Measuring rural consumers’ willingness to pay for quality labels using experimental auctions: the case of aflatoxin‐free maize in Kenya

Aflatoxins are a common health hazard in tropical countries, especially in rural areas. New methods to reduce aflatoxin levels in food staples, as well as cheaper test methods, are being developed, but consumers’ willingness to pay (WTP) for these improvements is unknown. A survey was conducted with a representative sample of rural consumers (1,344 in total, 63% women) in all major maize‐production zones of Kenya. The survey included an experimental auction with maize products of different qualities. The results showed that many rural consumers were aware of aflatoxins, but few understood their health risks. Respondents were willing to pay a premium for maize tested for aflatoxins and labeled, but asked a high discount for maize that was visibly contaminated with moldy grain. The premium was higher for respondents with education and in regions with aflatoxicosis outbreaks. Knowledge of aflatoxins substantially reduced the overall WTP, but did not increase the WTP for tested maize. Welfare analysis indicates that mandatory testing would result in substantial benefits if the cost of testing can be lowered to below the premium.     

Estimating Trade Misinvoicing from Bilateral Trade Statistics: The Devil is in the Details

Trade misinvoicing, an important channel of illicit financial flows, is frequently estimated by the partner-country trade data comparison method. However, this method relies on a critical but incorrect assumption that the trade statistics in partner countries exhibit no misinvoicing. This study proves that the assumption of no misinvoicing in partner countries cannot be supported, raising serious doubts about the reliability of the method and a possibility that inappropriate policy decisions may be made based on the erroneous estimates of trade misinvoicing. We introduce an alternative method to estimate trade misinvoicing which does not rely on the trade statistics of partner countries.     

Supporting ALARP decision making by cost benefit analysis and multiattribute utility theory

Current guidance in the UK and elsewhere indicate upper and target risk limits for the operation of nuclear plant in terms of individual risk per annum. ‘As low as reasonably practicable’ (ALARP) arguments are used to justify the acceptance or rejection of policies that lead to risk changes between these limits. The suitability of cost‐benefit analysis (CBA) and multiattribute utility theory (MAUT) are assessed for performing ALARP (‘as low as reasonably possible’) assessments, in particular within the nuclear industry. Four problems stand out in current CBA applications to ALARP, concerning the determination of prices of safety gains or detriments, the valuation of group and individual risk, calculations using ‘disproportionality’, and the use of discounting to trade‐off risks through time. This last point has received less attention in the past but is important because of the growing interest in risk‐informed regulation in which policies extend over several timeframes and distribute the risk unevenly over these, or in policies that lead to a nonuniform risk within a single timeframe (such as maintenance policies). The problems associated with giving quantitative support to such decisions are discussed. It is argued that multiattribute utility methods (MAUT) provide an alternative methodology to CBA which enable the four problems described above to be addressed in a more satisfactory way. Through sensitivity analysis MAUT can address the perceptions of all stakeholder groups, facilitating constructive discussion and elucidating the key points of disagreement. It is also argued that by being explicitly subjective it provides an open, auditable and clear analysis in contrast to the illusory objectivity of CBA. CBA seeks to justify a decision by using a common basis for weights (prices), while MAUT recognizes that different parties may want to give different valuations. It then allows the analyst to explore the ways in which different parties might (or might not) come to the same conclusion even when weighting items differently.     

The effects of (incentivized) belief elicitation in public goods experiments

Belief elicitation is an important methodological issue for experimental economists. There are two generic questions: 1) Do incentives increase belief accuracy? 2) Are there interaction effects of beliefs and decisions? We investigate these questions in the case of finitely repeated public goods experiments. We find that belief accuracy is significantly higher when beliefs are incentivized. The relationship between contributions and beliefs is slightly steeper under incentives. However, we find that incentivized beliefs tend to lead to higher contribution levels than either non-incentivized beliefs or no beliefs at all. We discuss the implications of our results for the design of public good experiments.     

