PLANT-LEVEL ANALYSIS USING THE ARD: ANOTHER LOOK AT GIBRAT'S LAW

This study uses the Annual Respondents Database to test whether Gibrat's law of proportionate effect holds for the UK manufacturing industry during the period 1973–1998. For a sample of manufacturing industries, four different panel unit root tests were carried out to test the relationship between growth and size for three measures of size: gross output, employment and gross value added. The tests were applied to unbalanced plant‐level panel data. The results show that there is strong evidence to reject Gibrat's law that firm growth is a random process in favour of the alternative proposition of mean reversion.     

Local air pollution and global climate change: A combined cost-benefit analysis

This article presents the findings of a combined cost-benefit analysis of local air pollution and global climate change, two subjects that are usually studied separately. Yet these distinct environmental problems are closely related, since they are both driven by the nature of present energy production and consumption patterns. Our study demonstrates the mutual relevance of, and interaction between, policies designed to address these two environmental challenges individually. Given the many dimensions air pollution control and climate change management have in common, it is surprising that they have only little been analyzed in combination so far. We attempt to cover at least part of the existing gap in the literature by assessing how costs and benefits of technologies and strategies that jointly tackle these two environmental problems can best be balanced. By using specific technological options that cut down local air pollution, e.g. related to particulate emissions, one may concurrently reduce CO₂ emissions and thus contribute to diminishing global climate change. Inversely, some of the long-term climate change strategies simultaneously improve the quality of air in the short run. We have extended the well-established MERGE model by including emissions of particulate matter, and show that integrated environmental policies generate net global welfare benefits. We also demonstrate that the discounted benefits of local air pollution reduction significantly outweigh those of global climate change mitigation, at least by a factor of 2, but in most cases of our sensitivity analysis much more. Still, we do not argue to only restrict energy policy today to what should be our first priority, local air pollution control, and wait with the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. Instead, we propose to design policies that simultaneously address these issues, as their combination creates an additional climate change bonus. As such, climate change mitigation proves an ancillary benefit of air pollution reduction, rather than the other way around.     

A comparison of ethical evaluations of business school faculty and students: A pilot study

This paper reports the results of a pilot study of differences in ethical evaluations between business faculty and students at a Southern university. Data were collected from 137 business students (46 freshmen and 67 seniors) and 34 business faculty members. Significant differences were found in 7 of the 30 situations between freshmen and faculty and four situations between seniors and faculty. When the combined means for each group were tested, there was no significant difference in the means at the 0.05 level of significance. A trend was revealed, however, in that the majority of the time faculty members were the most ethically oriented followed by seniors and then freshmen.Dr. Robert E. Stevens is Professor of Marketing at Northeast Louisiana University and is the author of 11 books and more than 80 articles. Dr. Stevens has served as a consultant to local, regional, and national firms for research projects, feasibility studies, and market planning, and has been a partner in a marketing research company.Dr. O. Jeff Harris is Professor of Management at Northeast Louisiana University. Prior to coming to Northeast, he taught at Louisiana State University, the University of Arkansas, and the University of Texas. Professor Harris has written three books and numerous articles and position papers. He is a consultant to many health care and processing organizations.Dr. Stan Williamson is an assistant professor of management at Northeast Louisiana University. He teaches strategy, human resource management, and management principles. Before this, he served as a senior executive for a regional health care system for 13 years and as a consultant in the health care field.     

Multiple Information Signals in the Market for Charitable Donations

We find evidence indicating that donors use third‐party rating information when they donate to U.S. nonprofit organizations (nonprofits). Specifically, using a sample of over 3,800 unique nonprofits rated by the three largest charity rating organizations in 2007, and over 12,000 unrated control nonprofits, we find that rated nonprofits have significantly higher direct donations than unrated charities. We also hypothesize and find that nonprofits with ratings from multiple rating organizations receive incrementally higher levels of donations. In addition, although charities that receive a positive rating have higher levels of donor support than those receiving a negative rating, both positively and negatively rated nonprofits receive a higher level of direct donations than unrated nonprofits. Finally, we find that nonprofits with consistently good ratings receive higher donations than those with mixed or consistently negative ratings, indicating the donor community values consistency across the three rating agencies.