Search results

This paper examines the determinants of corporate dividend policy in Jordan. The study uses a firm‐level panel data set of all publicly traded firms on the Amman Stock Exchange between 1989 and 2000. The study develops eight research hypotheses, which are used to represent the main theories of corporate dividends. A general‐to‐specific modeling approach is used to choose between the competing hypotheses. The study examines the determinants of the amount of dividends using Tobit specifications. The results suggest that the proportion of stocks held by insiders and state ownership significantly affect the amount of dividends paid. Size, age, and profitability of the firm seem to be determinant factors of corporate dividend policy in Jordan. The findings provide strong support for the agency costs hypothesis and are broadly consistent with the pecking order hypothesis. The results provide no support for the signaling hypothesis.

Millions of the British people have for some years now been struggling valiantly to live with hard times, watching them day by day grow worse but always hopefully that the cloud had a silver lining; that one day, reason and a sense of direction would prevail. Tyranny in many forms is a feature of history; the greatest epics have been risings of ordinary people to overthrow it. The modern form of tyranny is that of Money; the cruel and sinister ways in which it can be obtained and employed and the ineffectiveness of any measures taken to control the evils which result. Money savings over the years and the proverbial bank book, once the sure safeguard of ordinary people, are whittled away in value, never to recover. Causes always seemed to be contained within the country's own economy and industrial practices, and to this extent should have been possible of control. The complex and elaborate systems constructed by the last Government were at least intended for the purpose, but each attempt to curb excessive demands for more money, more and more for doing less and less— the nucleus of inflation—produced extreme reactions, termed collectively “industrial strife”. Every demand met without compensatory returns in increased work, inevitably led to rises in prices, felt most keenly in the field of food and consumer goods. What else would be expected from such a situation?

Kent County Council. Report of the Public Analyst for the quarter ended 31st December, 1946 and for certain data relating to the whole year 1946.

The British catering industry has its roots in the hospices and inns of very early times which provided food and shelter for the traveller. Much later, in the industrial era, when it became necessary to control the sale of intoxicating liquors, a dichotomy separated the industry into drinking and associated entertainments—the licensed or public house—and the eating houses. The latter have always provided for those whose circumstances and occupation force them to “eat out”. The influence of food rationing in the two wars was important and they have grown tremendously in recent years with the vast numbers of people who now travel long distances to work.

Factors which influence consumer spending, among the most sought after in any field of market research, things people buy and why, is valuable data on which much industrial planning, advertising techniques and marketing is based, but in no other field of trade is consumer preference so closely related to pure economics, i.e., value received in money terms, as in food. With most other commodities, from clothes to cars, hair‐do's to houses, factors affecting consumer choice have different results; appearance, aesthetic quality and neighbourly competition, all play a part, though appearance in a few foods is not entirely without significance, e.g., white bread. Present high levels of consumer spending are said by politicians to be a danger to the country's economy; a more prosaic thought would be that Government spending, or squandering, constituted the greater threat. In the main, factors which influence household food expenditure are essentially down to earth—palatability, digestibility, keeping quality and how far a food will go in the preparation of meals, its value in money terms. The king‐pin in all market research on food must be the woman of the house; it is her laying out of the household purse that determines the amount of food expenditure and the varieties purchased week by week. A housewife's choice, however, is a complex of her family's likes and dislikes, rarely her own, and also determined by the amount allocated from her purse for this part of the household budget and the number of mouths she has to feed. Any tendency to experiment, to extend the variety of food, is only possible with a well‐filled purse; with a large family, a common complaint is of monotony in the diet. A factor of immense importance nowadays is whether the housewife is employed or not, and whether whole‐time or part‐time, and which part of the day she can be in her own home. To this may be attributed, as much as anything, the rise in consumption of convenience foods. Fortunately for the purposes of reasonable accuracy in the results of enquiries, housewives form a class, reliable and steady, unlikely to be contaminated by the palsied opinions of the so‐called lunatic fringe in this unquiet age. Any differences in food choice are likely to be regional, and settled dietary habits, passed on from one generation to another. Statistics from the National Food Surveys show the extent of these, and also consumer preferences as far as food commodity groups are concerned. The Surveys have been running long enough to show something of consumer trends but, of course, they do not exhibit reasons—why consumers buy and use certain foods, their attitudes to food marketing practices, and, in particular, to advertising. Advertising claims, misleading undoubtedly but within the law, have long been a source of controversy between those who worship at the shrine of truth and others less particular. Elsewhere, we review a special study of consumer reactions to aspects of the grocery trade in the U.S.A., and note that 32 per cent do not accept advertisements as being true, but 85 per cent find them interesting and informative. Advertising practices are probably subject to less statutory control in the United States than here, and the descriptions and verbiage certainly reach greater heights of absurdity, but the British housewife is likely to be no more discerning, able “to read between the lines”, than her counterpart in that country. A major difference, however, is that in Britain, more houswives prepare and cook meals for their families than in the United States. The greatest importance of advertising is in the introductory phase of a commodity; new and more vigorous advertising is necessary later to delay the onset of the decline phase of the commodity's life cycle; to ensure that sales can be maintained to prevent rises in supply costs. Advertising helps considerably in the acceptance of a branded food, but housewives tend to ignore cut‐throat competition between rival brands, and what weans a consumer from a brand is not competition in advertising, nor even new and more attractive presentation, but reduction in real price. The main pre‐occupation of the woman of the house is food adequacy, and especially that her children will have what she considers conforms to a nutritious diet, without argument or rebellion on the part of her progeny and without distinction. She knows that bulk foods, carbohydrates, are not necessarily nutritious, although her ideas of which foods contain vitamins or minerals or other important nutrient factors tends to be hazy. She does not pretend to enjoy shopping for food and therefore tends to follow a routine; it saves time and worry. Especially is this so with young married women, who may have to take small children along. Each housewife has her own mental standard of assessing “value”, and would have difficulty in defining it. Nutritional value forms part of it, however, in most women, who connote their food provision with health. The greatest concern is not necessarily positive health, but prevention or reduction of obesity, which is seen among adult members of the family, especially growing girls, as an adverse effect on their appearance, and the types of clothes they can wear. A few of the more intelligent families have an indefinable fear of ischaemic heart disease and its relation to food. When they take positive steps to control the diet for these purposes, they are quite frequently in the wrong direction and rather confused even when this is done on medical advice.

