This article examines Light Chaser’s animation White Snake: Afloat (2024) within the context of the revival of Chinese guoman 國漫 (national animation) since the 2010s. It reflects on a key gap in existing literature: a failure to analyse the dynamic interplay of state ideology, market demands, and animators’ agency in the construction of specific guoman texts. Drawing on an interdisciplinary framework comprising Homi Bhabha’s ‘hybridity’, Roland Robertson’s ‘glocalization’, and Weiyu Zhang’s ‘Chineseness as identity work’, this article explores how the tripartite negotiation leads to distinct forms of hybridity across three aspects of the film—techno-artistic, narrative, and structural—against the backdrop of media glocalization. The analysis also examines how the film’s hybrid forms embody competing versions of Chineseness. The overall argument is that the hybridity in Afloat is a product of the triad’s complex negotiation; it illuminates the contentious status quo of contemporary Chineseness as a globalized ‘identity work’—a dynamic, ongoing, and contested process of constructing identity, encompassing not only a subject’s self-identification but also how others identify that subject.

This article analyzes Ukraine’s state decolonisation policy as a component of contemporary memory politics shaped by the full-scale Russo-Ukrainian war. While decolonial discourse extends across culture, museums, public history, and academia, the article focuses on decolonisation as a legally regulated memory policy implemented by state institutions and local authorities. In practice, this policy primarily targets toponymy and the symbolic transformation of public space through the removal of Russian imperial and Soviet heritage. Drawing on postcolonial theory, securitisation theory, and discourse analysis, the study examines how the Ukrainian state and civil society have responded to Russian aggression by making decolonisation part of a broader strategy of mnemonic security. The empirical example of Odesa demonstrates that, in local contexts, decolonization occurs within a tense interaction between the central anticolonial, Ukrainian-centric discourse and the city’s mnemonic specificities. On one hand, Odesa is actively involved in the decolonization agenda, accompanied by renamings, removals of monuments, and securitized arguments regarding the safety of public space. On the other hand, part of the local community does not equate the imperial past with colonialism and regards it as an integral part of local identity

This essay explains how Junot Díaz’s stories show the lasting impact of colonialism and dictatorship on everyday life, especially for immigrants and their children living between cultures. I argue that struggles over belonging, love, and identity are shaped by history and power even when characters do not name those forces directly. I interpret Junot Díaz’s fiction as an account of “the other side”: a peripheral perspective produced by migration, racialization, and the enduring afterlife of colonial violence. Dominican and U.S. histories, especially dictatorship, imperial entanglements, and postindustrial economic restructuring, shape the motives, relationships, and moral horizons of Díaz’s characters. Methodologically, the essay combines close reading with interdisciplinary framing: using diaspora theory to parse displacement, decolonial theory (via the concept of coloniality) to track the persistence of power/knowledge hierarchies, and comparative literary analysis to set Díaz alongside Gloria Anzaldúa and Rudolfo Anaya. Díaz’s “third place,” language, and genre play (fabulism, fantasy/science fiction) render colonial history as lived structure. Díaz shows how coloniality distorts intimacy, masculinity, and community through both material constraint and epistemic domination, and that “decolonial love” names a fragile but real form of resistance and healing. I conclude that colonialism is first a material enterprise whose cultural residues persist, and that reading the “carnality of knowledge” in Díaz clarifies how agency can emerge, even in exile, as a world-making practice.

The social entrepreneurship discourse in Germany has become more prominent at a time when the deeply rooted corporatist traditions of social provision have come under pressure for marketization. This article examines the potential role of “social entrepreneurs” in the institutionally established German welfare state. The article analyzes the opportunities and constraints that new players face. Drawing on survey data and case studies in the areas of elderly care and advancement of children with immigrant background, the analysis retraces the structure and diffusion of social entrepreneurial projects. It concludes that the simple transfer of the social entrepreneurship model is unlikely. The analysis suggests that successful social ventures in Germany adapt the notion of social entrepreneurship to prevalent institutional realities. In the context of more encompassing social services, dense decentralized networks, and different cultures of philanthropism, new players have a complementary role that stimulates rather than dominates the process of social innovation.

We examine how societal-level institutional logics impact the way in which hybridity develops in nonprofit organizations using international, comparative and qualitative case studies of community regeneration organizations in England and France. The research applies theoretically based conjectures about types of hybridity to empirical data generated from 20 interviews, document analysis and observation in five nonprofits in the city of Lyon and five in Sheffield. We find that the French nonprofits are ‘blended’ hybrids that integrate state and community institutional logics, while ‘assimilated’ hybrids combining state, community and market logics are found in the English cases. Undertaking contextually situated analysis of institutional logics generates new knowledge on the influences on nonprofits’ rules, practices and narratives, so improving the level of knowledge about, and capacity to manage, this sector.

