Search results

The purpose of this paper is to extend the methodology proposed in Majumder et al. (2012) for the estimation of the item-specific purchasing power parities (PPPs) within countries, to the cross-country context. It estimates item-specific intra-country PPPs (i.e. spatial prices) and inter-country PPPs in a unified framework using unit records of household food expenditures from three Asian countries: India, Indonesia and Vietnam, covering contemporaneous time periods. The study addresses a key limitation of the International Comparison Program (ICP) exercise, namely, that it treats all countries, large and small, as homogeneous entities. Moreover, it directly calculates bilateral PPPs between countries based on their expenditure patterns and prices alone and directly estimates the price-level indices (PLI) and their standard errors, allowing formal tests of the hypothesis of PLI being unity. The usefulness of the estimated PPPs is illustrated by applying them to comparisons of real food expenditures between the three countries, and benchmarking the comparisons with those using the ICP PPPs.

The methodology is based on the fact that a spatial price index can be viewed as a true cost of living index (TCLI). Using a general cost function underlying the Rank 3 quadratic logarithmic systems, the TCLI is calculated for a reference utility level.

The study provides formal statistical tests of the hypothesis of item invariance of the PPPs. The usefulness of the proposed methodology is illustrated by applying the estimated PPPs in comparisons of food expenditures between subgroups in the three countries. The sensitivity of the expenditure comparisons to the use of item-wise PPPs underlines the need to provide price information on highly disaggregated PPPs to a much greater extent than the ICP has done to date.

The choice of these three Asian countries was dictated by the fact that, though comparability of items between them remains an issue as with all cross-country comparisons. Also, in the absence of price data, this study followed the practice in Majumder et al. (2012, 2015a, 2015b) in using as proxies the raw unit values of the food items, but adjusted for quality and demographic factors using the procedure introduced by Cox and Wohlgenant (1986) and extended by Hoang (2009).

It addresses some limitations of the ICP, namely, ICP treats all countries as single entities with the purchasing power of the country’s currency assumed to be the same in all regions within the country, ICP uses the US dollar as the numeraire (this ignores the fact that the PPPs required in bilateral welfare comparisons between developing countries with vastly different consumption habits from the “international norm” are quite different from the ICP PPPs) and ICP uses distribution invariant prices to calculate PPPs, which overlooks the fact that the poor pay different prices from the “representative” individual.

This study highlights the importance of estimating and using item-specific PPPs in cross-country comparisons by formally testing and rejecting the assumption of item invariant PPPs and by providing empirical evidence that they do make a difference to the welfare comparisons between countries. This study provides PPPs based on food items only, which may be more relevant for poverty comparisons.

It introduces, for the first time, the concept of item-specific PPPs between countries as estimable parameters and operationalizes this concept by using them in cross-country welfare comparisons.

Anchoring vignettes have become a popular method to adjust self-assessed data for systematic differences in reporting behaviour to aid comparability, for example, of cross-country analyses. The method relies on the two fundamental assumptions of response consistency and vignette equivalence. Evidence on the validity of these assumptions is equivocal. This chapter considers the utility of the vignette approach by considering how successful the method is in moving self-assessed reports of health mobility towards objective counterparts. We draw on data from the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE) and undertake pairwise country comparisons of cumulative distributions of self-reports, their objective counterparts and vignette adjusted reports. Comparison of distributions is based on tests for stochastic dominance. Multiple cross-country comparisons are undertaken to assess the consistency of results across contexts and settings. Both non-parametric and parametric approaches to vignette adjustment are considered. In general, we find the anchoring vignette methodology poorly reconciles self-reported data with objective counterparts.

The study aims to shed light on cross-country comparisons of brand engagement in self-concept (BESC) among consumers from European countries and to link presumed differences with country-level economic growth and materialism. This study contributes to the literature on the customer–brand relationship and provides implications for international branding strategies.

This observation study explored levels of BESC in three European countries. Questionnaire data were collected from consumers of Austria (N = 302), Italy (N = 431) and Poland (N = 410) with the purpose to make cross-country comparisons of BESC among consumers.

The results provide evidence for partial scalar invariance of the BESC scale. Cross-country comparisons of latent means reveal that Polish consumers score higher on BESC than consumers from Austria and Italy. Moreover, Austrian consumers score higher on BESC than Italian consumers.

Culture as a contextual factor of BESC should be studied further. The findings should be replicated with non-convenience samples in additional cultural contexts to improve the generalizability of data. Structural equation modeling could be used to investigate psychological drivers of BESC differences.

