Search results

Authorship is the ultimate status of intellectual recognition in academic publishing. Although fairly robust guidelines have already been in place for a considerable amount of time regarding authorship criteria and credit, such as those by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors or Contributor Roles Taxonomy, the lack of reliable verification techniques hamper their accuracy, thereby reducing the validity of authorship claims in such statements. This paper aims to focus on the authorship status and responsibilities of co-first authors and co-corresponding authors.

To appreciate authorship responsibilities in this subset of authors, the broader academic authorship literature, as well as position statements, rules and guidelines, were consulted.

Academic publishing that relies on metrics is a global multi-billion-dollar business, so strict measures to assess and confirm authorship, which can be intellectually or financially “profitable” among academics that game such metrics, are needed. The current assessment is that there are inconsistent rules for equally credited authors such as co-first authors, co-corresponding authors and co-supervisors. In shared and collaborative authorship, there are also shared authorship-related responsibilities, but these are infrequently discussed, or tend to only be dealt with broadly.

Within the wider, and important, discussion about authorship, which is one of the most central issues in academic publishing, there has been a limited focus on equally credited authors such as co-first authors, co-corresponding authors and co-supervisors. This paper expands and fortifies that discussion.

The study attempts to examine the bias-adjusted financial and operational efficiency estimates of microfinance institutions (MFIs) operating in the Eastern Europe and Central Asia (ECA) region during the financial year 2017–2018. In addition, the study also identifies the responsible factors determining the financial and operational performances of MFIs operating in the ECA region.

The study employs two-stage bootstrap data envelopment analysis (DEA). In the first stage, the authors incorporate the bootstrap procedure in the DEA framework as suggested by Simar and Wilson (2000) to estimate the bias-corrected efficiency scores of 67 sample MFIs. In order to identify the drivers of efficiency level, the study deploys the bootstrap truncated regression model following the Simar and Wilson (2007) guidelines in the second stage of analysis.

The authors note from the empirical results that MFIs operating in the ECA region are relatively more financially efficient (0.588) than socially efficient (0.496). However, none of the MFIs were found to be operating at best-practice frontier while considering the bias-adjusted efficiency estimates. Further, the results of second stage of analysis confirm that corporate governance, that is, board size has positive and statistically significant impact on MFIs’ performances. In addition, the bad credit quality deteriorates both financial revenue and operational efficiency. Moreover, the MFIs’ size, profit status and debt-to-equity ratio were also found to be statistically significant to determine the operational and financial efficiency of MFIs in the ECA region.

The study provides the robust efficiency estimates and factors responsible to determine the financial and operational efficiency of MFIs operating in the ECA region. Further, the empirical results of the study provide the inputs and further direction to the policymakers, regulators, practitioners and managers in framing the policy and optimal operating strategies for ECA MFIs industry.

The study extends the DEA analysis by incorporating the bootstrap procedure in DEA model to estimate the bias-adjusted efficiency scores which are more reliable and robust. In addition, bootstrap truncated regression has been applied to identify the drivers of efficiency. Moreover, in the literature there is no single study which has deployed the double bootstrap DEA framework to examine the financial and operational efficiency estimates and its drivers.

The purpose of this paper is to compare the stringency of different types of public financing institutions' safeguard mechanisms in the financing of large dams in developing countries. It seeks to do so by examining: the institutional strategies and policies currently in place in a set of key public financing institutions; and project‐level case studies of dams financed by these institutions and the stringency with which existing policies are applied by the key financing institutions. It aims then to cite the key factors determining why the “safeguard‐performance” between these types of financing institutions differs and what the implications are for leaders working to effect improvements in these areas.

The study compares the safeguard mechanisms of two types of financing institutions by applying a set of benchmark criteria to both existing strategy and policy documents and to the actual application of those policies at the project level, through correspondence, interviews, and site visits.

The study argues that leaders may make a difference on improving the sustainability performance gap in the financing of large dams – with more difficulty in those cases where the current gap is mainly to be explained by “systemic” factors; and arguably with more ease in cases where the current gap is caused mostly by other factors.

The study leads to the above findings for the case of public financing institutions and large infrastructure projects (with a focus on dams). To make for greater generalisability of the findings, future research should complement this work by focusing on private financing institutions and on the financing of other types of projects.

Large infrastructure projects have massive social and environmental impacts, and public financial institutions have a large stake in determining the sustainability (or otherwise) of these projects. The paper seeks to help make large infrastructure investments more sustainable by providing guidance to leaders as to where and how sustainability aspects could best be integrated in financing decisions for these projects.

The value added lies in helping leaders define where sustainability efforts in large infrastructure finance are warranted – and where, conversely, they represent largely wasted efforts.

This study aims to identify project funding shortcomings in the existing literature and evaluate the financing channels accordingly.

This paper uses a structured literature review – a content analysis method. Then, the comparative analysis applied to data gathered from the content analysis.

To define the main research topics and establish a focus on hydroelectric power plant (HEPP) financing, a comprehensive structured literature review was conducted. According to the results of this study, there are three main categories of HEPP financing studies in the literature, namely, financing channels and products, factors that complicate financing and financing- risk relationship of HEPP projects. According to these findings, which criteria most affecting HEPP financing and which financing channel is the most suitable are determined.

Among all financing channels, only direct debt sources are selected.