Do Customers Affect the Value Relevance of Sustainability Reporting? Empirical Evidence on Stakeholder Interdependence

In spite of the strategic importance of sustainability reporting in current business practice and the resulting increase in research on its value relevance, studies accounting for stakeholder interdependence are scarce. On the basis of the instrumental stakeholder theory, we investigate whether customers have an impact on the value relevance of sustainability reporting. Using a sample of US listed firms, we show that the value relevance of sustainability reporting is affected by customer profile differences, thereby confirming customer–shareholder interdependence. However, customer profile effects are only predominant if firms' profitability levels are low and disappear as profitability increases. Overall, our findings provide a more nuanced understanding of the value relevance of sustainability reporting. Therefore, we offer managers fine‐grained guidance for value relevant sustainability reporting. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment     

Idea Competitions under scrutiny: Acquisition,intelligence or public relations mechanism?

Idea Competitions (ICs) are becoming a popular mechanism chosen by firms to perform Open Innovation. They are a way to engage with external sources of knowledge such as individual entrepreneurs and small firms who are asked to submit ideas and compete for a prize. However, little is known about the success of ICs as acquisition mechanisms. The researchers conducted interviews in five multinational companies to evaluate the effects of using ICs as an acquisition mechanism. Although still preliminary, the results of this study show that the success of ICs as an acquisition mechanism remains uncertain because their output (i.e. the number of ideas acquired) is often low compared to the input (i.e. the number of ideas submitted) and effort required to run them (e.g. to vet ideas). Across the cases observed, ICs appear to be more successful at identifying and acquiring early-stage ideas, particularly those outside the current business focus. The study shows that ICs deliver other functional benefits such as improved intelligence and public relations and that these need to be considered as part of the evaluation of the IC's success. The paper concludes by discussing the conditions in which ICs are implemented and the implications for Open Innovation theory.     

Beliefs of and attitudes toward political advertising: An exploratory investigation

The major goals of this study were to identify voters' belief structures about political advertising, develop a scale to measure beliefs, and examine how the identified beliefs are related to overall attitudes toward political advertising. The reliabilities, factor structure, and validity tests indicate that five belief dimensions—information, veracity, cynicism, money politics, and entertainment—have sound and stable properties. The scale demonstrates that voters assess political advertising at the instrumental level (e.g., information, veracity, and entertainment) as well as the institutional level (e.g., cynicism and money politics). The results showed that not all beliefs predicted overall attitudes. Furthermore, the results indicated that political involvement was a significant factor in influencing both beliefs and attitudes. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

MULTIVARIATE METHODS FOR MONITORING STRUCTURAL CHANGE

Detection of structural change is a critical empirical activity, but continuous ‘monitoring’ for changes in real time raises well‐known econometric issues that have been explored in a single series context. If multiple series co‐break then it is possible that simultaneous examination of a set of series helps identify changes with higher probability or more rapidly than when series are examined on a case‐by‐case basis. Some asymptotic theory is developed for maximum and average CUSUM detection tests. Monte Carlo experiments suggest that these both provide an improvement in detection relative to a univariate detector over a wide range of experimental parameters, given a sufficiently large number of co‐breaking series. This is robust to a cross‐sectional correlation in the errors (a factor structure) and heterogeneity in the break dates. We apply the test to a panel of UK price indices. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Do Teachers Matter? Measuring the Variation in Teacher Effectiveness in England*

Using a unique primary dataset for the UK, we estimate the effect of individual teachers on student outcomes, and the variability in teacher quality. This links 7,305 pupils to the individual teachers who taught them, in each of their compulsory subjects in the high‐stakes exams at age 16. We use point‐in‐time fixed effects and prior attainment to control for pupil heterogeneity. We find considerable variability in teacher effectiveness, a little higher than the estimates found in the few US studies. We also corroborate recent findings that observed teachers’ characteristics explain very little of the differences in estimated teacher effectiveness.