Quantitative methods for the economic valuation of a cultural tourism destination: case study of the Pisa Charterhouse

Quality & Quantity - This paper aims to provide an economic valuation of the Pisa Charterhouse, a renowned monastic complex built in the fourteenth century, located in the Tuscany region of...     

Disentangling economic crisis effects from environmental regulation effects: Implications for sustainable development

With climate change becoming more severe, policy makers must impose environmental regulations that will lead firms to adopt sustainable corporate models. According to the Porter hypothesis, environmental regulation can favour the implementation of business strategies that improve economic and environmental performances. In this study, we examine how one such form of regulation, the European Union Emission Trading Scheme (EU ETS), impacts firm performance, and we subsequently widen the examination beyond the regulation to evaluate an economic crisis which could potentially confound regulation effects. We estimate a panel model with time- and firm-fixed effects for different subsamples that disentangle the effect of the EU ETS policy from the 2008 economic crisis. The results indicate that the EU ETS policy in its third phase can activate the Porter hypothesis and is effective in fuelling the implementation of sustainable corporate models by firms. However, we also find that the economic crisis neutralises the effects of the regulation on firm performance, precluding the triggering of the Porter hypothesis in severely affected firms.     

Deep and Proximate Determinants of the World Income Distribution

This paper studies the deep and proximate determinants of the evolution of the cross-country distribution of GDP per worker in the period 1960–2008 by a novel method based on an information criterion. We find that countries of our sample follow three distinctive growth regimes identified by two deep determinants, namely life expectancy at birth in 1960 and the share of Catholics in 1965, and that each regime is characterized by non-linearities. Growth regimes appear to be the main cause of the increased inequality and polarization, while technological catch-up, proxied by the initial level of GDP per worker, acts in the opposite direction. Finally, human capital marginally reduces polarization, while investment rates and employment growth have no distributional effect.