This study is structured as a simple lender selection guide for HEPP investments. Selection criteria are applicable for both lenders and investors. For lenders, those criteria are expected to improve loan performance and optimize financial product selection. For investors, those criteria are expected to help choosing suitable products and improve revenues.

This study will contribute the researchers those intended to work on the topic.

This study will contribute to limited literature on HEPP financing. Project finance literature is limited and narrow even there is no study that investigates hydropower project finance sourcing. In this manner, this study can be considered as a pioneer.

In large parts of the world, income inequality has been rising in recent decades. Other regions have experienced declining trends in income inequality. This raises the question of which mechanisms underlie contrasting observed trends in income inequality around the globe. To address this research question in an empirical analysis at the aggregate level, we examine a global sample of 73 countries between 1981 and 2010, studying a broad set of drivers to investigate their interaction and influence on income inequality. Within this broad approach, we are interested in the heterogeneity of income inequality determinants across world regions and along the income distribution. Our findings indicate the existence of a small set of systematic drivers across the global sample of countries. Declining labour income shares and increasing imports from high-income countries significantly contribute to increasing income inequality, while taxation and imports from low-income countries exert countervailing effects. Our study reveals the region-specific impacts of technological change, financial globalisation, domestic financial deepening and public social spending. Most importantly, we do not find systematic evidence of education’s equalising effect across high- and low-income countries. Our results are largely robust to changing the underlying sources of income Ginis, but looking at different segments of income distribution reveals heterogeneous effects.

In the last four years, since Volume I of this Bibliography first appeared, there has been an explosion of literature in all the main functional areas of business. This wealth of material poses problems for the researcher in management studies — and, of course, for the librarian: uncovering what has been written in any one area is not an easy task. This volume aims to help the librarian and the researcher overcome some of the immediate problems of identification of material. It is an annotated bibliography of management, drawing on the wide variety of literature produced by MCB University Press. Over the last four years, MCB University Press has produced an extensive range of books and serial publications covering most of the established and many of the developing areas of management. This volume, in conjunction with Volume I, provides a guide to all the material published so far.

This paper attempts to identify the problem areas and developmental issues attached to women's entrepreneurship related to small medium enterprises (SMEs) particularly in Addis Ababa, the capital city of Ethiopia. It also attempts to devise certain stratagems for ensuring women's entrepreneurial growth and SMEs' advancement in the region.

The study was conducted in two phases. The first phase attempted to identify the problem areas in terms of nature, needs, desire, motivations and problems of women entrepreneurs in Ethiopia by an extensive review of the existing literature. The second phase incorporated a ground survey and focused interviews with groups of female entrepreneurs for assessing the factors related to entrepreneurship. The data pertaining to these issues were collected using 90 personally administered “schedules” in eight areas in Addis Ababa on the basis of stratified sampling. Basic level statistical analysis was performed using SPSS statistical package.

The focused interview identified problems in the areas of securing finances for establishing and running SMEs, lack of entrepreneurial and management competence and exposure, problems in finding the markets and distribution networks; limited opportunities for promotion and participation; limited amount of government and institutional support; absence of technological know‐how and integration mechanism; and rampant corruption in an undisguised or disguised form, as major bottlenecks.

The paper is one of the important studies taken in the context of women entrepreneurship in Ethiopia. No such studies have been undertaken in the past that assess the women entrepreneur in the context of overall SME development. Only a few exist but give more importance to microfinance and micro‐enterprises. So the paper is original in context as well as in research terms. Proper attention to the issues raised and recommendations made could give a significant boost to entrepreneurial activities in the region.

The aim of this paper is to better understand the good news coming from Africa and reflect on ideas discussed at the “Africa 2060: Good News from Africa” conference in April 2010 organized by Boston University's Frederick S. Pardee Center for the Study of the Longer‐Range Future.

Africa's performance over the last 50 years has been akin to a roller coaster ride of good news followed by bad news, with the bad news dominating. However since the dawn of the millennium Africa's outlook has increasingly become optimistic. As one looks at Africa's future, several questions emerge: which of these gains can be consolidated? Which of the positive trends will be sustained? Has this recent period of global attention provided the continent with a real institutional scaffolding on which a positive future can be built? And what needs to be done to ensure that the dangers of chronic poverty, conflict, and institutional collapse that still lurk in the shadows will be contained long enough that they eventually disappear?

The authors base their observations on the intense discussions during the conference by practitioners and experts and an engaged and informed audience, plus a broader reading of the literature, including that which was presented at the conference. These observations reflect a locus of expert and informed opinion and provide a window into the priorities that are engaging the imaginations of those thinking deep and hard about Africa's future. The authors distill seven key drivers that are of particular importance in shaping Africa's longer‐range future. Of course, all of these can operate in either a positive or a negative direction. It is the decisions that will be made by African and international policy‐makers, businesses, civic organizations, and citizens today that will determine which direction Africa will be “driven” towards tomorrow.

There are a number of exciting opportunities that await Africa in its future, but many of these also come with potential hurdles and pitfalls. Innovation, entrepreneurship, technology, knowledge, and globalization are among the areas that have generated significant good news to record from Africa. But within each of these areas there is also the potential and reality of bad news. The choice now lies with African citizens, decision makers and societies as to whether they are able to make the type of decisions that will control the negative tendencies of these drivers and accelerate the positive tendencies.