Timeline

• July 15, 2026: Full paper submission deadline

Timeline

• February 12, 2027: Submission deadline

Timeline

• November 30, 2026: Submission deadline

Timeline

• September 30, 2026: Submission deadline

Timeline

• September 30, 2026: Full paper submission deadline

C. Michael Hall, Massey University

The crisis in the Middle East marked by the Israeli and United States attacks on Iran, Israel attacks on Lebanon and Palestine, and attacks by Iran and their proxies on Israel and Middle East and Gulf states represents the greatest crisis for international tourism since COVID-19. The direct effects of the war on tourism in the Middle East and Gulf states is clearly substantial however it is also having broader effects throughout the global tourism system because of the significance on Gulf aviation hubs for international tourism as well as restrictions in airspace for Asia-Europe travel and shipping in the Straits of Hormuz. Moreover, Iran has directly threatened to expand its retaliatory attacks to include recreational and tourist sites worldwide.

Indirectly, the effects of the Middle East crisis also have enormous broader impacts on the cost of oil and gas, and therefore tourism aviation and transport, as well as on national and regional economies. According to the head of the International Energy Agency, the depth of the problem facing the globe because of the war on Iran is very serious, more so than the 1973 and 1979 oil crises, and more serious than the gas crisis sparked by Russia's invasion of Ukraine. From a tourism perspective, aviation schedules are already being revised considering potential fuel shortages while the cost of petrol has implications for domestic tourist travel. The cost aviation fuel and travel uncertainty has hit the economics of the airline industry leading to concerns over the collapse of carriers. Moreover, in the longer term the crisis has implications for the sustainability of carbon-based transport networks and tourism infrastructure and may lead to further development of renewable energy-based tourism infrastructure or new energy trajectories given the geopolitical risks attached to carbon dependent tourism.

Given the significance of the crisis for international and domestic tourism worldwide and the associated economic, policy, destination and environmental effects, Current Issues in Tourism calls for contributions to a special issue on tourism and the Middle East crisis in international, regional, national, and destination contexts in order to provide the latest research on the crisis' impacts and government, industry, destination, and consumer responses.

Potential topics

• The effects of the Middle East crisis on international and domestic tourist attitudes, behaviour, decision-making, and flows
• The impacts of the Middle East crisis on destinations, attractions and businesses and policy and industry responses
• The Middle East crisis and destination image
• Resilience, adaptation, and vulnerability in tourism considering the Middle East crisis
• The geopolitics of tourism and the Middle East crisis
• The Middle East crisis and the aviation sector
• Energy futures for tourism
• Foreign policy and tourism
• The future of tourism in the Middle East and the Eastern Mediterranean
• Substitute behaviour because of the Middle East crisis and the cost of energy
• Policy learning and the Middle East crisis
• The international and regional architecture of tourism governance and the Middle East crisis

Timeline

• December 31, 2026: Manuscript deadline

Guillermo Antonio Dávila, Universidad de Lima

Susanne Durst, Bangkok University

A growing number of organizations are facing political uncertainty, a knowledge-based economy with heterogeneous development, and technological upheavals that not only pose ethical and social challenges but also demand new business models and ways to maintain competitiveness. Many of these organisations operate in underdeveloped regions, geographically isolated areas, rural communities, conflict zones, post-disaster environments, or informal settlements. Others, like NGOs, operate in sectors with a lack of financial resources. These entrepreneurial contexts share characteristics such as financial constraints, difficulties in accessing and applying technologies, and a shortage of skilled workers. Organisations operating in these contexts must learn to innovate and remain globally competitive despite challenging conditions.

Given limited resources, institutional frameworks, and other uncertainties in today's world, companies should strive to make better use of their knowledge. Targeted and strategic KM enables organizations to maximize the value of their relevant knowledge. Research has shown that KM can mitigate the disadvantages associated with financial and technological constraints. In this sense, it might represent a strategic organisational capability that supports innovation, strengthens resilience, and fosters organisational learning.

