Rational But Poor? An Explanation for Rural Economic Livelihood Strategy

Using panel data for six rural sub‐Saharan Africa countries, this article tests two hypotheses: (i) household‐specific staple food price bands resulting from market failures in the presence of liquidity constraints and rainfed agriculture induces rural household specialisation in food crops as an economic livelihood strategy; (ii) specialisation in food crops yields inferior welfare than diversification, and keeps households trapped in poverty. The results lend strong support to both hypotheses, reinforcing the need for public investment in rural infrastructure in order to encourage household livelihood diversification for improved welfare.     

Does the Accounting Profession Discipline Its Members Differently After Public Scrutiny?

Analyzing a sample of 13,917 US firm–years from 1991 to 2006, we find that more innovative firms demonstrate high corporate social responsibility (CSR) performance subsequent to a successful innovation. These high-CSR innovative firms enjoy significantly higher valuation post-innovation. These findings imply that firms with demonstrated potential growth opportunities, as evident from the number of registered patents and their citations, benefit by strategically investing more in CSR activities; that is, CSR investment entails ‘doing well by [strategically] doing good.’     

Exploring the Motivational and Behavioral Foundations of External Technology Experts’ Knowledge Sharing in Collaborative R&D Projects: The Contingency Role of Project Formalization

High‐tech manufacturers increasingly rely on the knowledge contributions of external technology experts (ETEs), who contribute to collaborative R&D projects on behalf of suppliers. Many scholars have considered knowledge sharing in R&D collaborations from a firm‐level or project‐level perspective and focused on formalization as a potential remedy. While individual supplier employees at the operative level make the decision to share critical knowledge, the individual‐level perspective in literature on knowledge sharing in collaborative R&D projects is virtually nonexistent. Because knowledge sharing in collaborative R&D is a largely discretionary act on behalf of the supplier employee, personal motivations rather than inter‐firm relationship elements (e.g., network position or dependency) become the primary determinant of one’s sharing behavior. Abstracting from or ignoring these motivations of supplier employees in studies on collaborative R&D may obscure important insights for R&D managers. This study is an important first step in providing the empirical evidence needed to uncover the motivational and behavioral foundations for ETEs’ knowledge sharing in a collaborative R&D setting. Building on theories of gift and social exchange, this article identifies customer stewardship and distributive fairness as two important personal motivations of ETEs to share knowledge. Project formalization is considered as a key contingency condition. Analyzing survey responses of 186 ETEs, a multilevel regression‐based moderated‐mediation analysis of direct and indirect effects shows that customer stewardship predicts an ETE’s knowledge sharing behavior under (very) low levels of project formalization, and distributive fairness predicts knowledge sharing behavior under medium to high levels of formalization. Together, the results provide R&D project managers who aim to leverage external knowledge contributions with valuable insights that have been obscured in past firm‐level collaborative R&D studies.     

The Politics of Land Grabbing: State and corporate power and the (trans)nationalization of resistance in Cameroon

Approaching land grabbing as a site of politics wherein power functions in the challenge and/or stabilization of agrarian socioecological injustices, we capture agrarian relations in Cameroon in 2 fundamental ways. Drawing on Laclauian insights, we discuss power as a “counter‐hegemonic” practice, to characterize the resistance strategies of local NGOs, in terms of their articulated discourses around the socioecological effects of land grabs, on the one hand, and the political possibilities that this articulatory practice opens, in terms of (trans)nationalizing resistance across social identities and space, on the other hand. Here, the analysis adopts a Foucauldian‐inspired critique with strong commitments towards agrarian socioecological justice, in a context where policies to protect democratic access to land are absent. Second, framed as a hegemonic/governmental “form of rule,” we capture how state and diplomatic actors sought to override dissent and stabilize the contentious land deal. We also show how a moment of presidential “nondecision,” characterized by a hyper‐centralized bureaucracy conjoined with these hegemonic forces to disempower local administrative and judicial leverage, thereby fostering corporate power. The article thus contributes to debates on state and corporate powers, as well as the strategies of, or possibilities and constraints for resistance “from below” to irradiate and structure into a compelling force.     

Crowd counting: a behavioural economics perspective

Quality & Quantity - Developments in technology have facilitated the emergence of new crowd counting organisations. Some of the organisations have established platforms to disseminate their...     

PRICE‐PARITY ADJUSTMENTS SHOULDN'T BE A TRADE SECRET: STATE‐LEVEL PRICE PARITY AND ASSESSMENT OF COVENANTS NOT TO COMPETE ENFORCEABILITY

This paper demonstrates the importance of making regional cost adjustments and questions the validity of papers using nationwide compensation to assess noncompete enforceability and other policies without regional price‐level adjustments. Numerous papers in recent years do not incorporate the cross‐sectional analog to inflation adjustments. Using the Bureau of Economic Analysis Regional Price Parity (RPP) index, the results of a representative policy analysis study are analyzed with, and without, parity adjustment. We show that typical results demonstrating broad negative economic effects from noncompete covenants may be an artifact of using nominal, nonparity‐adjusted data. (JEL C18, R1, J31)     

Homogeneity pursuit in panel data models: Theory and application

This paper studies the estimation of a panel data model with latent structures where individuals can be classified into different groups with the slope parameters being homogeneous within the same group but heterogeneous across groups. To identify the unknown group structure of vector parameters, we design an algorithm called Panel‐CARDS. We show that it can identify the true group structure asymptotically and estimate the model parameters consistently at the same time. Simulations evaluate the performance and corroborate the asymptotic theory in several practical design settings. The empirical application reveals the heterogeneous grouping effect of income on democracy.     

Consistency Matters in Formally Selecting Incremental and Radical New Product Ideas for Advancement

Several new product development (NPD) scholars have argued that formal processes should be used when selecting incremental new product ideas for advancement at the very beginning of the fuzzy front end (FFE), but that such formal processes may be less beneficial when selecting radical new product ideas. However, arguments also exist for using formal idea selection processes for both types of new product ideas. In practice, informal processes are used for selecting both idea types and more formal processes are used for selecting radical ideas. Unequivocal empirical evidence for either of the opposing views or practices is lacking. This study sheds light on this matter using data from 161 of the firms that participated in the Product Development and Management Association's latest (2012) Comparative Performance Assessment Study. The results reveal that the highest idea success rate (i.e., the proportion of selected ideas that are eventually launched as new products and are successful in the marketplace) is associated with firms’ use of formal processes to select the vast majority of both incremental and radical new product ideas for advancement. This finding supports earlier claims that even for (raw) idea selection processes that take place at the very beginning of the FFE, managers need to adopt a portfolio perspective and consistently use formal idea advancement selection processes to ensure attaining the right balance between radical and incremental projects in later stages of the NPD pipeline to enhance overall NPD success. Notably, this finding shows that common managerial practices of using inconsistent approaches for selecting radical and incremental ideas for advancement need to be reconsidered.