The findings coming from the cross-country comparisons of BESC are of practical relevance to marketing managers: they should tailor their branding and communication strategies accordingly.

So far, the understanding of cross-cultural and cross-country differences in consumer–brand relationships has remained limited. This study adopts a rigorous approach to cross-cultural research enriching the literature on BESC from a cross-country perspective.

The purpose of this paper is to focus on the case where – by design – one needs to impute cross-country cross-survey (CCCS) data (situation typical for example among multinational firms who are confronted with the need to carry out comparative marketing surveys with respondents located in several countries). Importantly, while some work demonstrates approaches for single-item direct measures, no prior research has examined the common situation in international marketing where the researcher needs to use multi-item scales of latent constructs. The paper presents problem areas related to the choices international marketers have to make when doing cross-country/cross-survey research and provides guidance for future research.

Multi-country sample of real data is used as an example of cross-sample imputation (292 New Zealand exporters and 302 Finnish ones) the international entrepreneurial orientation (IEO) data. Three variations of the input data are tested: first, imputation based on all the data available for the measurement model; second, imputation based on the set of items based on the invariance structure of the joint items shared across the two groups; and third, imputation based both on examination of the invariance structures of the joint items and the performance of the measurement model in the group where the full data was originally available.

Based on distribution comparisons imputation for New Zealand after completing the measurement model with Finnish data (Model C) gave the most promising results. Consequently, using knowledge on between country measurement qualities may improve the imputation results, but this benefit comes with a downside since it simultaneously reduces the amount of data used for imputation. None of the imputation models leads to the same statistical inferences about covariances between latent constructs than as the original full data, however.

Considering multiple imputation, the present exploratory study suggests that there are several concerns and issues that should be taken into account when planning CCCSs (or split questionnaire or sub-sampling designs). Even if there are several advantages available for well-implemented CCCS designs such as shorter questionnaires and improved response rates, these concerns lead us to question the appropriateness of the CCCS approach in general, due to the need to impute across the samples.

The combination of cross-country and cross-survey approaches is novel to international marketing, and it is not known how the different procedures utilized in imputation affect the results and their validity and reliability. The authors demonstrate the consequences of the various imputation strategy choices taken by using a real example of a two-country sample. The exploration may have significant implications to international marketing researchers and the paper offers stimulus for further research in the area.

This chapter discusses the main challenges in higher education comparative research, focusing on cross-national forms of comparison and presenting examples from European research. The first part stresses the importance of constructing concepts which can travel across countries. This part identifies the different vertical levels of comparison involved in higher education cross-national research, discussing how the need for exploring general patterns in higher education (e.g. globalisation and Europeanisation) is confronted with the importance of taking into account the diversity within the particular cases (e.g. institutional and individual experiences). The second part focuses on the equivalence of meaning in large-N (in particular, the Eurostudent and REFLEX datasets) and small-N studies, identifying the respective limits of the two forms of comparison. The chapter contends that comparative research in higher education could benefit from more collaboration between small-N qualitative comparativists and experts of large-N studies used in European policy-making.

This paper aims to investigate the cultural variability in assessing the severity of a service failure.

Two separate studies were conducted. The first investigates differences in the perception of service failures across two cultural pools of subjects (allocentrics versus idiocentrics) and within a same country. The second contrasts two levels of comparisons: a cross-cultural values’ level and a cross-country level, to assess differences in the perception service failures’ severity.

Results showed that cultural values differences, when investigated at the individual level (i.e. idiocentrism versus allocentrism) are more significant to understand the influence of culture on the perception of severity, that is, allocentrics perceive more severity in the service failure than idiocentrics. However, a cross-country comparison (i.e. USA versus Puerto Rico) does not show significant differences.

Customers may assess, with different sensitivities, the severity of a service failure. These differences are mainly explained by differences in cultural values’ orientations but not differences across countries. Even originating from a same country, customers could perceive with different degrees the seriousness of a same service failure as they may cling to different cultural values. Hence, it is increasingly important to examine the cultural differences at the individual-level rather than a country level.

Firms serving international markets as well as multiethnic ones would have advantage to understand cultural differences in the perception of the severity at the individual level rather than at the societal or country level. This is more helpful to direct appropriate service recovery strategies to customers who may have higher sensitivity to the service failure.

Little is known about the effect of culture on the severity evaluation, although investigating cross-cultural differences in the assessment of severity is relevant to understand whether offenses are perceived more seriously in one culture than another and then if these offenses will potentially arise confrontational behaviors or not.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a comprehensive cross-national comparative framework to compare open data policies from different countries and to derive lessons for developing open data policies. Open data policies guide the opening and stimulate the usage of public data. However, some countries have no or less developed open data policies, in this way missing the opportunity to reap the benefits of open data.