This article provides an introduction and assessment of the English and Spanish literatures on gender relations in disaster contexts. We analyze regional patterns of differences and similarities in women’s disaster experiences and the differing research questions raised by these patterns in the scholarly and practice‐based literature. The analysis supports the claim that how gender is theorized makes a difference in public policy and practical approaches to disaster risk management. We propose new directions in the field of disaster social science and contribute a current bibliography in the emerging gender and disaster field.

The outbreak of typhoid fever which had been traced to a “carrier” of the fever germs may be given as a reason for the following note on the regulations relating to the manufacture of ice cream. This brief re‐statement of the regulations will serve to indicate the nature of the control exercised by the health authorities over a widely spread trade. It need hardly be pointed out that cream in the usually accepted sense of that term or its substitute containing a certain proportion of milk powder or skim milk is peculiarly liable to act as an agent in the dissemination of certain types of disease. “New regulations, the “Ice Cream (Heat Treatment) Regulations, 1946,” at present in draft, but operative from May 1st, 1947, deal with the sterilisation of the raw material and the retail sale in the finished and frozen state. Registration of premises, inspection by the local authority, combined with the goodwill of the trade, are obvious safeguards. The term “ice cream” possibly suggests to the average consumer a frozen mixture of cream—as that word is usually understood to mean—flavoured with the fresh juice or fresh‐fruit pulp of the name fruit. Such a mixture, if made from wholesome materials under hygienic conditions, would be a good, palatable luxury, and from the nature of the case seasonal. Most of us at some December midnight have had something called strawberry ice. The name stands, but the composition is rather a matter for speculation by the uninitiated. The term “cream” has been for many years applied to substances which though wholesome in themselves are not cream—vegetable fats, milk powder and the like—but they form the basis, so to speak, either in whole or in part of ice cream. There is in fact no official standard to define what is meant by ice cream, and the definition which we have ventured to offer must obviously be extended to apply to a large number of substances that do not of necessity consist either partly, still less wholly, of cream or of any substance whose origin is to be found in fruit of any kind. Ice cream, in fact, is a substance whose composition it seems may vary within wide and undefined limits. Thus the Ice Cream (Prohibition of the Manufacture and Sales) Order, 1942, says “‘Ice cream’ includes water ices.” The Ice Cream Transport Order (No. 305, March 22nd, 1945), prohibiting the export of ice cream to Great Britain from Northern Ireland, says: “Ice cream includes water ices and any article, whether frozen or chilled, and under whatever description it is sold, which is sufficiently similar to ice cream as to constitute a substitute for ice cream.” The statements just quoted seem to imply that ice cream may be made of almost anything as long as price, temperature and taste suit the requirements of the consumer. However, our concern is less to do with its composition as with regulations that have to do with the hygienic requirements of its manufacture. It may be pointed out that as things stand at present registration relates to premises and not to persons employed therein. Anyone can be employed in an ice cream factory, as he can be employed in any other kind of food factory. The matter of engaging him is left to the heads of the factory. They, as commonsense business people, with the interests of their business at heart, are not likely to engage anyone who is at sight obviously unfitted for the job. On the other hand, habits and health, especially the latter, become of peculiar importance when such a substance as ice cream is the object of manufacture. To make regulations as to the registration and inspection of premises, is one thing. It is not too easy to enforce such regulations. In the case of persons it is more delicate and difficult. If the offence be of habit it can be readily detected and dealt with. If of health, it becomes a matter for the Medical Officer of Health and his professional colleagues. Under Section 14 of the Food and Drugs Act, 1938, which came into force on October 1st, 1939, all premises in which ice cream is sold, manufactured, or stored must be registered with the local authority. The purpose for which registration is sought—sale, storage, or manufacture—must be stated, and also the nature of other business, if any, that may be carried on on the premises. If the premises appear to the local authority to be unsuitable, registration may be refused, or, if previously granted, may be cancelled. Notice of the refusal to register, or to cancel registration, must be served on the applicant or tenant of the premises by the local authority, giving reasons for the act, and the applicant or tenant may then, if he wishes, request the local authority to show cause, for the reasons given by them, why they should refuse to register or wish to cancel registration.” It need hardly be pointed out that the sole reason for registration is to enable the local authority to satisfy themselves that hygienic conditions are complied with, such as cleanliness, light, ventilation, adequate water