The notion of a “welfare mix” has two different points of reference. One is the variety of institutional arrangements of modern welfare states in, basically, capitalist democracies. This is primarily connected to a cross-country comparative perspective, very much influenced by classic pieces of research on the varieties of welfare states in general and related typologies (above all Esping-Andersen, The three worlds of welfare capitalism, 1990; see also Arts and Gelissen J Eur Soc Policy 12:137–158, 2002; Castles et al., The Oxford handbook of the welfare state, 2011). We believe to know, for instance, that Scandinavian welfare states are much more state-centered and, accordingly, third sector organizations much less important than in, say, conservative or corporatist welfare states such as Germany or Austria or in liberal welfare states such as the United States (cf. Salamon and Anheier, Defining the nonprofit sector: a cross-national analysis, 1997). A second point of reference of the “mix” of welfare state arrangements is the combination of sector-specific institutions in the provision of welfare-related services in a given country. It is here where the notion of hybridity is particularly relevant since it is typically the arrangement of overlapping sectoral segments that characterize the “mix” in question (cf. Evers Int J Public Adm 28:736–748, 2005 for an overview). Examples are tax exempted foundations in the field of education or science, private voluntary associations providing public goods such as social services of various kinds or private goods such as housing provided by public enterprises or cooperatives.

This article explores the interplay and collaboration between refugee organization volunteers and social service professionals. On the basis of qualitative interviews and observations, we study how volunteers from Danish local refugee organizations experience their interaction with refugees and social service professionals, and how they act and perceive their role as advocates for the refugees. The purpose is to gain insight into the everyday practices and strategies of civil society organizations attempting to balance the demands and interests of stakeholders and internal legitimacy claims in a hybrid environment. In addition to providing effective refugee assistance and services, refugee organizations achieve legitimacy through professional communication, campaign work, and networking with key political actors and stakeholders. However, although it may be less visible, advocacy-oriented activities also take place in local organizations at ‘street level.’ We identified three distinct types of strategies to balance issues of autonomy in the collaborative relationship with the municipalities and simultaneously engage in advocacy activities.

Present day welfare societies rely on a complex mix of different providers ranging from the state, markets, family, and non-profit organizations to unions, grassroots organizations, and informal networks. At the same time changing welfare discourses have opened up space for new partnerships, divisions of labor, and responsibilities between these actors. For nonprofit organizations this means that they operate in complex institutional environments where different institutions and logics compete with each other. In this special issue we have collected a number of articles that analyze how organizations and organizational fields adjust to a new environment that is increasingly dominated by the logic of the market, and how in particular nonprofit organizations, as hybrids by definition, are able to cope with new demands, funding structures, and control mechanism.

The influence of the state policy agenda though a neo-liberal contracted funding environment is redefining the boundaries of the third sector through a process of hybridisation. Hybridised organisations adapt to possess characteristics and logics of multiple sectors (public, private or community). Increasing hybridity within the New Zealand community and voluntary sector has resulted in a perceived dichotomy separating organisations that adapt to these challenges from those that resist. In this paper, we apply a hybridity lens to seven community development organisations, who have predominantly resisted marketisation and alignment with the state policy agenda, to assess the extent of their hybridity and how this has impacted on their place in the community and voluntary sector and access to funding opportunities available from the state.

Citizen participation is manifested through various concepts, such as activism, social movements, volunteering or civil society. The different ways of understanding popular engagement are often separated by delimitations that define them, particularly volunteering and civic action, as two highly differentiated forms of participation in the distinct academic disciplines: political science, volunteering studies, social movement studies or civil society theory. This article considers whether this basic theoretical differentiation can be problematised in the Spanish political context by exploring four paradigmatic cases of popular engagement, using qualitative case study methodology, specifically, a historic case from the 1990s and three more recent cases. It is hoped that the results of the study—which differentiates between organisational hybridity and fuzziness—will encourage reflection on the traditional boundaries between different forms of popular engagement.

This paper explores the complex process of hybridisation of third-sector housing and support organisations (TSOs) in Northern Ireland. The focus of the study is the policy field of housing-related support services, known in the UK as ‘Supporting People’. This is a hybrid policy field involving several government departments, a number of market mechanisms and two types of third-sector actors. The exercise of organisational agency to adapt to competing drivers is illuminated through mental health and homelessness case studies. The paper explores how competing external influences from the Northern Ireland Assembly, horizontal policies for the third-sector and vertical service commissioning policies interact with TSOs’ own adaptation strategies involving the deployment of robust third-sector identities. Hybridisation is found to involve not only the dominance of state drivers and the promotion of market mechanisms in both fields, but also enactment of third-sector identities. Our analysis of hybridization in this case counters Billis’ (2010) representation of third-sector identity as weak, in flux, and subject to erosion by focusing on the agency of TSOs to strategically adapt to and negotiate external drivers and thereby achieve competitive advantage. Through the enactment of identity in this adaptation process, resources such as legitimacy, charitable income and volunteers are secured. This provides opportunities for policy makers to add value if they are prepared to emphasise horizontal over vertical policy goals.