Bunk bed injuries in Australia: the case for a mandatory safety standard

Bunk beds have long been recognised as a potential source of injury to children. This study was undertaken to establish an evidence base for a proposed injury reduction program and to determine whether or not there is a case for a mandatory safety standard. Recent literature on bunk bed safety was reviewed to provide an overview of the injury issues involved. Major sources of relevant Australian and international data were identified and the available data summarised. An in-depth analysis of Victorian data was undertaken to identify the nature and severity of injuries sustained and any patterns or trends, including age profiles. It is estimated that, in Australia, in the under fifteen age-group, there are at least 2,100 bunk bed-related injuries treated annually by hospital emergency departments. This represents a rate of about 50 injuries per 100,000 age-specific population. The majority of these injuries (86%) occur in children under the age of 10 years with injuries peaking in the 5-9 year age-group. The main cause of non-fatal injury is falls from the top bunk resulting in a fracture (33%), mainly to the upper extremity (75%). There have been at least two deaths from asphyxia in Australia in the past 10 years, due to entrapment in the bunk structure. It is clear from the current evidence that bunk bed injuries are a significant problem in Australia and represent a life-threatening hazard to young children in particular. The existing voluntary Australian/New Zealand Standard adequately addresses the safety issues raised by the examination of the literature and the analysis of the injury data. It is also clear that, in Australia, voluntary standards and the market place have been ineffective in achieving compliance. It is therefore recommended that the Australian Standard be made mandatory in an effort to significantly improve the safety of bunk beds in Australia.     

The Legal and Economic Evolution of Workers Compensation: Prospects for Enhancing Choice in the System

ABSTRACT: Workers compensation in the United States has been designed as a no-fault system that provides comprehensive medical and income benefits to employees with work-related injuries. Under its no-fault concept and the exclusive remedy doctrine, injured workers relinquish the right to sue their employer in tort in exchange for prescribed, guaranteed benefits that are paid promptly without protracted disputes. However, there is considerable evidence of increasing litigation in and outside the system that is undermining its no-fault principles and siphoning resources away from the efficient delivery of benefits to injured workers. This article reviews the legal and economic developments that are reshaping workers compensation and the threats they pose. The authors argue for a comprehensive reexamination of the structure of the system to resolve the conflicts among its stakeholders and improve its efficiency. Specifically, the authors explore several potential measures that would enhance worker and employer choice to reconcile their interests while restoring the nofault foundation of the system.     

Trade and the Effect of Public Investment on Regional Inequalities in Heterogeneously Integrated Areas

Regional integration, it is argued, challenges the distribution of economic activity among regions. However, the government role in shifting the patterns of regional inequalities is still under debate and has received small comprehensive empirical evidence. This paper examines the hypothesis of trade as channelling public investment and, thus, perpetuating regional inequalities. We argue that the interplay of public and private investment plays a key role in stimulating trade and economic activity. To avoid problems of cross‐country heterogeneity and comparability this study examines data for two countries; Mexico and Spain, both followers of trade integration arrangements. Findings indicate that regional inequalities in Mexico are significantly explained by differences in export capacity serving to boost private investment whereas inequalities in Spain are appreciably driven by previous endowments and private capital formation.     

Human capital and economic growth in Spain, 1850–2000

We investigate human capital accumulation in Spain using income- and education-based alternative approaches. We, then, assess human capital impact on labor productivity growth and discuss the implications of its alternative measures for TFP growth. Trends in human capital are similar with either measure but the skill-premium approach fits better Spanish historical experience. As education is a high income elastic good, human capital growth computed with the education-based approach seems upward biased for the recent past. Human capital provided a positive albeit small contribution to labor productivity growth facilitating technological innovation.     

The Great Forgotten Issue: Vindicating Ethics in the European Qualifications Framework (EQF)

Various international authorities have insisted on the importance of ethical learning in higher education for would-be professionals, including students of Business Administration. As the process of creating the European Higher Education Area gathers pace, first steps have been taken to explicitly incorporate ethics in the common European Qualifications Framework (EQF). However, the authors of this study show how in the course of the EQF development process, the consideration given to ethical qualifications has been curtailed and subjected to serious limitations. In this article, the authors review the historical development and the main elements of the EQF. Then, they analyze the gradual elimination of ethics within the EQF. Finally, they highlight the implications of this gradual elimination and propose avenues for further research. Manuel Guillén is Senior Lecturer in Management, at the University of Valencia (Spain). Prof. Guillén earned his PhD in Management with a specialization in ethics and strategic management integration. He has been a Visiting Scholar at the University of St. Thomas, Minnesota (USA), at the University of Notre Dame, Indiana, USA, and guest Visiting Student at IESE Business School doctoral program, in Barcelona. He has presented some of his research at the top conferences in the field and has published in business ethics and management journals. Since 1997 he has taught Business Ethics courses in different business schools, institutions, and companies. Joan Fontrodona is an Associate Professor of Business Ethics and Academic Director of the Center for Business in Society at IESE Business School. He is member of the Academic Board of EABIS, Chairman of EBEN-Spain, and Member of the Executive Committee of ASEPAM, the Spanish Local Network of the Global Compact. He has published several books and papers on business ethics, corporate social responsibility, philosophy, and management. Alfredo Rodríguez-Sedano holds a PhD in Philosophy and a PhD in Business Administration. He is Professor of Sociology at the Education Department of the University of Navarre (Spain). He is also Visiting Professor at the Catholic University of the West (El Salvador). He has been Visiting Professor at the University of Andes (Chile) and Regular Professor at the Catholic University of Sacred Conception (Chile). He has published 16 books, 12 book chapters, and 15 articles on different subjects in the fields of management, philosophy, and education.     

Eagles and Turkeys: Human Capital Externalities,Departmental Co‐authorship and Research Productivity

Lucas (1988) hypothesised that human capital externalities explain persistent productivity growth and become manifest via interactions between workplace colleagues. Consistent with the first part of this hypothesis, Fox and Milbourne (2006) concluded that an increase in the average level of human capital in Australian economics departments raised the research productivity of departmental members. This paper tests the robustness of this finding by using a direct, rather than a proxy, measure of human capital and confirms the existence of human capital externalities within Australian economics departments. But we extend the analysis in two important dimensions. Firstly, we investigate the second part of Lucas' hypothesis by testing whether the externality becomes manifest via co‐authoring. We find no evidence that this type of interaction is associated with higher research productivity, especially for higher quality outputs. Secondly, we control for the likely endogeneity of one's peer group via instrumental variables estimation. In this case, we find that the peer group effect disappears completely for the highest quality outputs but remains for research output more broadly defined.     

A Critique of Economic Theory

Abstract:

Faced with home foreclosures, a stagnant economy, and weakly-effective federal programs of relief, Richmond, California, considered using eminent domain to acquire mortgages, modify loans to be more affordable, and thus prevent further erosion of the tax base. Strong objections have been lodged against such alteration of property rights, except through bankruptcy and foreclosure processes. The Richmond proposal is considered in the historical context of changes in the use of eminent domain as described by John R. Commons. Just as economic change forced U.S. courts to change the working definitions of property in the late nineteenth century, current contradictions in the way in which we think of households, and the systemic consequences of their management of debt, may produce changes in law and should alter the way in which economists analyze aggregate consumer spending and borrowing.