This chapter investigates the growing influence of diaspora business elites on Irish domestic affairs during and after the 2008 financial crisis. While their contributions to economic recovery—through investments, partnerships, and network mobilisation—were welcomed, their increasing involvement in political, cultural, and policy spheres sparked debate. The Irish Technology Leadership Group’s members played a central role in connecting Silicon Valley with Ireland, promoting entrepreneurship, and influencing infrastructure and higher education policies. However, their assertiveness, often coupled with neoliberal views, challenged the autonomy of Irish governance. Attempts to institutionalise diaspora involvement, such as the Diaspora 2016 initiative and presidential candidacy of Niall O’Dowd, revealed tensions between appreciation and resistance within Ireland. Chuck Feeney’s funding of political transparency initiatives and criticisms of government ethics highlighted the limits of acceptable diaspora activism. Symbolic recognitions, such as presidential awards and the establishment of a Minister for the Diaspora, sought to formalise relationships while maintaining boundaries. Ultimately, the chapter underscores the ambivalent dynamics between Ireland and its entrepreneurial diaspora—an essential asset, yet a potentially overreaching force in national policymaking.

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Diaspora Business Elites: An Overly Pervasive Presence?

  • Anne Groutel

摘要

This chapter investigates the growing influence of diaspora business elites on Irish domestic affairs during and after the 2008 financial crisis. While their contributions to economic recovery—through investments, partnerships, and network mobilisation—were welcomed, their increasing involvement in political, cultural, and policy spheres sparked debate. The Irish Technology Leadership Group’s members played a central role in connecting Silicon Valley with Ireland, promoting entrepreneurship, and influencing infrastructure and higher education policies. However, their assertiveness, often coupled with neoliberal views, challenged the autonomy of Irish governance. Attempts to institutionalise diaspora involvement, such as the Diaspora 2016 initiative and presidential candidacy of Niall O’Dowd, revealed tensions between appreciation and resistance within Ireland. Chuck Feeney’s funding of political transparency initiatives and criticisms of government ethics highlighted the limits of acceptable diaspora activism. Symbolic recognitions, such as presidential awards and the establishment of a Minister for the Diaspora, sought to formalise relationships while maintaining boundaries. Ultimately, the chapter underscores the ambivalent dynamics between Ireland and its entrepreneurial diaspora—an essential asset, yet a potentially overreaching force in national policymaking.