Decolonizing international business

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to encourage scholars of international business (IB) to engage with the “decolonizing the university” project and reflect on what decolonizing might mean for IB research and education. The paper also argues that it is particularly important for IB scholars to join the decolonizing project given that the field’s main object of study – the multinational enterprise – has been central to colonialism. Design/methodology/approach An essay style is adopted to introduce the decolonizing project to IB and to explain why and how this scholarly field might benefit from engaging with it. As part of that, the paper calls upon IB scholars to work on decolonizing the field and to do so by not only interrogating its knowledge claims but also broadening the scope of its research so it can address the theme of neo-colonialism. Findings The paper reveals the conspicuous absence of IB scholars from the decolonizing project and situates such absence within a long-standing indifference within IB to the issue of colonialism. Social implications In learning about and engaging with the decolonizing project, IB scholars will be able to not only enrich IB theory and education but also help to tackle one of the grand challenges facing the modern world society, namely, social inequality and injustice rooted in colonialism. Originality/value It is hoped that this paper will stimulate reflection on IB’s absence from the decolonizing project and assist scholars in developing an understanding of the project’s rationale and underlying literature. It is also hoped that the paper will open dialogue within IB about how this field might be decolonized and help scholars engage meaningfully with other disciplines as they do so.

Moving beyond delinking, decoloniality and the pluriverse: reflections on the “decolonizing international business” debate

“…Boussebaa (2023, p. 551) reports “the conspicuous absence of IB from the decolonising project” and “long-standing indifference among IB scholars to the issue of colonialism”. He suggests a critical interrogation of IB knowledge concerning power relations rooted in colonialism, to position research on indigeneity and indigenous knowledge in its colonial context, and to engage with the study of neo-colonialism, building on the ideas of Nkrumah (1965).…”

“…He suggests a critical interrogation of IB knowledge concerning power relations rooted in colonialism, to position research on indigeneity and indigenous knowledge in its colonial context, and to engage with the study of neo-colonialism, building on the ideas of Nkrumah (1965). Boussebaa’s (2023) call to decolonise IB builds on a considerable tradition of critical IB scholarship that seeks to introduce ideas from postcolonial theory to IB (Banerjee and Prasad, 2008; Boussebaa and Morgan, 2014; Durepos et al , 2016; Jack and Westwood, 2009; Westwood, 2006; Westwood and Jack, 2007). Drawing on elements of the decolonial thinking approach, Alcadipani and Faria (2014, p. 109) call for the decolonisation of the field of IB and the construction of a “pluriversal international business” in which “many worlds and knowledges could coexist”.…”

“…In the IB literature, there is a track record of engagement with decolonisation (Banerjee and Prasad, 2008; Westwood, 2006; Westwood and Jack, 2007), culminating in Boussebaa’s (2023, p. 550) call for IB scholars “to engage with the ‘decolonising the university’ project and reflect on what decolonising might mean for IB research and education”, arguing that “the field’s main object of study – the multinational enterprise – has been central to colonialism”. This paper supports and responds to this call by reflecting on the decolonial thinking approach, proposing a broader analytical framework to analyse colonisation and decolonisation and discussing the implications of the decolonisation debate for IB scholarship.…”

“…The debate on decolonising the university as a political project (Bhambra et al, 2018(Bhambra et al, , 2020 has finally reached the academic field of international business (IB) (Boussebaa, 2023). Even though postcolonial studies have been addressing issues related to decolonisation for decades, the magnitude of the current debate in the academy is new, in terms of both intensity and impact.…”

Review of The Contest for Value in Global Value Chains: Correcting for Distorted Distribution in the Global Apparel Industry

“…Unlike the claims given by managers in Nachum and Uramoto’s study, the study of Apple reveals that this firm can even impose such requirements on Foxconn, its biggest supplier, despite claims about Foxconn’s and the People’s Republic of China’s – where Foxconn’s plants are mostly located – rising bargaining power and technological advancement within the global value chains (Chan et al , 2020). This certainly begs further exploration of the extent of the bargaining power of Global South suppliers, including those within the apparel industry, amid neocolonialism that still characterizes the capitalist world economy (Boussebaa, 2023).…”