Search results

Purpose: This chapter aims to enlighten the stakeholders on the role and contribution and the issues and challenges of large-scale industries in the wake of the globally unified economies.

Need for the study: Large-scale industries are one of the pillars of any nation and can exercise an immense impact on the numerous facets of the economy of any country. Their role and contribution can benefit all the stakeholders, especially in today’s integrated and interdependent world economies. Hence, there is an absolute need to highlight the issues and challenges and suggest measures to overcome them to promote a resilient global economy.

Methodology: The study gathered data from secondary sources like textbooks, articles, and the internet.

Findings: The findings of the study state that large-scale industries are enormous contributors to employment creation, development of the economy, growth of revenue, research and development (R&D) and innovation, export promotion, and infrastructure. The significant challenges include regulatory compliance, workforce management, economic volatility, political instability, supply chain management, environmental compliance, and technology and infrastructure.

Protectionism, deregulation, public–private partnership, privatisation, and environmental regulation are significant government decisions that affect large-scale industries. The study identifies tax incentives, easy access to financing, and domestic and international trade policies to safeguard large-scale industries’ interests.

Practical implications: Large-scale industries contribute towards the growth of global economic resilience in terms of employment generation, technological advancements, and innovation, fostering international trade in today’s interconnected world.

Discuss in detail the uses which might legitimately be made of the following passage by the writer of a profound study of economic life and thought in France at the end of the reign of Louis XIV. In answering the question make full use of your knowledge of (a) historical criticism; (b) French economic and general history.

We aim to analyze the early trajectory of Argentine industry from the perspective of uneven and combined development. Argentine integration into the world market based on the export of agricultural goods had not neglected industrial development. At first, Argentine industry benefited from its late emergence and rapidly followed the path of leading countries’ manufactures. But initial advantage soon turned into a liability. The emergence of large-scale industry required expanded markets that were already occupied by older and stronger competitors. The 1930 crisis and the impact of the Second World War aggravated this problem. Attempts to remedy the situation – an export-led industrialization scheme and an internal-market-oriented economy – failed successively. We study this process through the analysis of Argentine industrial chambers’ journals, reports from the United States Department of Foreign Trade and Argentine official government documents. We find that the export-led industrialization project failed because of the weakness of Argentine industries and not because of economic nationalism. That was the outcome of the previous failure of liberal projects and of the international constraints imposed by the Second World War and its aftermath. During this later period of internal-market-oriented economy, the gap between Argentine and international productivity widened. This paper presents an innovative interpretation that transcends liberal and nationalistic explanations and serves as a case study of the implications of uneven and combined development.

Allyn Young′s lectures, as recorded by the young Nicholas Kaldor, survey the historical roots of the subject from Aristotle through to the modern neo‐classical writers. The focus throughout is on the conditions making for economic progress, with stress on the institutional developments that extend and are extended by the size of the market. Organisational changes that promote the division of labour and specialisation within and between firms and industries, and which promote competition and mobility, are seen as the vital factors in growth. In the absence of new markets, inventions as such play only a minor role. The economic system is an inter‐related whole, or a living “organon”. It is from this perspective that micro‐economic relations are analysed, and this helps expose certain fallacies of composition associated with the marginal productivity theory of production and distribution. Factors are paid not because they are productive but because they are scarce. Likewise he shows why Marshallian supply and demand schedules, based on the “one thing at a time” approach, cannot adequately describe the dynamic growth properties of the system. Supply and demand cannot be simply integrated to arrive at a picture of the whole economy. These notes are complemented by eleven articles in the Encyclopaedia Britannica which were published shortly after Young′s sudden death in 1929.

Recognition of the importance of Large Scale Engineering (LSE) construction in the economics of Europe has resulted in the European Commission supporting the proposal for the eLSEwise project (Esprit 20876). eLSEwise is the European LSE Wide Integration Support Effort, which commenced in 1996 as part of the family of the ‘User Reference Group’ projects established by the European Commission to define the needs of the busiess users of ICT within several industrial areas. This paper describes the eLSEwise initiative and the approach adopted in identifying the LSE construction needs and the business processes that come together to allow an LSE project to evolve through the various phases of a project life cycle.

