Search results

It is difficult to develop an overall picture of the practice of management accounting (MA) in farms and farm enterprises (FEs) because little research has been published on the topic, and these studies are mostly discrete and unconnected to the others. The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of the available research, develop an explanatory framework for MA practices in farming entities and identify some major avenues for future research on the topic.

This paper uses systematic literature review methods. After an extensive database search and an examination of references/citations, 41 empirical journal articles published between 1964 and 2016 are identified, described and analyzed in this research paper.

The findings reveal that the practice of MA in farms is subject to information problems and that the empirical research on this topic largely lacks a theoretical explanation. Therefore, the explanatory framework of MA practices in farming entities reveals that these practices are subject to influencing factors such as familism, government farm policies, market competition, technological changes, the seasons and the weather/climate.

The overall limited findings on the practice of MA in FEs indicate that caution should be taken when generalizing the current knowledge on the use of MA practices in other organizational forms to farming entities. Moreover, future research should draw on explicit theories to explain empirical results.

This paper is the first comprehensive literature review of studies on MA practices in farms and FEs.

The purpose of this paper is to empirically ascertain whether an ideological barrier to entry exists, preventing heterodox economists from publishing in mainstream journals.

The empirical results were obtained from a questionnaire asked of heterodox economists. The ten questions include where respondents submitted their research; their treatment by editors and referees; and whether an ideological barrier to publication exists.

The evidence overwhelmingly supports the existence of an ideological entry barrier. This barrier goes beyond the normal competitive nature of journal publishing, that is limited journal pages constricting the number of “good papers” that can be published, suggesting that there is an insidious ideological entry barrier preventing heterodox ideas from being published.

Based on this evidence, the last section proffers several research suggestions, including more sophisticated models predicting the likelihood of a heterodox economist submitting to a mainstream journal and the likelihood of acceptance. And, finally, several reforms are suggested including the adoption of a universal code of conduct for referees.

The purpose of the “Introduction” is to provide the motivation and context for the articles of this special issue and an overview and summary of the contributions that follow.

The paper provides an overview and summary of the contributions in the special issue.

It is argued that heterodoxies had gained a considerable and growing influence on research orientations, methodologies, and critical reflections, also on the mainstream publishing practices, even in the mainstream. This has been widely acknowledged as “hip heterodoxy” recently. Thus, many heterodox economists have developed optimistic expectations for the future of the profession. However, that influence has left the main mechanisms of reproduction of the mainstream untouched. These are mass teaching, public advising, journal policies, and faculty recruitment. Above that, the last decade has seen something like a “counterattack” to safeguard these mainstream reproduction mechanisms. The means used for this seem to be journal (and publisher) rankings based on purely quantitative citation measures and “impact factors”. These have an obvious cumulative “economies‐of‐scale” effect which triggers a tendency towards reinforcement and collective monopolization of the dominating orientation. Department rankings and individual faculty evaluations are then based on journals rankings. As a result, there are observable tendencies towards the cleansing of economics departments in a number of countries.

The paper also discusses potential reasons and methods for alternative approaches to measure citation interrelations, networks, cooperation, and rankings among heterodoxies (journals and departments), and for alternatives of publishing and the future of heterodoxies in general. Finally, it draws the picture of the present situation and the foreseeable future of heterodoxies as it emerges from the 11 contributions of the special issue.

This paper presents the remarkably edible landscape of Tilting, Fogo Island, Newfoundland. Tilting is a Cultural Landscape District (Historic Sites and Monuments Board) and a Registered Heritage District (Heritage Foundation of Newfoundland and Labrador). Tilting has outstanding extant examples of vernacular architecture relating to Newfoundland's inshore fishery, but Tilting was also a farming community despite its challenging sub-arctic climate and exposed North Atlantic coastal location. There was a delicate sustainable balance in all aspects of life and work in Tilting, as demonstrated through a resource-conserving inshore fishery and through finely tuned agricultural and animal husbandry practices. Tilting's landscape was “literally” edible in a way that is unusual for most rural North American communities today. Animals like cows, horses, sheep, goats, and chickens were free to roam and forage for food and fences were used to keep animals out of gardens and hay meadows. This paper documents this dynamic arrangement and situates local agricultural and animal husbandry practices in the context of other communities and regions in outport Newfoundland. It also describes the recent rural Newfoundland transition from a working landscape to a pleasure landscape.

