Explore the vast range of titles available.

Objective: The objective of the article is to identify and systemize the governance dynamics and related socio- economic consequences of the fintech transformation in banking, while acknowledging spatial contexts. Research Design Methods: The research framework comprised Global Production Networks (GPN), Global Value Chain (GVC), and co-evolutionary approaches to guide a systematic literature review in the Scopus, Web of Science, and Taylor Francis databases for 2016-2021. The final sample comprised 76 sources that became the basis for selective coding and the synthesis of the results.Findings: Fintech impacted banking governance by creating a dual and interrelated system of global financial networks and a ‘mosaic’ of territorial financial ecologies and ecosystems, where incumbent banks held an im- portant but not exclusive position. The fintech-enhanced governance transformations had both positive socio- economic effects (improved efficiency, expanded range of services, and inclusion of unbanked or under-served customers) and negative effects (over-indebtedness, surveillance, and exclusion of some customers). Wider so- cio-economic consequences refered to sustainable development and changes in economic and social behaviour. Implications Recommendations: A research framework and agenda for future studies related to the dy- namics of fintech-driven governance in banking have been elaborated. The article derives the immediate and wider economic and social consequences of fintech-driven transformations. The results can also be applied in public policies oriented towards sustainable socio-economic development.Contribution Value Added: The study provides theoretical and policy-relevant contributions. Firstly, it broadens the research on the transformation of banking governance in the spatial context. Secondly, it contributes theoretically by proposing a research framework of GVC and GPN governance augmented by a co-evolutionary perspective. Thirdly, the article informs policy that seeks financial inclusion for cohesive and sustainable development.

This article reviews the rapidly growing domain of global value chain (GVC) research by analyzing several highly cited conceptual frameworks and then appraising GVC studies published in such disciplines as international business, general management, supply chain management, operations management, economic geography, regional and development studies, and international political economy. Building on GVC conceptual frameworks, we conducted the review based on a comparative institutional perspective that encompasses critical governance issues at the micro-, GVC, and macro-levels. Our results indicate that some of these issues have garnered significantly more scholarly attention than others. We suggest several future research topics such as microfoundations of GVC governance, GVC mapping, learning, impact of lead firm ownership and strategy, dynamics of GVC arrangements, value creation and distribution, financialization, digitization, the impact of renewed protectionism, the impact of GVCs on their macro-environment, and chain-level performance management.

Global production networks (GPN) are organizational platforms through which actors in different regional and national economies compete and cooperate for a greater share of value creation, transformation, and capture through geographically dispersed economic activity. Existing conceptual frameworks on global value chains (GVC) and what we term GPN 1.0 tend to under-theorize the origins and dynamics of these organizational platforms and to overemphasize their governance typologies (e.g., modular, relational, and captive modes in GVC theory) or analytical categories (e.g., power and embeddedness in GPN 1.0). Building on this expanding literature, our article aims to contribute toward the reframing of existing GPN-GVC debates and the development of a more dynamic theory of global production networks that can better explain the emergence of different firm-specific activities, strategic network effects, and territorial outcomes in the global economy. It is part of a wider initiative-GPN 2.0 in short-that seeks to offer novel theoretical insights into why and how the organization and coordination of global production networks varies significantly within and across different industries, sectors, and economies. Taking an actor-centered focus toward theory development, we tackle a significant gap in existing work by systematically conceptualizing the causal drivers of global production networks in terms of their competitive dynamics (optimizing cost-capability ratios, market imperatives, and financial discipline) and risk environments. These capitalist dynamics are theorized as critical independent variables that shape the four main strategies adopted by economic actors in (re)configuring their global production networks and, ultimately, the developmental outcomes in different industries, regions, and countries.

In this framing paper for the special issue, we map significant research on global production networks during the past decade in economic geography and adjacent fields. In line with the core aim of the special issue to push for new conceptual advances, the paper focuses on the central elements of GPN theory to showcase recent rethinking related to the delimiting of global production networks, underlying political-economic drivers, actor-specific strategies and regional/national development outcomes. We suggest that the analytical purchase of this recent work is greater in research that has continued to keep a tight focus on the causal links between the organizational configurations of global production networks and uneven development. Concomitantly, considerable effort in the literature has gone into expanding the remit of GPN research in different directions, and we thus engage with five domains or ‘constituent outsides’ that relate to the state, finance, labour, environment and development. We believe such cross-domain fertilisation can help realize GPN 2.0’s potential for explaining uneven development in an interconnected world economy.

