:

For my other activities and talks during this year’s re:publica, please check out my (German) blog post over at osconjunction.net.

(Leonhard)

This week, my University of Innsbruck hosted the conference on “Enhancing the voice of science on Wikipedia: How universities can collaborate with the online encyclopedia in science communication”. I had the honor to deliver the opening keynote on “Science (Communication) and Wikipedia: Potentials and Pitfalls”. In this talk, I offer some thoughts on the following questions:

  • How ‘scientific’ is Wikipedia?
  • How important is science for Wikipedia?
  • How important is Wikipedia for science?
  • How important is Wikipedia for our common knowledge?
  • What are potentials when science communication meets Wikipedia?
  • What are the pitfalls?
  • Is it worth it?

The slides are available over at Slideshare.

Florian Überbacher (Montpellier Business School), Elke Schüßler (Leuphana University) and Arno Kourula (University of Amsterdam Business School) are calling for submissions to their 2024 EGOS Subtheme on “Regulating Organizations: Re-Examining the Intersections between States and Businesses”.

In view of the grand environmental, political, and social problems we are facing, we would – perhaps more urgently than ever – need a functioning regulatory and legal environment that motivates companies contribute towards making our world more sustainable. But how should such a ‘better’ and ‘smarter’ regulatory system look like and how should regulatory processes be organized?

To address such questions, and connect organizational scholarship with ongoing debates on (trans)national governance and regulation, the aim of this subtheme is to invite scholarship that seeks to integrate, extend, or contradict regulatory and organizational research in novel ways.

The deadline for the submission of short papers is January 9th, 2024.

While there is a lot of discussion about new Twitter alternatives and the relevance of journalists and other critical groups of users, the potential of university-based Fediverse instances has hardly been addressed. It is high time for universities to get involved in the Fediverse.

In fact, researchers from around the world are already there, as evidenced by the various disciplinary opt-in lists of Academics on Mastodon. They recognize the Fediverse’s potential to contribute to publicly owned scholarly knowledge, as Björn Brembs and colleagues have advocated for in Nature.

However, the full potential of decentralized social networks will only become clear when universities also bring students into the Fediverse. In order to support this, please check out and share the call to action “Universities of the World, Join the Fediverse!”

As we have all experienced recently, to prevent pandemic outbreaks or mitigate an evolving pandemic crisis, it is of utmost importance to guarantee timely and global access to safe and effective vaccines. Through their pre-print, Milena Leybold (University of Innsbruck) and Konstantin Hondros (University of Duisburg-Essen) make a step towards opening a debate on “Increasing Vaccine Access in a Shorter Time. Alternative Regulatory Frameworks in Response to Pandemics.” 

População do DF conta com 47 tipos de vacinas e soros
Source: Agência Brasília, https://www.flickr.com/photos/64586261@N02/51330020291/
Read the rest of this entry »

In March 2021, Alek Tarkowski and Paul Keller published an essay on the “Paradox of Open” on the occasion of launching their Brussels-based Think Tank Open Future. While sketching an agenda for their adovacy work, the essay offered a more sober perspective on the promises previously associated with openness:

While Open works as a strategic (and narrative) approach in specific fields of application, it no longer provides a more general vision of a more just and egalitarian digital society.

More recently, open future published a collection of essays responding to this text. I had the honor to also contribute a response essay entitled “How Openness Becomes Exclusionary” on imported, created and path-dependent diversity deficits in online communities that explicitly describe themselves as “open”:

Read the rest of this entry »

Konstantin Hondros & Milena Leybold

Is an open source vaccine inside?

Just over a year ago, Milena Leybold and Leonhard Dobusch asked, Why is there no open-source vaccine against Covid-19? and discussed arguments why open-source vaccines are difficult to achieve. In March 2022, The Financial Times published an article by Donato Paolo Mancini, Jamie Smyth, and Joseph Cotterill asking Will ‘open-source’ vaccines narrow the inequality gap exposed by Covid? (behind a subscription barrier) and indicating that the landscape of open-source vaccines may have changed substantially.This blog post is thought of as a reply and extension to this very informative report that introduces mainly two organizations producing or aiming to produce open-source vaccines: Afrigen Biologics and Vaccines (Afrigen) and the Texas Children’s Hospital Center for Vaccine Development (CVD with their vaccine Corbevax). For sure, Afrigen and CVD approach vaccine development, production, and distribution much more openly than most of the vaccines dominating the market. Still, it is unclear to what extent they should be considered as “open-source.” To clarify this topic, we scrutinize what an open-source vaccine ideally could be, to what degree Afrigen or CVD fit the ideals of open-source, and what other attempts for open-source vaccine alternatives are currently under development.

Read the rest of this entry »

The Book

Governance across borders: transnational fields and transversal themes. Leonhard Dobusch, Philip Mader and Sigrid Quack (eds.), 2013, epubli publishers.
December 2025
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031  

Copyright Information

Creative Commons License
All texts on governance across borders are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Germany License.