Whose Grave’s This, Sir? An Ethico-Political Critique of Organized Resting Places

Daniela Pianezzi & Melissa Tyler

Business Ethics Quarterly2025https://doi.org/10.1017/beq.2025.13article
AJG 3ABDC A
Weight
0.37

Abstract

What can we learn about organizational ethics from studying cemeteries as organizational/organized manifestations of our mutual, embodied vulnerability? How does, and how should, the ethico-political imperative of death and the deceased materialize in the cemeterial space? With reference to a comparative analysis of two island cemeteries, Venice’s San Michele and New York’s Hart Island, this paper makes three contributions to the emerging literature on organizational ethics of life and death. First, it makes an empirical contribution based on an organizational study of two “resting places” that highlights the importance of understanding organizational life and death with reference to ethics. Second, it makes a theoretical contribution to scholarship on the organization of death and on grieving as embedded in a politics and ethics of recognition. Third, the paper shows how our desire to be recognized as valid, viable subjects comes to be organized, and situated, in ways that perpetuate precarity and vulnerability, a point that is illustrated with reference to cemeteries as ethically significant organizational settings.

1 citation

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/beq.2025.13

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{daniela2025,
  title        = {{Whose Grave’s This, Sir? An Ethico-Political Critique of Organized Resting Places}},
  author       = {Daniela Pianezzi & Melissa Tyler},
  journal      = {Business Ethics Quarterly},
  year         = {2025},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/beq.2025.13},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Whose Grave’s This, Sir? An Ethico-Political Critique of Organized Resting Places

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.37

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.16 × 0.4 = 0.06
M · momentum0.53 × 0.15 = 0.08
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.