Search results

This chapter strives to evaluate the impact of tourist arrival on energy consumption, air pollution, gross domestic product (GDP), and foreign direct investment to suggest strategies for further tourism development. Relevant data from Taiwan are analyzed, entailing tourist arrivals, GDP, carbon dioxide emissions, energy consumption, and capital investment. It tests four hypotheses using the Augmented Dickey-Fuller single root test, the Autoregressive Distributed Lag model, and time series econometrics of Granger causality. This study finds that tourist arrival is positively related to energy consumption and GDP, whereas it negatively relates to carbon dioxide emission and capital investment. In consideration of a negative relationship between tourist arrival and direct investment, this study suggests devising timely research agendas on carrying capacity and service quality in the mind of international tourists to see if additional investment in tourism infrastructures is needed.

Over the past 25 years as a marketing academic, I have been fortunate to have collaborated with various researchers and firms and have contributed to the advancement of the marketing field. This is a review article that tracks my progress through these years that has led me to explore different areas of marketing, thereby shaping me as a researcher and an academic. As I see now, all of my research work can be viewed from a decision-making point of view – decisions that marketers can make either at the market, brand/firm/store, or the customer level. These decisions have in turn been transformed into strategies or tactics leading up to successful implementations and improved bottom-line results. The development of strategies/tactics and successful implementations can be seen in nearly 10 areas of research that I have involved myself in. This article also highlights how my research studies have contributed and advanced the creation of knowledge in each of these research areas.

Knowledge transfer considers the company as a dynamic system dealing with different kinds of knowledge. As production becomes more knowledge-based, this increases the potential for capturing and taking advantage of knowledge. On the other side, these factors become more complex and difficulties increase for the effective transfer of knowledge across organizational boundaries.

Research on knowledge transfer has experienced substantial growth in the past 30 years and research on knowledge transfer is still increasing (Kumar & Ganesh, 2009). The literature argues quite unanimously that there is a positive link between knowledge sharing and competitive advantage. This is analyzed in several studies, but according to Dyer and Hatch (2006), this assumption has not been generally proven. In this chapter, we discuss the points of view from different contributions on this subject. In the empirical part of this chapter, we propose the idea that knowledge transfer is a way for organizations to be more competitive and implement changes essential to their survival. This is done by looking at five firms in the meat producing industry in different countries.

The global economic fallout following the unexpected onset and rapid spread of COVID-19 pandemic worldwide, in early 2020, has necessitated international and national action plans towards new normal models of realignment in enterprise bottom-line and management. In 2020, ‘Supporting Small Business through the COVID-19 Crisis’ was declared the lead theme of the MSME Day – June 27 – by the UN. A ‘COVID Response Alliance for Social Entrepreneurs’ was launched by an affiliate of the World Economic Forum (WEF). Drawing inspiration from the ‘small business’ focus of the UN MSME Day declaration and the ‘social entrepreneurship’ perspective of the WEF, the study seeks to draw few perceptions and conclusions in the post-COVID economic recovery context of India, where Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) are observed to be a key driver of development, thanks to an add-on supportive package in the wake of the COVID-19 economic crisis. It is found that the package fails to provide a direct push for promotion of social enterprises/entrepreneurship in the Indian MSME sector, as there is no focused policy approach on leveraging ‘entrepreneurship resources’. Hence, the general trend of the sector continues to be dominated by the ‘for-profit first’ concern rather than a fair blend of ‘social value creation first’, with ‘profit’. Discourse on social entrepreneurship and action-oriented rehabilitation tools proposed in the Covid context globally have failed to reorient the dominant outlook of social enterprises in India – business as a tool for achieving social impact – to social impact as a spontaneous/positive outcome from business. The study highlights the lapses on the ground, of theoretical formulations, despite their couching in Covid contexts, and the need for a more institutionalised enabling environment for social value creation, impact investment and social stock exchange in the social enterprise ecosystem.