According to modern organizational theory, the growth of companies in developing nations is due to the coming together of public and private sector interorganizational networks and globalization. Within an open system and a very dynamic environment, a corporation cannot work autonomously. Here are the objectives of the study: The goals of this research are threefold: first, to learn how Thai SMEs expanded into BRICS countries; second, to find out what kinds of inter-organizational networks Thai SMEs relied on when going global; (...) and third, to give some advice to Thai SMEs that want to expand internationally in BRICS and to the Thai government on how to set up management networks that help with investment and internationalization. Documentary analysis of the database from the office of small and medium enterprise promotion and in-depth interviews were among the qualitative approaches employed in this study. This study examined 76 individuals from Thailand who were considered significant informants due to their extensive understanding of developing markets, namely those in the BRICS countries. A total of 63 executives responsible for overseeing their businesses' activities in the BRICS nations, together with 10 operational officers and 3 government officials, were chosen as key informants. In order to get trustworthy information for this study, the researcher used the triangulation method. Executives and government officials with operational responsibilities inside government agencies were interviewed in-depth, and their data was cross-referenced with that from pertinent papers. Thai SMEs were affected by the BRICS countries' political, legal, and socio-cultural frameworks, according to the study. Companies in the BRICS countries went global for three main reasons: to tap into untapped markets, to boost operational efficiency, and to secure access to critical resources. For Thai SMEs looking to grow their business in BRICS nations, the following factors were crucial to their success: 1) The network between different organizations; 2) the capacity to adjust to political and legal changes in BRICS countries; 3) non-formal ties; 4) the capability of local employees; 5) the appropriateness of the entrance method approach; and 6) knowledge gained from past mistakes. (shrink)

Cultural tourism is one of the oldest and most prosperous tourisms in the world, which dates back to the history of cultural culture. The prosperity of cultural tourism will lead to economic development and cultural and social changes. Therefore, the purpose of this research is to investigate the role of factors affecting cultural tourism in economic development and cultural and social changes. This article explains the characteristics of cultural tourism and its importance in all-round growth and development according to the (...) image of cultural tourism. This research seeks to answer the basic question, what are the factors affecting the development of cultural tourism? What strategies can be formulated and presented for the development of cultural tourism in the country? The presented research method is mixed in terms of practical purpose and descriptive in terms of data collection. For this purpose, after stating the topic and examining the background of the research, the role of factors affecting cultural tourism in economic development and social effects was identified. The results showed that cultural tourism has an effect on both economic and cultural variables of the tourism area. Also, according to the findings of the research, among the identified factors, the factors of providing information about cultural places and their history, promoting tourism businesses for tourist, and creating security are more important than other factors in the development of tourism. (shrink)

In 1982 the American philosopher and Levinas scholar Edith Wyschogrod conducted an interview with Emmanuel Levinas, the transcript of which she published seven years later. Early in the interview, Wyschogrod proposed to Levinas that his philosophy constituted a radical break with western theological tradition because it started not with a Parmenidean ontological plenitude, but rather with the God of the Hebrew Bible. The God Levinas began with, according to Wyschogrod, wasan indigent God, a hidden God who commands that there (...) be a world apart from God, because God needs the multiplicity of the world in order for there to be justice. Levinas responds to this proposal: That’s quite right. Justice, I call it responsibility for the other, right? There is even in Totality and Infinity, the evocation of the tzimtzum [the idea in kabbalistic writings of the self-contraction of God in order to create the void in which creation can take place], but I won’t venture into that. (shrink)