For some time now, calls have been made for a more adequate theorization of the state and institutional frameworks in work on global production networks (GPNs) and global value chains (GVCs). However, despite claims in GPN research that institutional contexts matter, there remains an absence of theoretical frameworks on the state in GPNs. Consequently, understanding of the relations between state action and the changing geographies of production networks remains in its infancy. This paper explores a strategic-relational understanding of the state and the rearticulation of scales of state formation to understand the dynamics of global production networks in macro-regional spaces.

This article aims to unpack and analyse the institutional and political dynamics of strategic coupling from a host region perspective, adopting an actor-centred approach that focuses on regional institutions’ efforts to attract and embed lead firm investments within global production networks. We are particularly concerned with understanding the strategic agency and shifting coalitions of actors that create couplings and shape their evolution over time. This involves opening up the institutional underpinnings of strategic couplings by focusing more specifically on the key episodes in their creation and the organisation of the temporary coalitions that do the work of creating couplings. This approach is operationalised through a case study of the Siemens offshore wind turbine plant in the Humber region of England. In conclusion, we emphasise the need for regional institutions to develop adaptive coupling creation strategies that co-evolve with the reconfiguration of production networks and the reshaping of national institutional and political environments.

Understanding and conceptualizing the complexities of the contemporary global economy is a challenging but vitally important task. In this article, we critically evaluate the potential of one interpretive framework—the global production networks (GPN) perspective—for analysing the global economy and its impacts on territorial development. After situating the approach in relation to other cognate chain/network approaches, the article proceeds to review and evaluate a number of underdeveloped areas that need to be understood and incorporated more fully if the framework is to deliver on its early potential. The article concludes with a consideration of the key research issues facing work in this area.

The configurations of global value chains and production networks are constantly changing, leading to new trajectories and geographical distributions of value creation and capture. In this article, we offer a 40-year evolutionary perspective on power and governance in the global coffee value chain and production network. We identify three distinct phases that are characterised by different power dynamics, governance setups and distributional configurations. We find that the kinds of power exercised along the coffee chain have changed, but also that the underlying power inequities between Northern buyers and Southern producers have remained fundamentally unaltered.

Global Production Networks (GPNs) have become a key focus of research in economic geography and related fields in recent years. This article has two main aims. First, I offer a critical appraisal of GPN research, focusing on its contribution to the rethinking of regional development processes and the notion of ‘strategic coupling’ in particular. Second, the article aims to forge a new set of links between GPNs and evolutionary economic geography (EEG), which has also attracted considerable recent interest as a framework for assessing the evolution of economic landscapes. In particular, I use evolutionary approaches and the concept of path dependence to develop a broader and deeper conception of the range of coupling, recoupling and decoupling processes that take place between regions and GPNs, going beyond strategic couplingper se.

To commemorate 40 years since the founding of the Journal of Business Ethics, the editors in chief of the journal have invited the editors to provide commentaries on the future of business ethics. This essay comprises a selection of commentaries aimed at creating dialogue around the theme Technology, Megatrends and Work. Of all the profound changes in business, technology is perhaps the most ubiquitous. There is not a facet of our lives unaffected by internet technologies and artificial intelligence. The Journal of Business Ethics established a dedicated section that focuses on Technology and Business Ethics, yet issues related to this phenomenon run right through all the sections. Kirsten Martin, editor of the Technology and Business Ethics section, joins our interim social media editor, Hannah Trittin-UIbrich, to advance a human-centric approach to the development and application of digital technologies that places Business Ethics at centre of the analysis. For Shuili Du, technology is the defining condition for a new era of Corporate Social Responsibility—CSR 3.0—which she defines as “a company’s socially responsible strategies and practices that deal with key ethical and socio-technical issues associated with AI and related technologies on the one hand and leverage the power of AI and related technologies to tackle social and environmental problems on the other hand.” It is not just technologies that are a determining feature of our lives but technology companies, an argument made by Glen Whelan as he examines Big Business and the need for a Big Business Ethics as we try to understand the impact of Big Tech on our post-work world. Indeed, as noted by Ernesto Noronha and Premilla D’Cruz, megatrends in addition to advancement in technologies, namely globalization, the greening of economies, and changes in demographics and migration, are shaping the future for workers in ways previously unimaginable. Contributing to this important debate, Praveen Parboteeah considers the influence of another longstanding but oft overlooked megatrend, the role of religion in the workplace. Given the enormity of the influence of technology and other megatrends in our world, it is not surprising that this essay introduces ground-breaking ideas that speak to the future of business ethics research.