Literature review and case studies were conducted to extend an existing comparison framework, and the framework was used to compare open data policies of the UK, the USA, The Netherlands, Kenya and Indonesia.

The comparison of open data policies highlighted several lessons that can be learned, including actions regarding a robust legal framework, generic operational policies, data providers and data users, data quality, designated agencies or taskforces and initiatives and incentives for stimulating demand for data. National policies should also be focused on removing barriers on the operational level and policies for stimulating the release and use of data.

There is hardly any research systematically comparing open data policies. The comparative framework provided in this paper is a first analytical basis for cross-national comparison of open data policies and offers possibilities for systematic cross-national lesson-drawing.

The authors found two waves of policy-making. The first wave of policy is focused on stimulating the release of data, whereas the second wave of policy is aimed at stimulating use. The comparison can be used to learn from other policies and help to improve open data policies. A third wave of open data policy is expected to materialize focusing on realizing added value from utilizing open data.

Improving a country’s open data policy can help the country to reap the benefits of open data, such as government transparency, efficiency and economic growth.

Open data are a recent phenomenon and countries are looking for ways to obtain the benefits. This research can be used for developing and evaluating open data policies.

The issue of export instability exerts an enduring fascination for economists with an interest in the area of economic development. Over several decades a voluminous literature has emerged embracing debates on the domestic consequences and on the causes of export instability. The purpose here is to examine these debates and an attempt is made to set out different theoretical stances, to classify and examine empirical findings, and to indicate the directions in which the debates have moved. Such a statement of a review article's purpose is, of course, incomplete without more specific delineation of the boundaries within which the general objectives are pursued. Here that delineation has three facets.

The purpose of this work is to explore what determines a country’s entrepreneurial environment attractiveness, by understanding how countries compare regarding their business environment and entrepreneurial opportunities and whether such aspects have changed over time.

Through a longitudinal country-level cluster analysis of business environments (years 2001 and 2016), this study captures changes in classification of both emerging and developed market economies throughout an attractiveness spectrum, from least to most attractive environments.

Interesting findings involve the difference in trajectories of emerging economies, such as India compared to the stagnation of Brazil, Argentina and South Korea in the 15-year period. The paper seeks to contribute to the debate on the attractiveness of the entrepreneurial environment beyond the simple notion of most and least economically developed countries by providing a framework for dynamic cross-country analysis of entrepreneurial environmental attractiveness that can be further explored, tested and expanded.

Main limitations relate to the non-exhaustive sample of countries and variables. Contributions are both academic and managerial: helping to fill important research gaps in international entrepreneurship, namely, environmental conditions, cross-country comparisons (Coombs et al., 2009) and the understanding of elements of the investment climate (Stern, 2002); and assisting managers, entrepreneurs and policymakers understand what defines a country’s entrepreneurial environment attractiveness to better evaluate potential locations for investment.

The originality of the paper lies in using cluster analysis in a longitudinal study of country attractiveness, as well as in advancing the debate of country attractiveness, by adding a temporal dimension (from factors that are less structural to more conjunctural) and a comparative dimension in a new cross-country comparison framework of analysis.

The purpose of this research is to take into consideration the country effect in online and offline environments and compares price levels and dispersion online v. offline across the two largest Continental European markets, thus adding a new dimension in price comparisons and multichannel pricing strategies.

Based on an empirical analysis of data collected in one product category (CDs), our findings for France and Germany show that price levels ‐including shipping costs – are always higher online than offline in each country and price dispersion is persistent across markets. Calculating mean prices for the two countries, ANOVA tests reveal significant differences among the two sets of data. Using standard deviation as the measurement for price dispersion, Levene statistics reveal a higher degree of online price dispersion than offline and statistically significant differences between the two sample countries.

Even if our approach need to be extended to more product categories and more countries, our article may be interesting for practitioners, policy makers and managers. It clearly shows that the “frictionless capitalism and cost transparency hypothesis” has proven to be wrong most of the time even if many retailers still believe they must sacrifice the possibility of pricing up when they go on the internet. As demonstrated by our findings, retailers can take advantage of online relative indifference to price to capture some margin premium and enjoy excellent results.

Our results also demonstrate that, even if results show some similarities and common trends, differences among France and Germany still remain important. As a consequence, marketers should continue to approach the European marketplace with full awareness of its diversity.