How materialism affects environmental beliefs, concern, and environmentally responsible behavior

This article examines the relationship between materialism, environmental beliefs, environmental concern, and environmental behaviors. The study used a random telephone survey of 337 US adults. Using a causal modeling approach, the study demonstrates that materialism has a negative effect on environmental beliefs, and these beliefs positively affect environmental concern and environmentally responsible behaviors. The article then provides implications of the results for consumer and environmental policy.     

THE DOMAIN AND SCOPE OF SCM'S FOUNDATIONAL DISCIPLINES — INSIGHTS AND ISSUES TO ADVANCE RESEARCH

The authors examine and take stock of the changing nature and landscape surrounding supply chain management, and the related disciplines of purchasing, operations management, logistics and marketing channels of distribution. They identify, describe and synthesize the nature of research in those academic disciplines that are identified to be some of the objectives with respect to supply chain management's integration goals. Their examination highlights the considerable evolution and significant advances occurring within and among these disciplines. Additionally, they find this new landscape to provide both insights and issues for scholarship to those attempting to understand the evolving nature of supply chain management and its related fields. Such insights and issues suggest a number of proposals for progress with regard to SCM's future development.     

The winnowing away of behavioral accounting research in the US: The process for anointing academic elites

This paper reports the results of a study of the most prolific publishers in the four recognized most prestigious journals in accounting for the period 1963 through 1999. The focus is on learning whether the widespread perception that behavioral accounting research (BAR) has diminished in significance as a prominent paradigm in the US accounting academy has any validity and to identify whether a new generation of US BAR researchers is emerging to join the academic elite. Based on the characteristics of persons who have appeared as authors five or more times during the study period, it seems that BAR is in recession in shaping the US academic agenda in accounting. The power of successful individuals to shape the academic agenda as evidenced by service on editorial boards of prominent journals is dominated by those individuals who are graduates of a set of elite schools utilizing a neoclassical economics based research paradigm. The power of this group seems to be growing in the US. In spite of the interest in BAR among accounting doctoral students and faculty, it is not a pursuit that now leads to academic status, which, in turn, diminishes its potential contribution towards the shaping of the accounting academic agenda.     

How does the call market method affect price efficiency? Evidence from the Singapore Stock Market

On August 21, 2000, the Singapore Exchange (SGX) adopted the call market method to open and close the market while the remainder of the day’s trading continued to rely on the continuous auction method. The call method significantly improved the price discovery process and market quality. A positive spillover effect is observed from the opening and closing calls. Day-end price manipulation also declined after the introduction of the call market method. However, the beneficial impact from the call market method is asymmetric, benefiting liquid stocks more than illiquid stocks.     

Austrians and post keynesians: The questions of ignorance and uncertainty

Conclusion We do not wish to imply that there is nothing of value in Davidson’s presentation of the Post Keynesian approach to uncertainty. Nor do we believe that there is no possibility of fruitful dialogue on various aspects of the uncertainty problem between Austrians and Post Keynesians. Credit is certainly due to Davidson for his ability to frame the risk-uncertainty distinction in the language of modern, neoclassical theories of stochastic processes. And, apart from the omissions we have discussed, most Austrians will find little to disagree with in his discussion of entrepreneurship and “crucial” decisions. Unfortunately, those omissions are of fundamental relevance to the whole issue of uncertainty. The strength of the Austrian approach is demonstrated in its close attention to the entrepreneurial function that other traditions, including the Post Keynesians, tend to ignore.     

Drivers of Shareholder Returns in Tech Industries (or How to Make Sense of Amazon's Market Value)

Earnings according to GAAP do a notoriously poor job of explaining the current values of the most successful high‐tech companies, which in recent years have experienced remarkable growth in revenues and market capitalizations. But if GAAP earnings fail to account for the values of such companies, are there other measures that do better? The authors address this question in two main ways. They begin by summarizing the findings of their recent study of both the operating and the stock‐market performance of 169 publicly traded tech companies (with market caps of at least $1 billion). The aim of the study was to identify which of the many indicators of corporate operating performance—including growth in revenues, EBITDA margins, and returns on equity—have had the strongest correlation with shareholder returns over a relatively long period of time. The study's main conclusion is that investors appear to be looking for signs of neither growth nor efficiency in using capital alone, but for an optimal mix or balancing of those goals. And that mix, as the study also suggests, is captured in a cash‐flow‐based variant of “residual income” the authors call “residual cash earnings,” or RCE. In the second part of their article, the authors show how and why RCE does a much better job than reported net income or EPS of explaining the current market value of Amazon.com , one of the best‐performing tech companies in the world. Mainly by treating R&D spending as an investment of capital rather than an expense, RCE reveals the value of a company that is distinguished by both the amount and the productivity of its ongoing investment—both of which have been obscured by GAAP.