The methodological boundary of the GPE is demarcated by truth and non‐violence. It needs to be emphasised that the GPE is dependent on a type of methodological individualism where individuals matter most in the operation of the whole system. Individuals are the true entities and their holistic development is the basic purpose of the GPE, and this goes a long way to achieve the desideratum of a self‐reliant society. These are the basic instrument variables so to say. To ignore the development of individuals in the system of the GPE is like playing Hamlet without the prince of Denmark. For the proper working of the Gandhian system, many instruments, and institutional and organisational changes are indeed necessary and in some cases, what Schumpeter calls creative destruction, becomes inevitable. Gandhi's methodology was a combination of both realism and idealism. Very often he used the method of eclecticism through a fusion of empirical pragmatism with metaphysical idealism. This is evident in many of his writings including the theory of state, and political and social philosophy.

The purpose of this illustrative case‐based research is to analyze and evaluate the 2004 controversial merger of two high‐profile French pharmaceutical companies, Sanofi‐Synthelabo and Aventis.

This is a case‐based research paper that relates existing theory to mergers and acquisitions (M&As) and global strategies by highlighting those issues that impact business and industrial markets as well as multinational corporations' (MNCs) operations.

Sanofi‐Aventis continues to go through a multitude of changes in its corporate reorganization while Novartis has been exploring collaborative ventures with pharmaceutical and bio‐tech companies.

There is a scarcity of published work in the case‐based research area. The work provides an understanding of the French government's national champion initiatives and their impact on the European and global pharmaceutical companies.

The findings of this case have tangible implications for those business marketers and MNCs that operate in the European markets and other countries regarding seeking M&As and expansion.

The case adds value in the national champion theory and its associated areas that relate to business and industrial markets.

The purpose of this paper is to compare and analyze the modern productivity estimation techniques, namely, Levinsohn and Petrin (LP, 2003), Ackerberg Caves and Frazer (ACF, 2006), Wooldridge (2009) and Mollisi and Rovigatti (MR, 2017) on unit-level data of 32 Indian industries for the period 2009-2015.

The paper first analyzes different issues encountered in total factor productivity (TFP) measurement. It then categorizes the productivity estimation techniques into three logical generations, namely, traditional, new and advanced. Next, it selects four contemporary estimation techniques, computes the industrial TFP for Indian states by using them and investigates their empirical outcomes. The paper also performs the robustness check to ascertain, which estimation technique is more robust.

The result indicates that the TFP growth of Indian industries have differed greatly over this seven-years of period, but the estimates are sensitive to the techniques used. Further results suggest that ACF and Wooldridge yield the consistent outcomes as compared to LP and MR. The robustness test confirms Wooldridge to be the most robust contemporary technique for productivity estimation followed by ACF and LP.

To the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study that compares the contemporary productivity estimation techniques. In this backdrop, this paper offers two novelties. First, it uses advanced production estimation techniques to compute TFP of 32 diverse industries of an emerging economy: India. Second, it addresses the fitment of estimation techniques by drawing a comparison and by conducting a robustness test, hence, contributing to the limited literature on comparing contemporary productivity estimation techniques.

Despite the remarkable expansion of microfinance over the past several decades, the industry remains in a developmental period of experimentation and rapid growth, exploring which approaches work best under different circumstances. Widespread diffusion and local adaptation of techniques and innovations from pioneering organizations such as ACCION International, Grameen Bank, FINCA, Bank Rakyat Indonesia, BancoSol, and many others fostered the emergence of a global industry that by most counts now serves more than 100 million clients. Yet along many dimensions of the industry – for example, client methodologies, information technologies and infrastructures, transparency and performance monitoring, product and service portfolios, funding structures, human resource management, health and environmental amelioration, and regulations – significant barriers remain to achieving the broad vision of microfinance as a major contributor in fighting global poverty.