Search results

This study provides empirical evidence on the impact of the Panama Canal expansion (PCE) on the economies of Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) countries, particularly in light of the emergence of larger container ships such as neo-Panamax and post-Panamax vessels.

This study uses the Bayesian structural time Series (BSTS) model to evaluate the economic effects of the PCE on 21 countries within the LAC region. It utilized the World Bank's gross domestic product (GDP) figures between 2000 and 2019 as the primary variable, alongside the human development index (HDI) (X1), container throughput (TEU) (X2) and unemployment rates (UNEMPL) (X3) covariates. This allowed a precise and robust approach to analyzing time series data while accounting for uncertainties and allowing the inclusion of various components and external factors.

The findings revealed that the PCE has a positive and statistically significant impact on most countries within the Caribbean Transshipment Triangle, ranging from 9.2% in Belize to 46% in Cuba. This suggests that the causal effect of the PCE on regional economies was not confined to any specific type of economy or geographical location within the LAC region. Where the growth rates were statistically insignificant, primarily in some Latin American countries, it coincided with countries that are primarily driven by exports and service industries, where bulk and oil tanker vessels are likely to be the main carriers for exports rather than container vessels.

The practical implications of this research are crucial for various stakeholders in the maritime industry and economic planning. The factors influencing economic growth resulting from investing in maritime activities are vital for decision-makers to create policies that lead to positive outcomes and sustainable development in regions and countries with flourishing maritime industries. The methodology and findings have significant implications for governments, managers, professionals, policy-makers and investors.

The key takeaways from the wide-ranging World Innovation Forum 2009 can be grouped into three themes. First, opportunities for innovation exist not only in new products and services but also in customer experiences, as the case studies of Build-a-Bear, JFK's new T5 terminal, and GlaxoSmithKline's Alli illustrate. Second, understanding future trends in innovation requires knowing that radical innovation often takes years to be adopted and begins in populations other than the traditional users. Anticipating trends in innovation means looking for signs that people's expectations are changing and that new ideas are about to reach critical mass. Finally, biology provides a both source of innovation and a useful metaphor for innovation-related thinking, as Paul Saffo, C.K. Prahalad, Clayton Christensen and Fred Krupp described.

The current study uses an advanced machine learning method and aims to investigate whether auditors perceive financial statements that are principles-based as less risky. More specifically, this study aims to explore the association between principles-based accounting standards and audit pricing and between principles-based accounting standards and the likelihood of receiving a going concern opinion.

The study uses an advanced machine-learning method to understand the role of principles-based accounting standards in predicting audit fees and going concern opinion. The study also uses multiple regression models defining audit fees and the probability of receiving going concern opinion. The analyses are complemented by additional tests such as economic significance, firm fixed effects, propensity score matching, entropy balancing, change analysis, yearly regression results and controlling for managerial risk-taking incentives and governance variables.

The paper provides empirical evidence that auditors charge less audit fees to clients whose financial statements are more principles-based. The finding suggests that auditors perceive financial statements that are principles-based less risky. The study also provides evidence that the probability of receiving a going-concern opinion reduces as firms rely more on principles-based standards. The finding further suggests that auditors discount the financial numbers supplied by the managers using rules-based standards. The study also reveals that the degree of reliance by a US firm on principles-based accounting standards has a negative impact on accounting conservatism, the risk of financial statement misstatement, accruals and the difficulty in predicting future earnings. This suggests potential mechanisms through which principles-based accounting standards influence auditors’ risk assessments.

The authors recognize the limitation of this study regarding the sample period. Prior studies compare rules vs principles-based standards by focusing on the differences between US generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) and international financial reporting standards (IFRS) or pre- and post-IFRS adoption, which raises questions about differences in cross-country settings and institutional environment and other confounding factors such as transition costs. This study addresses these issues by comparing rules vs principles-based standards within the US GAAP setting. However, this limits the sample period to the year 2006 because the measure of the relative extent to which a US firm is reliant upon principles-based standards is available until 2006.

The study has major public policy suggestions as it responds to the call by Jay Clayton and Mary Jo White, the former Chairs of the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), to pursue high-quality, globally accepted accounting standards to ensure that investors continue to receive clear and reliable financial information globally. The study also recognizes the notable public policy implications, particularly in light of the current Chair of the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) Andreas Barckow’s recent public statement, which emphasizes the importance of principles-based standards and their ability to address sustainability concerns, including emerging risks such as climate change.

The study has major public policy suggestions because it demonstrates the value of principles-based standards. The study responds to the call by Jay Clayton and Mary Jo White, the former Chairs of the US SEC, to pursue high-quality, globally accepted accounting standards to ensure that investors continue to receive clear and reliable financial information as business transactions and investor needs continue to evolve globally. The study also recognizes the notable public policy implications, particularly in light of the current Chair of the IASB Andreas Barckow’s recent public statement, which emphasizes the importance of principles-based standards and their ability to address sustainability concerns, including emerging risks like climate change. The study fills the gap in the literature that auditors perceive principles-based financial statements as less risky and further expands the literature by providing empirical evidence that the likelihood of receiving a going concern opinion is increasing in the degree of rules-based standards.

Stopping and questioning citizens is an important policing tactic. Prior research explores citizens’ perceptions of stop and question policing, or “SQP”, by municipal police, yet campus police also use this tactic. The purpose of this paper is to understand whether and why college students believe campus police should have the right to engage in SQP.

