Search results

The following is an introductory profile of the fastest growing firms over the three-year period of the study listed by corporate reputation ranking order. The business activities in which the firms are engaged are outlined to provide background information for the reader.

X = multiple interpretations

In this study, the authors use a country-level database covering 63 economies over the period 2014–2019 and employ a wide range of proxies to discuss new technological trends in finance, particularly in the banking sector. The authors also distinguish alternative technology-based business models that directly compete with banks [financial technology (fintech) and giant technology (bigtech) credit providers]. The results suggest that banks’ increased focus on technological innovation, as measured by market value and number of patents, is a possible response to the emerging technology-based nonbank competition, particularly from fintech and bigtech firms. Additionally, the results indicate that the emergence of financial innovation contributes negatively to the average value of bank patent, indicating significant competitive pressure on banks in the technological race. Thus, banks are countering the challenge of fintech and bigtech competition in the financial market by increasing their technology projects and patenting activities. These trends are crucial and may change the stability and sustainability perspectives of banks.

This chapter attempts to theorize the role of knowledge in the determination of the value of commodities. This draws from the South Korean controversy on the value and price of information commodities such as computer software and digital music. One group of writers has argued that the value of software copies (=commodities) is contributed by the labor time expended to produce the source code (=knowledge) in a piecemeal fashion. For another group, the source code has nothing to do with the production of the value of copies given that the source code is unnecessary for the (re)production of copies, and thus the value of software copies is approximately zero and its price is a high monopoly price. Both approaches are flawed. In the case of the former, no value can actually be transferred from the source code to copies because no changes are made to the source code before or after the production of copies. In case of the latter, knowledge is viewed as having nothing to do with value production. On the basis of this critique, an alternative view is put forward, in which knowledge plays an important role in value production by determining the productivity and/or complexity of labor. Knowledge “virtually intensifies” labor. It is also argued that intellectual property rights should be theorized in a way to refine and reproduce the role of knowledge – the virtual intensification of labor – at more complex and concrete levels of analysis.

This study investigates the complex interaction between properties of some emergent crises and the expertise of particular public sector leaders, who themselves are embedded in particular institutional processes that further constrain identification of these emergent crises. It is suggested that discrepancy in the ability of leaders to detect crises is due not only to their own proficiency in some cognitive skills, but also to their interaction with, and differences in, particular properties of some emergent crises, which render some emergent crises more detectable than others in some institutional environments.

In the discussion groups subjects will be taken up which are not dealt with in the lectures. The subjects to be taken up in the discussion groups of each week and the assignments relating thereto will be announced well in advance of the meetings.

This paper presents estimates of total personal income for every U.S state in 1880, 1890, 1900, and 1910. The series includes new figures for 1890 and 1910, and revisions of Richard Easterlin's (1960) figures for 1880 and 1900 based on recent economic history research. The new estimates allow better examination of U.S. interregional income differences and cyclical behavior of U.S. states’ total personal income.