RESPONSIBILITY AND CAPABILITY

This paper explores the issue of responsibility and links it to the concept of capability. The paper begins by looking at what it means to be responsible and connects this to the now common distinction in public policy between blame and task. It is argued that responsibility should be internalised rather than externalised and placed in the hands of the state. This can be done through the extension of property rights and so the paper offers a brief justification for the link between responsibility and property rights. The final part of the paper considers the ideas of capability and competence and uses these to argue for the placing of personal responsibility at the heart of public policy.     

LACK OF RIGOUR IN DEFENDING FAIRTRADE: A REJOINDER TO ALISTAIR SMITH

Smith (2010 ) does not deny that he made errors in economic theory, logic and fact, and that he had misused evidence. He says that I misrepresented a large body of theory, that I distorted what he said in four places and that I was wrong in one sentence. These statements are false.     

The Value of Changes in Deer Season Length: An Application of the Nested Multinomial Logit Model

Increasing deer populations can be controlled through manipulatingharvest limits or season length. While such actions often result in benefitsto hunters, both motorists and the agricultural sector also benefit as alower deer population leads to fewer incidences of harmful human-deerencounters. Traditional recreation demand models are often employed toexamine the welfare implications of changes in daily hunting bag limits.Studies measuring the effects of changes in season length, however, arenoticeably absent from the literature. This study uses a nested randomutility model to examine hunter choice over site and season selection toderive the values of changes in season length.     

The Growth of Jobless Households in Australia

In this article it is shown that individual-based measures of joblessness and household measures of joblessness have diverged over the last twenty years with joblessness becoming increasingly concentrated in certain households.     

A Common Base Answer to the Question “Which Country Is Most Redistributive?”*

We believe that what most authors have in mind when referring to the “most redistributive country” is a tax and transfer schedule that is most redistributive across all pre-tax and transfer income distributions. In order to measure each country's tax and transfer redistribution according to the same baseline, we suggest using the transplant-and-compare method of Dardanoni and Lambert (2002, Journal of Public Economics 86, 99–122) to establish a common base. The redistributive effects of countries’ tax and transfer schedules are illustrated by employing microdata on eight countries from the Luxembourg Income Study (LIS). Of these eight countries, Finland is found to be the most redistributive country, according to the common base method.     

Equity and asset growth among Subchapter S banks

Since 2004, commercial banks in the United States have been allowed to elect Subchapter S (hence Sub-S) status with up to 100 shareholders. That limitation may promote more effective monitoring of bank managers by shareholders which can, in turn, explain previous findings of superior performance among Sub-S banks. The present research focuses on the possibility that the shareholder limitation also constrains opportunities for bank growth, or a slow growth hypothesis for Sub-S banks. Using a differences-in-differences regression approach for a sample of community banks (i.e., less than $1b in assets) from 2004 to 2014, and controlling for initial assets and urban location, it is found that annual growth in real assets and equity was significantly higher among banks that never held Sub-S status than for banks that always held Sub-S status, and that banks switching to Sub-S later grew significantly faster than those that always held Sub-S status. Fixed effects regressions show that switching to Sub-S status significantly reduced equity growth, with asset growth significantly reduced after 2008. In conjunction with earlier findings, the results suggest that the availability of Sub-S status helped to protect and strengthen community banks across a time period including substantial financial turmoil.