IN addition to the completely separated air which may be trapped in a hydraulic system, air may also exist in close association with the fluid in either of two states, namely:

The purpose of this paper is to report the use of performance metrics among 121 Brazilian agribusiness companies, with the aim of helping accountants and academics to understand the actual use of performance metrics in non-integrated supply chains (SCs).

To identify which performance metrics are used among SC partners, four independent clusters representing specific SC roles (input suppliers, farmers, distributors, and retailers) were formed. Data relating to 49 performance metrics were collected by questionnaire and analyzed statistically to isolate common measures.

It was found among suppliers, farmers, distributors, and retailers that the performance metrics for return on investment, responsiveness, and response time to clients are not being used whereas customer satisfaction obtained a usage pattern in all roles in the four groups. Hence, it appears that customer satisfaction rather than financial sustainability is the driver for discussion between SC partners.

Although limited to a sample of firms within Brazil, the findings confirm evidence from similar SCs worldwide.

These findings suggest that the common metrics approach to measure SC performance may be very difficult to achieve in practice and other alternatives should be investigated by management accountants.

A predominance of customer satisfaction metrics to the exclusion of discussions on financial performance between partners in agri-food SC has implications for the sustainability of the industry and the ability of accountants and managers to negotiate when faced with increasing input costs.

This study contributes to the accountants’ understanding of how performance measurement works in fragmented SCs, whereas the majority of the literature is concerned with the integrated SCs.

This study aims to examine the process of informal learning of aviation instructors.

A qualitative instrumental case study design was used for this study. In‐depth, multiple semi‐structured interviews and document review were the primary approaches to data collection and the data were analyzed using constant comparative analysis. The Marsick, Watkins, Callahan, and Volpe reconceptualized model of informal and incidental learning underpinned this study.

Findings support prior research on the catalysts, strategies, and lessons learned that are associated with informal learning. However, a key finding of this study was capturing the complexity of the informal learning process for aviation instructors as they faced the daily challenges associated with facilitating their students' learning which served as the catalyst for their learning.

The findings of this study are not intended to be generalizable to populations beyond this specific study due to limitations associated with the site selection, purposeful sample selection criteria, and sample size. Additionally, the unique nature of the aviation field and temporal considerations prevent the generalizability of the results of this study.

Despite the growing base of research on informal learning, calls for research that continues to examine how certain characteristics of workers and their work environment influence informal learning, and research that provides more holistic understandings of this type of learning have been requested. This research responds to these calls by exploring the process of informal learning among aviation instructors. The catalysts for informal learning, the strategies used, and lessons learned are identified. More importantly, unlike previous research, the complexity of the process of informal learning is captured and illustrated as a cyclical, non‐linear, non‐sequential process that is highly intertwined with teaching in this aviation context. The careful documentation of the actual learning process provides thick, rich data to deepen our understanding of what this kind of learning actually looks like.

This study aims to take a whole-of-chain perspective to explore how entrepreneurial orientation (EO) influences collaborative performance in agri-food value-chains through enhancing the acquisition of knowledge.

Data were collected through a survey of 233 actors, including farmers, intermediaries and retailers in one beef cattle value-chain in the Central Highlands, Vietnam. Structural equation modeling was used to test hypotheses.

The actors’ level of EO within a value-chain is positively associated with collaborative performance within the beef value-chain. Additionally, knowledge acquisition partially mediates the relationship between EO and collaborative performance.

Generalizability is limited because of sampling constraints.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study of EO from a whole-of-chain perspective in agri-food value-chains in an emerging economy and has implications for policymakers and agri-food marketers.