Empirical evidence from different contexts supports the critical role of KM in this regard. Regarding innovation, KM practices have been associated with higher innovation performance in firms from Brazil and China. In terms of resilience, studies suggest that organisational resilience can be reinforced through knowledge-based resources and capabilities, including dynamic capabilities in Indonesian firms, the joint action of intellectual capital and generative AI in Turkish organisations, and knowledge transfer, integration, and sharing mechanisms in emergency management systems in China. Likewise, organisational learning has been linked to intellectual capital and knowledge process capability in Taiwanese firms. KM has also proven to be very beneficial for small and medium-sized enterprises and their development. When operating under constraints, it is crucial to understand the qualities of available resources, including knowledge, as it is not automatically an intrinsic asset. Against this backdrop, discussing risks related to knowledge is relevant, allowing the organisation to examine knowledge from both a positive and a negative perspective, which can lead to new ways of thinking and novel solutions for leveraging knowledge.

Although KM has become an established field in recent years, the focus of studies remains on relatively stable and well-institutionalized environments, i.e., developed economies and mature organizational environments. Contexts characterized by institutional weaknesses or resource constraints are comparatively under-researched, although emerging findings suggest that KM could play a crucial role in overcoming such constraints through mechanisms such as tinkering, socialization, and knowledge-sharing routines. Since SMEs constitute the majority of businesses in all economies, and approximately 61 percent of SMEs are from emerging economies, there is a significant need for more context-sensitive KM research that examines the roles KM can play in contexts characterized by resource and institutional scarcity.

This special issue aims to deepen the understanding of KM in contexts with limited resources and institutional frameworks. It seeks to identify mechanisms, capabilities, and theoretical perspectives through which KM enables organisational development and resilience despite such conditions. It welcomes the application or proposal of novel methodological approaches for investigating KM phenomena in such environments. By promoting context-sensitive research from underrepresented areas, this special issue aims to generate both theoretical and practical contributions that help to reduce the existing gap between established and underrepresented contexts.

This Special Issue welcomes a wide range of contributions, including conceptual papers, literature reviews, empirical studies, comparative and cross-country studies, theory-building research, practice-oriented studies, and methodological contributions, that advance understanding of KM in contexts characterised by resource and institutional constraints.

Potential topics

• KM as an enabler of organizational performance under conditions of resource scarcity
• Knowledge risk management as crucial function in environments characterized by internal and external constraints
• KM in underrepresented organisational settings, including SMEs, family businesses, informal organisations, low-technology firms, social organisations or geographically isolated regions
• Organisational learning processes in contexts characterised by institutional and resource constraints
• The role of KM in strengthening organisational resilience during internal and external crises and disruptions
• Necessary conditions and bottlenecks for organizational development empowered by KM
• The interplay between artificial intelligence and KM in overcoming organisational and institutional constraints
• The role of institutional ecosystems and inter-organisational networks in enhancing the effectiveness of KM
• Novel methodological approaches for studying KM in constrained and underrepresented contexts

Timeline

• March 15, 2027: Manuscript deadline

Michele Acciaro, Copenhagen Business School

Martin Jes Iversen, Copenhagen Business School

Ioannis Lagoudis, University of Piraeus

Iryna Savelieva, Odesa National Maritime University

Dong Yang, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University

Kum Fai Yuen, Nanyang Technological University

Critical infrastructure (CI) systems, such as energy, transportation, telecommunications, and water, form the backbone of modern economies. These systems face unprecedented challenges from technological disruptions, geopolitical tensions, environmental pressures, and evolving security threats, from cyber-attacks and supply chain vulnerabilities to climate impacts. Virtually no firm can consider itself independent from CI, as infrastructure disruptions cascade through supply chains, energy failures halt production, and transportation bottlenecks constrain competitiveness.

