Search results

The purpose of this paper is to examine the suitability of free carbon calculators aimed at the agricultural industry, for use in greenhouse gas (GHG) emission benchmarking, using the European dairy industry as an example.

Carbon calculators which were claimed to be applicable to European dairy farms were identified and tested using six production scenarios based on data from real European farms supplemented using published literature. The resulting GHG emission estimates, together with estimates apportioned using three functional units, were then compared to determine the robustness of the benchmarking results.

It was found that although there was a degree of agreement between the seven identified carbon calculators in terms of benchmarking total farm emissions, once a suitable functional unit was applied little agreement remained. Tools often ranked farms in different orders, thereby calling into question the robustness of benchmarking in the studied sector.

The scenario-based approach taken has identified issues liable to result in a lack of benchmarking robustness within this sector; however, there remains considerable scope to evaluate these findings in the field, both within this sector and others in the agricultural industry.

The results suggest that there are significant hurdles to overcome if GHG emission benchmarking is to aid in driving forward the environmental performance of the dairy industry. In addition, eco-labelling foods based on GHG benchmarking may be of questionable value.

At a time when environmental benchmarking is of increasing importance, this paper seeks to evaluate its applicability to sectors in which there is considerable scope for variation in the results obtained.

This paper aims to assess agri-environment (AE) scheme options on cultivated agricultural land in England for their impact on agricultural greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. It considers both absolute emissions reduction and reduction incorporating yield decrease and potential production displacement. Similarities with Ecological Focus Areas (EFAs) introduced in 2015 as part of the post-2014 Common Agricultural Policy reform, and their potential impact, are considered.

A life-cycle analysis approach derives GHG emissions for 18 key representative options. Meta-modelling is used to account for spatial environmental variables (annual precipitation, soil type and erosion risk), supplementing the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change methodology.

Most options achieve an absolute reduction in GHG emissions compared to an existing arable crop baseline but at the expense of removing land from production, risking production displacement. Soil and water protection options designed to reduce soil erosion and nitrate leaching decrease GHG emissions without loss of crop yield. Undersown spring cereals support decreased inputs and emissions per unit of crop yield. The most valuable AE options identified are included in the proposed EFAs, although lower priority is afforded to some.

Recommendations are made where applicable to modify option management prescriptions and to further reduce GHG emissions.

This research is relevant and of value to land managers and policy makers. A dichotomous key summarises AE option prioritisation and supports GHG mitigation on cultivated land in England. The results are also applicable to other European countries.

In order to achieve reductions in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, it is essential that all industry sectors have the appropriate knowledge and tools to contribute. This includes agriculture, which is considered to contribute about a third of emissions globally. This paper reports on one such tool: IMPACCT: Integrated Management oPtions for Agricultural Climate Change miTigation. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

IMPACCT focuses on GHGs, carbon sequestration and associated mitigation options. However, it also attempts to include information on economic and other environmental impacts in order to provide a more holistic perspective. The model identifies mitigation options, likely economic impacts and any synergies and trade-offs with other environmental objectives. The model has been applied on 22 case study farms in seven Member States.

The tool presents some useful concepts for developing carbon calculators in the future. It has highlighted that calculators need to evolve from simply calculating emissions to identifying cost-effective and integrated emissions reduction options.

IMPACCT has potential to become an effective means of provided targeted guidance, as part of a broader knowledge transfer programme based on an integrated suite of guidance, tools and advice delivered via different media.

IMPACCT is a new model that demonstrates how to take a more integrated approach to mitigating GHGs on farms across Europe. It is a holistic carbon calculator that presents mitigation options in the context other environmental and economic objectives in the search for more sustainable methods of food production.

By examining the impact of product innovation on abnormal financial returns following the launch of new products, this study aims to test the explanatory power of a new compound measure of product innovativeness (Ganbaatar and Douglas, 2019).

It is a longitudinal study in which the authors used the compound product innovativeness score (CPIS) for the first time to measure product innovativeness. The abnormal financial returns are estimated through the event study design, where four different models are used. Artificial neural network analysis is done to determine the impact of the CPIS on abnormal returns by utilising a hexic polynomial regression model.

