Benefits of Cross‐sector Partnerships in Markets at the Base of the Pyramid

In this paper we analyze whether cross‐sector partnerships enable companies to respond to the specific conditions at the base of the pyramid (BOP). We develop three hypotheses in which we argue how cross‐sector partnerships support companies to face unfamiliar conditions in these markets. We test the developed hypotheses against the data of 103 companies operating in BOP‐markets. The results show that companies rely on organizations from the civil society sector in order to meet customer needs. Partners from the business sector are supportive when responding to restrictive market conditions. Institutional partnerships should be considered when companies aim at responding to the regulatory environment. We outline theoretical and managerial implications and reflect some limitations of the study. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment.     

A Tutorial on Palm Distributions for Spatial Point Processes

This tutorial provides an introduction to Palm distributions for spatial point processes. Initially, in the context of finite point processes, we give an explicit definition of Palm distributions in terms of their density functions. Then we review Palm distributions in the general case. Finally, we discuss some examples of Palm distributions for specific models and some applications.     

COVID-19’s impact on real estate markets: review and outlook

Financial Markets and Portfolio Management - As symbolized by vacant office buildings, empty shopping malls and abandoned flats in metropolitan areas, the new coronavirus disease 2019 has severely...     

Trade and Industrial Policies with Heterogeneous Firms: The Role of Country Asymmetries

This paper explores the role of country asymmetries for trade and industrial policies with heterogeneous firms. The analysis delivers a number of novel results. First, trade policies, infrastructure policies and industrial policies which improve the business conditions in one country have negative productivity and welfare effects on the trading partner. Second, symmetric trade liberalization is immiserizing for a trading partner whose business conditions are inferior. Third, there are gains from trade even for a country whose monopolistically competitive sector with heterogeneous firms is wiped out by switching from autarky to trade.