The deep interconnection between innovation and security, conceptualized as the 'security-innovation nexus', has emerged as a defining feature of contemporary political economy. Understanding CI security innovation requires engaging with complex interdependencies where technological capabilities, industrial structures, geopolitical strategies, and security co-evolve. Innovation systems frameworks offer powerful analytical lenses for this purpose, yet CI systems remain relatively understudied within innovation studies despite their strategic importance.

The integration of innovation and security objectives presents important governance challenges. Poorly designed security governance can undermine innovation by fragmenting knowledge networks, while innovation without security governance increases systemic fragility. These tensions manifest across multiple levels: at the firm level, companies must balance security investment with innovation focus; at the sectoral level, CI operators must coordinate heterogeneous actors; at the policy level, governments must manage trade-offs between openness and security controls.

These tensions also generate pressing ethical dilemmas, most visibly around dual-use technologies whose civilian and security applications cannot be cleanly separated. Such dilemmas place renewed demands on corporate responsibility, responsible innovation, and on assessments of the social value created—or eroded—by security-oriented technological change in CI sectors.

Recent geopolitical developments, including the Russia-Ukraine war and the Israel-US war on Iran, the US-China technology competition, and strategic contests over semiconductors, critical raw materials, and telecommunications infrastructure, have heightened the urgency of this research agenda. Critical raw materials have emerged as a key concern especially in relation to green technology transitions, with implications spanning from renewable energy infrastructure to shipbuilding and defence industries. Digital transformation across CI sectors, including autonomous systems, AI, IoT, and cyber-physical systems, is simultaneously reshaping capabilities and creating new vulnerabilities. High-profile cybersecurity incidents in energy, transportation, and telecommunications networks demonstrate how cyber resilience has become a core dimension of infrastructure security.

From an organizational perspective, security concerns in CI create innovation opportunities for dependent firms while reshaping CI provision itself. Firms perceiving infrastructure vulnerabilities, e.g., geopolitical risks threatening supply chains, cybersecurity threats to networks, or climate impacts on energy grids, develop organizational innovations to reduce dependency and enhance resilience. Importantly, these innovations frequently diffuse back into CI sectors and adjacent industries, constituting a bidirectional dynamic that remains a crucial but understudied dimension of CI innovation.

Potential topics

• Innovation Systems, Governance, and Geopolitics - Technological Innovation Systems (TIS) approach for CI security and how security-focused innovation systems emerge and evolve
• Innovation Systems, Governance, and Geopolitics - Sectoral and technological innovation systems in CI security, knowledge bases, and actor networks
• Innovation Systems, Governance, and Geopolitics - Regulatory innovation and multi-level governance approaches balancing security, safety, and economic efficiency
• Innovation Systems, Governance, and Geopolitics - Geopolitical competition, technology sovereignty, and industrial policy effects on CI innovation systems
• Firm Strategies, Organizational Innovation, and Resilience - Organizational innovation and adaptation in response to CI system vulnerabilities
• Firm Strategies, Organizational Innovation, and Resilience - Firm strategies, organizational innovation, and business models for infrastructure security
• Firm Strategies, Organizational Innovation, and Resilience - Resilience, supply chain security, and infrastructure interdependencies
• Digital Transformation, Sustainability Transitions, and Human Factors - Digital transformation, automation, and cybersecurity in critical infrastructure
• Digital Transformation, Sustainability Transitions, and Human Factors - Sustainability transitions and the security-environment nexus
• Digital Transformation, Sustainability Transitions, and Human Factors - Socio-technical transitions, ethics, and human factors in CI sectors
• Multi-Level Transitions and Sectoral Applications - Multi-level dynamics of transitions with focus on critical infrastructure
• Multi-Level Transitions and Sectoral Applications - Sectoral applications including energy, transportation, telecommunications, water, financial systems, healthcare, and space infrastructure

Timeline

• Invalid DateTime: Publication of the special issue
• December 15, 2026: Submission opens
• January 31, 2027: Submissions due

Paresh Wankhade, Edge Hill University

Giles McClelland, Edge Hill University

Increasingly, disasters, emergencies and crises have become defining challenges for contemporary public management scholarship. Global security threats, floods, wildfires, terrorist attacks and pandemics require a swift response from the authorities and emergency services. This involves continuous translation, boundary spanning and brokerage across professional, organizational, and jurisdictional boundaries. Such conditions place intense pressure on public organizations to anticipate risks, co-ordinate across fragmented systems, communicate with the public, maintain legitimacy and learn from failure.

