Optimal equity valuation using multiples: The number of comparable firms

We examine how the accuracy of a multiples-based valuation changes as the number of comparable firms used to estimate the valuation multiple increases. Our research is motivated by a contrast between the approach followed by practitioners, who typically use a small number of closely comparable firms, and the academic literature which often uses all firms in an industry. Using a simple selection rule based on growth rates, we find that using 10 closely comparable firms is as accurate on average as using the entire cross-section of firms in an industry. The loss of accuracy from using five comparable firms rather than 10 firms or the entire industry is not great.     

Policy preferences of experts seeking to raise and stabilise farm incomes in the Eastern Gangetic Plains

Poverty is endemic in the highly populated Eastern Gangetic Plains where agriculture is critical to more than half the population. However, the mechanisms to support agriculture for development are contested. For example, some have advocated a strong role for government support and assistance due to market weaknesses, while others have promoted the need for more market-oriented approaches. We use an elicitation process focussed on expert policymaking communities, employing stated preference techniques to explore these options. Differences in perceptions about the effectiveness of policies and their delivery are reported between countries, while also empirically examining the influence of the respondents' organisational background. The results show support for policies that improve farmers' access to inputs, especially when delivered by private sector actors. The research provides an important contribution to the literature on policies for agricultural development.     

Exploring customer heterogeneity with a scale-extended latent class choice model: Experimental evidence drawn from urban water users

The search for improved water pricing is central to urban water reform in many countries. Establishing efficient water prices is notoriously difficult, not least because different customers have different demands for water and yet they are presently faced with a one-size-fits-all approach to pricing and service. This is especially challenging where water availability fluctuates widely, as is the case in many parts of Australia, because the impacts of exposure to episodic periods of scarcity can differ markedly. There is now substantial interest in the notion of ‘unbundling’ the water product to provide a better fit between customers' preferences and the level of service received. Following this trend, this study provides important insights into householders' willingness to pay for a range of flexible water options using a choice experiment. The paper reports a relatively underemployed extension to the latent class modelling framework to investigate preference heterogeneity towards urban water products, including purchasing services that involve the provision of environmental and amenity outcomes. The work adds to studies that use choice data to reveal heterogeneity while improving our understanding of household customers' demands. Overall, it also brings into focus questions about the future management of water in urban contexts.     

New approaches to measuring welfare

Economics has traditionally understood ‘welfare’ (what makes a life go well) as the satisfaction of preference. This conceptualisation of welfare is typically measured using revealed preferences, proxied through income and prices or stated in willingness-to-pay surveys. Recent decades have seen growing challenges to this paradigm. The climate crisis, among other phenomena, has called into question whether income and price data effectively proxy preferences, and willingness-to-pay surveys continue to struggle with accurately pricing important items such as biodiversity, digital goods, privacy and social connections. Preference satisfaction as a welfare criterion has also been challenged conceptually by psychologists and scholars working in the development space, among others. In this article, we review recent innovations in alternate ways of conceptualising and measuring welfare for the purposes of economic welfare analysis. We focus on using stated preferences over aspects of well-being, life-satisfaction scales and the WELLBY approach, and well-being frameworks such as Bhutan's Gross National Happiness Index. While not without weaknesses, these approaches also have marked strengths relative to the traditional approach.     

Rethinking Accounting,Accountability, and Accounting Regulation: Concerns about the Proposed Canadian Sustainability Standards Board*

This paper expands on a letter recently submitted by a group of Canadian business academics to the Independent Review Committee on Standard Setting in Canada (IRCSSC) in response to the committee's proposed Canadian Sustainability Standards Board. We highlight sections of the IRCSSC's Consultation Paper that we find problematic and draw on accounting and other research to explain why it fails to live up to its potential. Chief among the problems we identify is that the IRCSSC appears to be wedded to the same narrow, investor-based focus promoted by the International Sustainability Standard Board. We also draw attention to the rushed nature of the process, its exclusion of lay experts, the IRCSSC's ambiguous use of the term public interest, and its inattention to alternative understandings of value and the environment (including the people within it). Finally, we problematize the IRCSSC's sidestepping of the issues of power, culture, and conflict; its neglect of monitoring and enforcement; and its surprising disregard of the Global Reporting Initiative. Along with a number of suggestions for improving the process and its outcome, this paper also contributes to ongoing debates on standard setting and the question of whether accounting is currently equipped to provide the necessary tools for sustainability reporting.