The authors find effect sizes that substantially exceed practically significant levels and that the CPIS explain 65% of the variance in the firm’s abnormal returns in market valuation. Moreover, new-to-the-market novelty predicts 83% of the variation, while new-to-the-firm (catch-up) innovation insignificantly impacts firm value.

This paper demonstrates how the CPIS, an objective and direct measure of product innovativeness, can be used to gain more insight into the innovation effect.

Implications for the business practice of this study include the necessity of relentless innovation by firms in contested differentiated markets, particularly where technological advance is ongoing. Larger and mature firms must practice corporate entrepreneurship to renew their products on a continuous basis to avoid slipping backwards in their markets. Innovation leadership, rather than following the leader, is also important to increase competitive advantage, given the result that innovation followship does not produce abnormal financial returns.

In this study, the authors focused on the effect of product innovativeness on firm performance. While the literature affirms a positive relationship between innovation and firm performance, the effect size of this relationship varies, due largely to the authors contend to simplistic measures of innovativeness. In this study, the authors adopt the relatively novel “compound” measure of product innovativeness (Ganbaatar and Douglas, 2019) to better encapsulate the nuances of both technical novelty and market novelty. This measure of product innovativeness is applicable to firms of all sizes but is more easily applied to entrepreneurial new ventures and SMEs, and it avoids the shortcomings of prior firm-level and subjective measures of innovativeness for both smaller and larger firms. Using a more effective analytical method (Artificial Neural Network), the authors investigated whether there is a “practically” significant effect size due to product innovation, which could be valuable for entrepreneurs in practice. The authors show that the CPIS measure can very effectively explain abnormalities in the stock market, exhibiting a moderate effect size and explaining 65% of the variation in abnormal returns.

Prati, Douglas, Ferris, Ammeter, and Buckley (2003) have proposed that emotional intelligence is a critical component in effective team leadership and team outcomes. John Antonakis (2003) questioned whether the first claim in this article, that emotional intelligence is critical for effective team leadership, is justified. He presents six questions that illuminate his reservations. In response, the present authors attempt to answer his reservations by clarifying and explicating the reasoning behind this claim.

We review past research on the relationship between attributional perceptions, emotions, and workplace aggression and develop a conceptual model that extends this research in two ways. First, we consider the influence of controllability attributions on the type (otherdirected, self-directed, hostile, non-hostile) and likelihood of aggressive responses to negative workplace outcomes and situations. Second, we consider the extent to which discrete negative emotions might mediate these attribution-aggression relationships. Implications for anticipating and preventing workplace aggression based on this conceptual model are discussed.

The Management Committee meeting, due to be held on 18th December, has perforce had to be postponed until after the journal has gone to press, and will now take place early in January. This is due to the sudden indisposition of Mr. Douglas Anderson, Vice‐Chairman of the Institute and Chairman of the Educational Sub‐Committee. Mr. Anderson is a key figure concerning the matters to be discussed at the meeting, particularly the Institute's Educational programme for 1980. Plans are now in hand so that if by any chance he is still unwell at the time the meeting is now due to be held, his views and all‐important advice on the major items of the agenda will be before Members at the appropriate time.

Violence against women and girls (VAWG) is a global policy issue with significant social, economic and personal consequences. The burden of VAWGs is distributed unequally, with rates of gender violence significantly higher in low- to middle-income countries of the Global South. Yet the bulk of global research on gender violence is based on the experiences of urban communities in high-income English-speaking countries mainly from the Global North. This body of research typically takes the experience of women from Anglophone countries as the norm from which to theorise and frame theories and research of gender-based violence. This chapter problematises theories that the privilege women in the Global North as the empirical referents of ‘everyday violence’ (Carrington et al., 2016). At the same time, however, it is important to resist homogenising the violence experienced by women across diverse societies in the Global South as oppressed subaltern Southern. This binary discourse exaggerates the differences and obfuscates the similarities of VAWG across Northern and Southern borders and reproduces images of women in the Global South as unfortunate victims of ‘other’ cultures (Durham, 2015; Narayan, 1997). This chapter contrasts three examples, the policing of family violence in Indigenous communities in Australia; Image-based Abuse in Singapore; and the policing of gender violence in the Pacific as a way of concretising the argument.