Data come from 73 in-depth interviews with students attending a university in metropolitan Atlanta, GA. The sample was obtained through convenience and purposive sampling methods. Data were analyzed using the ethnographic perspective.

Most participants said campus police should practice SQP for three reasons: it is their job; SQP is an effective crime fighting tactic; and SQP is useful given the features and functions of college campuses. Among participants who said campus police should not practice SQP, they were concerned that officers would use it in unwarranted situations.

Findings suggest that the police might be able to reduce resistance to SQP by clearly explaining to suspects why they are being stopped and also clarifying to the public the legal thresholds for stopping and questioning citizens.

This is the first study to consider perceptions of SQP by campus police. The findings also shed light on how campus and municipal police are (dis)similar in perceptions of their SQP practices.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate final projects in a freshman leadership course (combining grounding in leadership theories with a service-learning component) to determine what students learned about leadership, themselves as developing leaders, and leading in the civic community, and how deeply they learned these concepts. Students found situational leadership theories, team leadership theories, and leadership principles (Drath, 2001) most relevant to their experiences. Personally, students learned about themselves as individuals, leaders, team members, and community members. Civically, students learned how to apply leadership theories, work in teams, and about the community as a system. In terms of depth of learning, based on Bloom’s (1956) taxonomy, students were able to identify, describe, and apply concepts and to some extent analyze and synthesize them. These findings suggest that using service learning to help students learn about both the theory and practice of leadership is a viable alternative.

This work provides an empirical analysis to determine whether directors’ compensation is lower (“transparency control effect” and “transparency deterrent effect”) or higher (“effects of transparency on increasing competition in pay”) among firms with greater transparency in terms of directors’ compensation.

A disclosure index about board compensation and different models based on linear panel-data regression have been developed, on a sample of 73 Spanish firms for the period 2007–2012.

Our results suggest that disclosure on pay strategy to directors leads to an increase in directors’ compensation, therefore, in this case, the effect of transparency on increasing competition in pay seems to prevail. Conversely, the disclosure on individual directors’ compensation and payment leads to a decrement in directors’ compensation, prevailing the transparency control effect and transparency deterrent effect.

The results of this study might be of interest to investors (to take into account these effects before they implement additional corporate governance reforms) and regulators (to be aware of the importance of this issue).

First, we study the effect that transparency and voluntary disclosure regarding board compensation has on the level of directors’ compensation. Second, in this study we go one step further in the transparency of board compensation disclosures by constructing a disclosure index. Finally, the results contribute to the necessary debate that is currently taking place in the Spanish, European and international context regarding this issue.

This paper examines the governance function that incubators perform for entrepreneurial firms. The authors demonstrate that this governance function has both a consultative and a control dimension and illustrate how these are enacted in the interactions between incubators and entrepreneurs. The authors also show how these interactions come into being and how entrepreneurs assess the value of the governance role played by incubators.

The paper is based on a cross-sectional interview study with entrepreneurs of 21 start-ups that were hosted by three different incubators. The start-ups are all early-stage technology firms. The analysis in the paper follows an inductive approach.

The authors find that the governance role of incubators is about both consultation and control. Consultative forms of governance include providing input and advice as well as questioning ideas and assumptions. Controlling forms of governance comprise setting targets and tracking progress as well as enforcing structures and documentation. The authors furthermore show that governance episodes are triggered either by the entrepreneurs themselves or by the incubator. In the former case, such episodes are mainly about consultation, while in the latter one, they often have a pronounced control element, which materializes particularly through regularly enforced meetings. Most entrepreneurs seem to appreciate this control element, acknowledging that, in its absence, they would lack the self-discipline of doing some things that need to be done.

This study’s findings extend prior research on inter-organizational relationships and the types of governance mechanisms observed therein. The authors show that a strict separation between actors who offer consultation and those who exercise control is too simplistic. Incubators influence entrepreneurial firms both through consultative and controlling forms of governance. In terms of limitations, this study’s analysis focuses on the perspectives of entrepreneurs, and the authors did not include the perspectives of incubators nor did the authors directly observe meetings between these two parties.

This paper provides examples for how entrepreneurial firms can benefit from being part of an incubator.

This study contributes to the discussion of the governance of inter-organizational relationships by focusing on incubators. In so doing, the authors also complement extant literature on management control in entrepreneurial settings by showing how the incubator fulfills a control function for entrepreneurs before these implement control mechanisms themselves.

This chapter considers the school-to-prison pipeline (STPP) within the United States as a network of flows and feedback loops that connects the education and delinquency systems. This system is heavily biased to funnel students with disabilities, disproportionately from low-income minority families, away from productive educational outcomes through punitive, exclusionary, and restrictive measures that too often result in incarceration. Congress intended special education and disability rights laws to ameliorate injustice and ensure long-term positive outcomes for all students. Through a systems theory perspective, this chapter outlines key leverage points inherent in disability rights laws, which can and should be activated to interrupt and reverse the STPP. Many provisions within the law are overlooked or inadequately enacted within current educational practices. The authors present problem-solving strategies, rooted in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and other disability rights laws, for educators, juvenile justice advocates, and policymakers to use in order to reduce school exclusion and incarceration of vulnerable youth and to provide education opportunity for all students.