This theme issue invites contributions that examine the changing relationship between disaster management, emergency services, inclusion and public governance. There is particular interest in the movement from a narrow model of emergency response towards a broader concern with inclusive resilient governance. Existing scholarship further suggests that effective crisis management involves good leadership, sense-making, organizational support, effective co-ordination, clear communication, accountability, legitimacy and learning.

Public management scholarship has highlighted the importance of governance capacity, institutional design and legitimacy in crisis systems, signalling the role and value of collaborative and network governance during turbulent times. This highlights the difficulties of co-ordinating multiple actors under conditions of urgency, uncertainty, threat and risk. Resilience scholarship further reminds us that disaster preparedness and recovery depend not only on formal state capacity, but also on social capital, community capabilities, information flows, local knowledge and uneven patterns of vulnerability.

Existing scholarship also emphasises the actions employees take to promote and protect their own personal resilience. Job crafting has been found to be positively associated with favourable outcomes for job holders, teams and organizations. Due to its bottom-up nature, job crafting has been identified as potentially beneficial for dynamic and turbulent work environments in which managers require employees to demonstrate initiative and adaptive capabilities. Exploring any mutually beneficial job crafting behaviours to improve workforce resilience, staff engagement and wellbeing will offer interesting insights into contemporary emergency service management.

Exposure to disasters including preparedness, evacuation, response, and reconstruction processes are not socially neutral events and are also shaped by gender and identity relations, social norms, institutional cultures and unequal distributions of power and resources in how the risk is produced, experienced and managed.

This theme welcomes conceptual, theoretical, empirical and comparative papers addressing disaster management, emergency services, job crafting, diversity and resilience from a public management theory and practice perspective. There is particular encouragement for submissions that connect emergency and disaster studies with debates in public administration, public policy, governance, organizational theory, collaborative governance, gender studies, public service management and institutional resilience. There is particular interest in studies that explore how emergency service managers and employees craft and reshape their roles to promote and protect their personal resilience.

Potential topics

• How are emergency services adapting to more complex, frequent and interconnected crises?
• What forms of governance capacity are needed to manage compound and cascading risks?
• How do public organizations co-ordinate across organizational, sectoral and jurisdictional boundaries during disasters?
• What are the strengths and limitations of command-and-control, networked and collaborative models of emergency management?
• How do emergency services balance centralized command with local discretion, improvisation and community knowledge?
• How do frontline responders reshape tasks, relationships and meanings during disaster preparedness, response and recovery?
• What forms of job crafting support workforce resilience, engagement, wellbeing and service continuity?
• What role do leaders and managers play in influencing the job crafting behaviours of teams and individuals?
• How do public organizations maintain trust, legitimacy and accountability during and after crises?
• What role do identities such as women and gender-diverse actors play in community resilience, mutual aid and local crisis leadership?
• How do inequalities shape exposure to disaster risk, access to emergency services and recovery outcomes?
• What role do communities, civil society organizations, volunteers and private actors play in building resilience?
• How do governments and emergency services learn or fail to learn from inquiries, reviews and past disasters?
• How are digital technologies, data analytics, AI, early warning systems and crisis communication platforms transforming emergency management?

