Can household-based food consumption surveys be used to make inferences about nutrient intakes and inadequacies? A Bangladesh case study

Household Consumption and Expenditures Surveys (HCES) are increasingly being used to make inferences about individual food consumption, despite the fact that they collect food data at only the household level. Usually the analysis assumes that the household’s food is distributed among its members in direct proportion to each member’s share of the household’s total energy requirements; what is referred to as the adult male equivalent (AME) approach. Using the 2011–2012 Bangladesh Integrated Household Survey—which collected consumption data for all members of rural households using combined 24-hour recall (24HR) and food weighing methods—this study directly compared probability-based average estimates of intakes, intake gaps, and the prevalence of inadequacies as estimated by the 24HR and those calculated using the AME approach for energy and each of four micronutrients: vitamin A, iron, zinc, and calcium.At the population level, for iron, vitamin A, and calcium, more than 97% of all individuals had the same estimated prevalence of adequate or inadequate nutrient intakes using 24HR and AME-based estimates. In the case of energy and zinc, roughly 77 and 83% of the sample population had identical adequacy statuses, respectively. The magnitude of inadequacies (the nutrient gaps) differed by 8 percentage points for energy and less than 3 percentage points for the four micronutrients. Disaggregating intakes and inadequacies by age groups revealed that the vast majority of variance between the two methods was highly concentrated in the first few years of life. Children 3 years of age and younger constituted 7.5% of the population but had 13.1% of the inconsistencies in intake adequacy status. 54% of children 3 and under had at least one pair of inconsistent prevalence estimates. While there are important differences in the levels of estimated energy and micronutrient intakes using 24HR and the AME-based estimates for children 3 and under, the results are remarkably comparable for the rest of the population.     

Can first-mover and early-mover advantages be sustained in an industry with low barriers to entry/imitation?

This study examines whether first-mover and early-mover advantages can be sustained in an industry where the barriers to entry are generally low and new product innovations can be easily imitated—namely, the money market mutual fund industry. Using a simultaneous-equation supply-and-demand model of panel data from a variety of money market fund product categories, the study finds that first-movers and early-movers enjoy both a highly sustainable pricing advantage and a moderately sustainable market share advantage. These counterintuitive results are interpreted in terms of the structural characteristics of demand in the industry. Implications of these results for the ongoing debate between the ‘sustainability’ and ‘hypercompetition’ perspectives are discussed. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Time allocations across collaborations of academic scientists and their impact on efforts to commercialize novel technologies: is more always better?

We investigate how time spent in different collaborative research arrangements by academic scientists affect their propensity of involvement in the commercialization of novel, university-originated technologies. Three common collaborative strategies used by academic scientists: (1) internal (within the research group or within the home university) research collaboration; (2) cosmopolitan research collaboration (with scientists in other US or foreign universities); or (3) university–industry research collaboration are assessed. Drawing on the concepts of cognitive and spatial distance, the empirical findings suggest that only one internal research collaboration strategy has a significant impact on the propensity of academic scientists to engage in the commercialization of novel technologies with a private firm; however, this relationship is inverse U shaped. More importantly, academic scientists adopting a university–industry collaboration strategy and spending more research time in such an arrangement have a significantly stronger propensity for being involved in technology commercialization with a private firm; however, this relationship is inverse U shaped as well. We discuss the managerial and policy implications of the findings.