Permit markets,carbon prices and the creation of innovation clusters

Innovation clusters combining public and private effort to develop breakthrough technologies promise greater technological advances to slow down climate change. We use a multi-country model with an emission trading system to examine whether and how international climate policy can incentivize countries to create such innovation clusters. We find that a minimal carbon price is needed to attract applied research firms, but countries may nevertheless fail to invest in complementary research infrastructure. We construct a mechanism that leads to innovation clusters when emissions targets are set before uncertainty surrounding technological developments is resolved. It is a combination of low permit endowments for the country with the lowest costs to build the needed infrastructure, compensation for this country by profits from permit trade, and maximal possible permit endowments for the remaining countries. We outline how the EU-ETS can be further refined according to this mechanism.     

The impact of research collaboration on academic performance: An empirical analysis for some European countries

The aim of this paper is to investigate the impact of internal and external research collaborations on the scientific performance of academic institutions. The data are derived from the international SCOPUS database. We consider both quantity (the number of publications) and quality indicators (the field-weighted citation impact and the share of publications in the 10% most-cited articles) to evaluate universities' performance in some European countries (Germany, France, Italy, the UK and Russia). To this end, we develop a non-overlapping generations model to evidence the theoretical idea of research externalities between academic institutions. Moreover, we implement an empirical model to determine the extent to which the impact of internal and external collaborations on universities' performance is sensitive to the geographical dimension of the data.     

Is it U.S. GAAP or IFRS? Understanding how R&D costs affect ratio analysis

While financial reporting standards under U.S. GAAP and IFRS are fundamentally similar, differences do exist that may affect our analysis of company financial statements. This is particularly true when comparing a U.S. company following U.S. GAAP to a firm that uses IFRS. To illustrate, we compare research and development (R&D) accounting methods under both sets of standards and illustrate how they affect the analysis of financial results of firms in a specific industry—automotive manufacturers. Our results provide insight into settings in which differences in R&D accounting may have the greatest impact on financial analysis.     

Researcher perceptions and choices of interview media: the case of accounting research

This study offers foundational insights into the ways in which perceptions of different interview media—principally, face‐to‐face, telephone and videoconferencing channels of communication—may influence researcher choices and practices. Informed by the reflections of 23 senior accounting researchers, our evidence identifies a duality of practices in the usage of different interviewing media, influenced primarily through the role played by experience, which informs perceptions upon which practices are based. We discuss this duality of practices in terms of information richness theory and channel expansion theory and offer further insights into the factors that influence and shape researchers’ perceptions of the contextual suitability of particular media available to interview‐based accounting research.     

Machine Learning and Expert Judgement: Analyzing Emerging Topics in Accounting and Finance Research in the Asia–Pacific

In this paper, we focus on the question to what extent machine learning (ML) tools can be used to support systematic literature reviews. We apply a ML approach for topic detection to analyze emerging topics in the literature—our context is accounting and finance research in the Asia–Pacific region. To evaluate the robustness of the approach, we compare findings from the automated ML approach with the results from a manual analysis of the literature. The automated approach uses a keyword algorithm detection mechanism whereby the manual analysis uses common techniques for qualitative data analysis, that is, triangulation between researchers (expert judgement). From our paper, we conclude that both methods have strengths and weaknesses. The automated analysis works well for large corpora of text and provides a very standardized and non-biased way of analyzing the literature. However, the human researcher is potentially better equipped to evaluate current issues and future trends in the literature. Overall, the best results might be achieved when a variety of tools are used together.     

Research engagement,impact and sustainable tourism

In this editorial, we reflect on how the Journal of Sustainable Tourism can contribute towards sustainable tourism researchers achieving more impact with their research. We propose some changes that can be tested in, and introduced gradually and collaboratively with, the community of the editorial board and authors. To support impactful mind sets, we will promote research that reflects diverse academic communities. To promote impactful research topics, we will encourage authors to frame their submitted articles against the Sustainable Development Goals, while research that is time sensitive will be fast tracked so it can contribute to current debates. To promote impactful methodologies, we shall favour articles that use mixed methods and action research, and those that conduct longitudinal, experimental, and evaluative research. To promote impactful partnerships, we will favour multidisciplinary approaches and research that has been co-created with stakeholders. To promote impactful communication and dissemination, we will continue to build an online community on social media for sustainable tourism researchers, we will promote articles in social media to raise their visibility, and we will provide free access to those articles that are deemed to have the greatest potential to impact positively on society.     

Beyond the boundaries: Challenges for business,policy and society

This editorial article introduces the papers presented at the ITS Seoul 2018 and seven papers selected for the special issue of ITS Seoul 2018. Specifically, this article provides the results of keyword networks, research agendas and coauthor networks of ITS Seoul 2018. A summary of the seven papers accepted for the special issue of ITS Seoul 2018 is also included. Finally, this article concludes by introducing another paper that empirically explores the value of special issues by analyzing the characteristics of special issues of Telecommunications Policy.     

Pitching research: ‘qualitative cousins’ and the ‘extended family’

This study has two related goals – one very specific and one more general. The specific goal is to constructively engage with Lodhia (2017) on the issue of whether and to what extent ‘qualitative cousins’ are well served by Faff's (2015) original pitching research (PR) template. Using this ‘cousins’ focus as a primer, the more general goal is to update the agenda created by Faff (2015) and in so doing, explore the ‘extended family’ of PR work/resources now available.     

Drivers of research impact: evidence from the top three finance journals

We study the characteristics of all published papers in the top three finance journals (JF, JFE and RFS), and how these paper characteristics affect the number of citations in Google Scholar and the Web of Science database. First, we find the characteristics in the universalist perspective remain constant while the characteristics in the constructivist and presentation perspectives increase over time. Second, some characteristics are significantly different between the high-impact and the low-impact papers. Third, paper quality, research method, journal placement and paper age are the most important drivers. Last, different drivers play different roles in different journals.     

Risks from self-referential peer review echo chambers developing in research fields: 2018 Keynote Address presented at The British Accounting Review 50th Anniversary Celebrations,British Accounting and Finance Association Annual Conference,London

Denigration of academic experts and expertise, amid a resurgence of political populism, poses a challenge to the legitimacy of academic research. Addressing this challenge requires us to continually demonstrate the importance of basing policy interventions on reliable evidence, rather than unevidenced assertions that gain traction through communication echo chambers. However, unconscious confirmation biases in collection and analysis of evidence can impair the reliability of our research insights. A key source of such confirmation biases are unchallenged ideologies and other taken-for-granted assumptions underlying any research (sub)field. This essay argues that informal and formal peer review processes at many stages of research need to highlight and challenge both conscious selectivity bias and unconscious confirmation bias. However, they are unlikely to do so where researchers only take on board feedback from peers in the same (sub)field who share ideological commitments and taken-for-granted assumptions. In such circumstances, self-referential peer review echo chambers can develop that entrench rather than challenge weaknesses in a research (sub)field. This can be a major risk to the effectiveness and reputation of any academic research (sub)field; a risk we need to confront.