supply and sanitation in general. Though the conditions may be complied with there is still the more serious danger that may arise from “milk‐borne diseases,” a danger that is admittedly peculiarly acute when such a substance as ice cream is the subject of manufacture or storage. The Medical Officer of Health must therefore be informed by the manufacturer if any milk‐borne disease has occurred among persons living or working in or about the premises. We may hazard the guess that it may not always be easy for the manufacturer to obtain such certain knowledge. “Milk‐borne disease” means enteric fever (including typhoid or paratyphoid), dysentery, diphtheria, scarlet fever, acute inflammation of the throat, gastro‐enteritis, and undulant fever—a formidable list—and any other disease that may be declared milk‐borne by the Minister of Health. With the best will in the world on the part of everybody concerned the enforcement of this Order, and there can be obviously no half measures in doing so, presents difficulties that can only be adequately appreciated and discussed by medical practitioners who are conversant with the nature of the disease in general and with the particular conditions that led to its occurrence. Apart, however, from its purely medical aspect, and if we consider the manufacturer we find that if he has done his duty in this respect he may have his business brought to a standstill, or at least a part or even the whole of his stock destroyed. The Medical Officer of Health is very rightly empowered, in the interests of public health, which override all other considerations, to prohibit the use for human consumption of any substance likely to convey milk‐borne disease and to order either its removal or its destruction. Compensation can be paid to the manufacturer if the Medical Officer of Health, after further enquiry, be satisfied that the suspected substance is not injurious. His notice for destruction or removal must then be withdrawn. On the other hand, compensation will not be paid if the suspected substance was actually injurious, or was made on the premises while the order of the Medical Officer was still in force. If a person feels aggrieved by the decision of the local authority he may appeal to a court of summary jurisdiction. Any change in the occupation of registered premises must be notified to the local authority by the ingoing tenant if he intends to use such premises for the purpose for which they were registered. If at the commencement of the Act of 1938 a local Act was in force dealing with the conditions for registration of premises it may remain in force unless the Minister, at the request of the local authority, declares the 1938 Act, 14 (1), to be in place of it. The use of unregistered premises renders the offender liable to a fine not exceeding £20, and for a second offence a maximum penalty of £100 and for three months imprisonment. Every street seller of ice cream must have his name and address on the barrow or container. It may be added that hotels, clubs and inns are exempt from registration, and theatres, music halls and the like are also exempt unless they manufacture ice cream on the premises. The Order of 1942 prohibited the manufacture of ice cream in catering establishments or in institutions, meaning by these terms premises previously authorised to do so by licence from the Ministry of Food or by a Food Control Committee. Institutions or households were exempt from this Order if the ice cream manufactured was to be consumed on the premises. This Order was rescinded by an Order of November 16th, 1944, and manufacture was resumed from that date. This was certainly not due to any marked increase in the milk supply. The trade demand was and is at least in part met by a permitted substitute.

The United States (US) sugar program protects domestic sugar farmers from unrestricted imports of heavily-subsidized global sugar. Sugar-using firms (SUFs) criticize that program for causing US sugar prices to be higher than world sugar prices. This study examines the financial performance of publicly traded SUFs to determine if they are performing at an economic disadvantage in terms of accounting profitability, risk and economic profitability compared to other industries.

Firm-level financial accounting and market data from 2010 to 2019 were utilized to construct financial metrics for publicly traded SUFs, agribusinesses and general US firms. These financial metrics were analyzed to determine how SUFs compare to their agribusiness peer group and general US companies. The comprehensive financial analysis in this study covers: (1) accounting profit rates, (2) drivers of profitability, (3) economic profit rates, (4) trend analysis and (5) peer comparisons. Quantile regression analysis and Wilcoxon–Mann–Whitney statistics are employed for statistical comparisons.

Regarding various profitability and risk measures, SUFs outperform their agribusiness peers and the general benchmark of all US firms in terms of accounting profit rates, risk levels and economic profit rates. Furthermore, compared to other US industries using the 17 French and Fama classifications, SUFs have the highest return on investment and economic profit rate―measured by the Economic Value Added® margin―and the second-lowest opportunity cost of capital, measured by the weighted average cost of capital.

This study finds nothing to suggest that the US sugar program hinders the financial success of SUFs, contrary to recent claims by sugar-using firms. Notably in this analysis is the evaluation of economic profit rates and a series of robustness techniques.