Konstantinos Zougris’s research while affiliated with University of Hawaii–West Oahu and other places

Introduction This paper is designed to identify key factors informing the process of developing a United States-based national community of practice of state and regional food system planning efforts aligned with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. Methods Grounded in an extensive literature review, we employed an exploratory sequential mixed methods design to assess the needs, functions, challenges, and likelihood for participation in a national community of practice aligned with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. Data drawn by a series of semi-structured interviews with 25 leading experts, complemented by a set of self-administered online surveys of 35 practitioners of food planning efforts across the nation. Results Our integrative findings revealed overwhelmingly interest and need for the development of a national community of practice aligned with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. The findings further indicate that in the process of developing a national community of practice, the principles and functions of shared governance, mutual trust and collective fundraising are essential to supporting credible and coordinated activities that promote equity, reinforce capacity building, promote research on food system measurements, and strengthen advocacy for systemic transformation aligned with the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Finally, our study revealed a rampant interest in collaboration and knowledge sharing in various stages of the formation of a national community of practice. The majority of the participants appear to be familiar, yet only a small fraction of their organizations appear to be formally aligned with the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Discussion Our integrative findings emerge with Wenger’s conceptual framework offering a suitable theoretical grounding in the process of developing a community of practice in food systems planning. The implication of this study denotes the importance of collaboration among academic research institutions, legislators and FPEs within the community that can spur adaptation, innovation, and integration in food system planning, policy, implementation, and monitoring. Coordination in pooling resources and aligning efforts can lead to more efficient use and allocation of funds, ensuring that investments are directed toward the most impactful practices aligned with state and regional food system initiatives and planning efforts.

The purpose of this conceptual paper is to navigate through the socio-historical modulations in American tolerance for different psychoactive substances, and propose a theoretical synthesis formed by two vanguard philosophical doctrines, objectivism, and constructivism. Our approach is grounded on the analysis of social historical context and objective harms that have influenced drug use tolerance in the United States based on key historical events such as: heavy drinking at the dawn of nineteenth century, the establishment and repeal of prohibition, late nineteenth century opiate and cocaine tolerance followed by early twentieth century prohibition, post-prohibition drug concerns such as marijuana prohibition in the 1930s, heroin concerns and medical depressant use in the 1950s, poly-drug use in the 1960s, crack cocaine use in the 1980s, and finally modulations in tolerance for peyote use. Evidence supports the notion of drug harms reduction for the privileged, and criminalization of drug use by marginalized groups. Over long spans of history, however, more objectively harmful drugs are rejected, while drugs that can be used regularly without serous dysfunction are tolerated and normalized. We argue that a framework of social status and pharmacological harm can account for the vacillating policy responses that have emerged to different drugs at different times. Our approach informs the role of socio-cultural conflict in drug policy development and infuse the need for empirical research on the effect of socioeconomic positioning on attitudes of medicalization and legalization of marijuana and opioid policy in contemporary America.

The purpose of this paper is to describe the topical structure across national sociologies and detect the topic clusters contributing to the intellectual divide of the discipline. I employed a hybrid methodological style consisting of latent semantic analysis, topic polarization index and simple correspondence analysis to extract and map the topical divides across American and British sociological journals. The textual data were drawn from 11,793 abstracts published in 4 American, and 4 British journals in a 40-year period. My analysis revealed divisive publication preferences across the American and British journals. Topics associated with theory, methods, race, health, social class, crime, income inequality, aging, suicide, social networks, social movements and social status, appeared to contribute the most to the intellectual divides across American and British sociologies. The polarizing publication preferences on the core topics of theory and methods support former findings claiming that there is a fundamental epistemological divide across the two national sociological traditions. American journals tend to publish papers with an emphasis of methodology, while British journals show preference on papers with a theoretical focus. Finally, my findings revealed that core sociological topics relevant to social institutions such as marriage and family, labor, education, and stratification such as gender, immigration and occupational mobility contribute to the intellectual fusion of American and British sociologies.

This conceptual paper provides a meta-theoretical synthesis describing knowledge production processes in the sociological discipline. The first part of this paper gives an overview of recent studies exploring the sociological knowledge space with an emphasis on the epistemological tension, and the structural divides induced by social conditions that contribute to the process of knowledge production. A meta-theoretical synthesis -constituted by the institutional theory framework, combined with the field theory and the theory of communities of practice- aims to identify the structural arrangements, the cultural domains and the interactive processes that establish intellectual consensus, from which, validated forms of scientific knowledge are generated. I detect an intrinsic mechanism of different camps of communities of scholars accumulating intellectual capital through a process of participation, negotiation, and reification, which is based on a knowledge circuit among academic fields and the intellectual habitus that form a holistic institution of knowledge generation practices. Finally, I suggest that further research in the direction of detecting the institutional arrangements of knowledge exchange, with an emphasis on the epistemological preferences across countries, should be carried out.

Purpose The authors apply topic sentiment analysis (several relatively new text analysis methods) to the study of public opinion as expressed in social media by comparing reactions to the Trayvon Martin controversy in spring 2012 by commenters on the partisan news websites the Huffington Post and Daily Caller. Methodology/approach Topic sentiment analysis is a text analysis method that estimates the polarity of sentiments across units of text within large text corpora (Lin & He, 2009; Mei, Ling, Wondra, Su, & Zhai, 2007). Findings We apply topic sentiment analysis to public opinion as expressed in social media by comparing reactions to the Trayvon Martin controversy in spring 2012 by commenters on the partisan news websites the Huffington Post and Daily Caller. Based on studies that depict contemporary news media as an “outrage industry” that incentivizes media personalities to be controversial and polarizing (Berry & Sobieraj, 2014), we predict that high-profile commentators will be more polarizing than other news personalities and topics. Originality/value Results of the topic sentiment analysis support this prediction and in so doing provide partial validation of the application of topic sentiment analysis to online opinion.

Limited research has been done about the applicability of World-Systems Theory (WST) on meso-sociological domains. This paper discusses the theoretical framework of the WST spatial divisions, applies it in subnational geographic domains, and examines the phenomenon of spatial income inequality across the Illinois' counties. We argue that the 40 Human Development Index (HDI) could serve as a suitable classification measure of WST regional taxonomies. Our findings indicate equivalence of structural classification between local and global geographical domains at the state of Illinois. Also our analysis on spatial inequality supports the findings of vanguard studies of the field suggesting a negative association between rurality and development, as well as an inverse relationship between rurality and income inequality at a county level.