Timeline

• May 1, 2027: Deadline for research articles
• August 1, 2027: Deadline for debate and new development articles

Laura Mazzola, Royal Holloway Business School

Leonardo Rinaldi, Royal Holloway Business School

Ileana Steccolini, University of Essex

Martina Linnenluecke, University of Technology Sydney

Resilience studies highlight the capacity of social and ecological systems to adjust, recover, and thrive despite adversity. Recent literature emphasises resilience as a multidimensional construct, covering individual, organisational, and system levels and extending across supply chains, financial management, and leadership dynamics. Resilience is seen as a valuable asset and forms part of a broader trend towards strength-based as opposed to deficit models of development. The concept of resilience has gained substantial traction across disciplines, particularly as we face increasing disruptions from economic, social, and environmental crises.

These disruptions have challenged the ability of our social and economic systems to withstand and adapt to crises, highlighting significant gaps in how they anticipate, respond to, recover from and potentially capitalise on such events. While sustainability research has long played a crucial role in accounting by encouraging positive change and working towards long-term viability, resilience studies offer a complementary perspective. Resilience emphasises the need for long-term sustainability and the capacity to endure, adapt, and transform in response to unexpected challenges. By integrating resilience into accounting, technologies, logic and thinking, we strive for long-term sustainable outcomes and short-term adaptability. In an era shaped by climate change, global pandemics, economic instability, and geopolitical disorder, accounting scholars are well-placed to respond to these challenges by providing alternative perspectives that meet the growing demand for sustainable and resilient solutions.

This AAAJ special issue aims to contribute to the academic debate on the role of accounting in fostering resilience ('accounting for resilience') and understanding and evaluating resilience ('accounting of resilience'). We encourage submissions that explore accounting as a tool for understanding resilience and as a mechanism for fostering adaptation, transformation and resistance in response to social, economic, and ecological challenges. At the same time, we invite research that questions how and why current accounting practices may be inadequate in supporting resilience and, in many cases, may even contribute to the vulnerability of socio-ecological systems.

Accounting for and of resilience holds the potential to illuminate how accounting can be used to empower marginalised communities, promote equity, address issues of inequality and climate adaptation, and inform strategic responses, particularly in times of crisis. However, it is equally essential to scrutinise how traditional accounting practices may exacerbate inequalities and vulnerabilities, potentially hindering the development of genuinely resilient systems. Critical accounting scholars can and should play a role in fostering a deeper understanding of resilience by developing theories and practices that consider both sides of resilience: the mechanisms that help us understand and evaluate resilience in social structures and the actions that contribute to fostering and shaping resilience.

We call for academic work that promotes theoretical and empirical understanding of resilience, explicitly focusing on intersections of accounting and power, the political economy of resilience, the politics of resilience, and the allocation of resources in times of crisis. Topics of interest include accounting's role in sustainable development, the impact of accounting practices on communities during periods of disruption, and resilience in public sector or community contexts. We welcome interdisciplinary research that applies various methodological and theoretical approaches to provide in-depth, novel insights into these areas.

Potential topics

• Accounting for and of Resilience: examining how resilience is constructed, measured, and communicated through accounting and accountability practices and whose interests it serves.
• Interdisciplinary perspectives: integrating resilience thinking from natural and social sciences into accounting frameworks.
• Constructing resilient systems: investigating how accounting defines and constructs the boundaries of 'systems' (e.g., organisational, community, or social-ecological) when conceptualising, calculating and reporting resilience.
• Politics of resilience: deconstructing resilience as a technical concept and highlighting its political and ethical dimensions.
• Accountability and resilience: exploring how accountability mechanisms can be designed to incorporate resilience metrics and their implications.
• Auditing and resilience: questioning whether auditing captures resilience complexities or reinforces narrow compliance-driven views.
• Resilient economy: analysing accounting's role in building sustainable, equitable, and stable economic systems.
• Theoretical contributions: developing critical theoretical models that challenge dominant resilience paradigms.
• Empirical studies: applying qualitative or quantitative methods to examine how resilience is operationalised in practice.

Timeline

• May 31, 2026: Opening date for manuscripts submissions
• August 31, 2026: Closing date for full paper submissions