State takeover legislation and share values: The wealth effects of Pennsylvania's Act 36

Proponents of state antitakeover legislation argue that previous empirical tests by financial economists of the wealth effects of Pennsylvania's 1990 antitakeover law are biased. We show that the proponents are correct. In particular, firm size, event-time clustering, and non-synchronous trading effects account for the wealth decreases reported in earlier studies. We also show, however, that both proponents and critics of the Pennsylvania legislation have ignored the earliest press release about it. The wealth effect associated with this announcement is negative, large, and statistically significant. These results therefore are consistent with the hypothesis that the Pennsylvania law decreased company values and with the hypothesis that the initial market reaction is an unbiased estimate of the law's effect on firm values.     

Confronting chaos

While it is common to observe that our society and world are becoming increasingly complex and fast paced, most of our theories provide no bases upon which to develop appropriate strategies. The need for developing holistic strategies is becoming urgent in two related areas: major interactive technologies and morality. Jonathan King is Associate Professor of Management at the College of Business at Oregon State University. He received his B.A. in philosophy from Antioch College (1965) and his M.B.A. in Finance (1975) and Ph.D. in Business, Government and Society (1980) from the University of Washington. His primary research interests are in the areas of moral philosophy and General Systems Theory. His most important publications are The Three Faces of Thinking, Journal of Higher Education (1986) and Prisoner's Paradoxes, Journal of Business Ethics (1988).     

Ethical encounters of the second kind

When our society holds widely shared norms and values, we can agree on what constitutes unethical business practices. To the extent our social consensus is unraveling, agreement becomes increasingly problematic. Unfortunately, mainstream Western moral philosophy offers no guidance in this situation. We must therefore begin to focus on the types of social relationships that must exist for there to be agreement on what is right, good and just. This line of argument is, at best, merely suggested in discussions and articles on business ethics. Jonathan B. King is Associate Professor of Managment at the College of Business at Oregon State University. He received his B.A. in philosophy from Antioch College (1965); subsequently served for eight years as an officer in the United States Navy; received his M.B.A. (1975) and Ph.D. (1980) in Business, Government and Society from the University of Washington. His primary research interests are in the areas of epistemology and moral philosophy — e.g., the contribution of the liberal arts to interpretive thought, the sociology of moral knowledge, and the organizational distortion of information. His most important publications are: Teaching Business Ethics, Exchange1984 and A Case for the Humanities Perspective, Organizational Behavior Teaching Journal1984     

When haste makes sense: Cracking down on street markets for illicit drugs

This paper presents an analytical approach to the tactical question: ‘What level of enforcement over time allows one to eliminate a street market for illicit drugs while expanding the least possible total effort?’ The analysis is done in the context of Caulkins' model [6] which predicts the rate of change of dealers as a function of enforcement level and several market parameters. Our analysis suggests that the simple strategy of using the maximum available enforcement intensity until the market has been eliminated minimizes the total enforcement effort required.     

Correction to: Impact of anti-discrimination laws on credit scoring

Journal of Financial Services Marketing -     

Do stock market returns predict changes to output? Evidence from a nonlinear panel data model

Recent empirical work suggests a predictive relationship between stock returns and output growth. We employ quarterly data from a panel of 27 countries to test whether stock returns as useful in predicting growth. Unlike previous research, our approach allows for the possible non-linear effect of recessions on the growth-return relationship. There is strong evidence to suggest that a linear model would be misspecified and provide potentially misleading inference. Using a switching regression approach, we find evidence that returns are most useful in predicting growth when the economy is in recession.First version received: November 2002/Final version received: April 2003This paper benefited greatly from discussions with Kalvinder Shields, Mark Harris, Pete Summers, and Vance Martin. Two anonymous referees provided useful comments on an earlier version of the paper for which we are grateful. The usual disclaimer applies to any errors and omissions. Funding from The University of Melbourne greatly assisted in the completion of this paper.     

Rich Nations, Poor Nations: How Much Can Multiple Equilibria Explain?

This paper asks whether the income gap between rich and poor nations can be explained by multiple equilibria. We explore the quantitative implications of a simple two-sector general equilibrium model that gives rise to multiplicity, and calibrate the model for 127 countries. Under the assumptions of the model, around a quarter of the world’s economies are found to be in a low output equilibrium. We also find that, since the output gains associated with an equilibrium switch are sizeable, the model can explain between 15 and 25% of the variation in the logarithm of GDP per worker across countries.     

A real options perspective on entrepreneurial entry in the face of uncertainty

In this paper we develop and test theory regarding whether entrepreneurs contemplating starting a new venture account for the value of the option to defer the entry decision. While others have illuminated the theoretical applicability of real options theory to entrepreneurship, empirical evidence in this context is lacking. Consistent with predictions derived from real options theory, we find that high uncertainty in the target industry dissuades entry, and that the irreversibility of the entry decision moderates this relationship. Furthermore, we find that the irreversibility of the investment decision can be influenced by industry‐level, firm‐level and even individual‐level factors. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.