Search results

Privatization continues to receive serious consideration at the federal, state, and local government levels. The most frequent reason cited for privatizing services is to reduce the size and cost of government. While many government entities have privatized services, it is often up to academic researchers to determine if the goals of privatization have been realized and to shed light on the organizational and service characteristics that make it more likely that the results of privatizing a particular service will be positive. This paper seeks to provide a background to those researchers interested in examining the privatization of government services. The paper reviews and synthesizes prior privatization research and discusses future research directions.

This research uses data from 2,470 not-for-profit-organizations (NFPOs) to examine the impact of organization size, risk, and complexity on monitoring costs in the NFP sector. OLS regression analysis indicate that monitoring costs are higher for (a) larger NFPOs, (b) NFPOs subject to the Single Audit Act, 8 NFPOs having larger amounts of assets tied up in receivables and inventories, (d) NFPOs spending a larger percentage of their expenses on program support services, and (e) NFPOs providing higher compensation to their officers and directors. In addition, some NFPOs such as schools and hospitals are associated with higher monitoring costs.

This paper investigates residential sanitation collection (RSC) pricing under two different service delivery arrangements: (1) the municipal RSC arrangement where municipal employees collect residential refuse, and (2) the contract RSC arrangement where private sector firms, under contract with a municipality, collect residential refuse. The results of the study indicate that municipal RSC prices are significantly higher than contract RSC prices. Furthermore, municipal RSC prices exhibit greater variability than contract RSC prices. These findings suggest that contract pricing is consistent with pricing in a competitive market.

This issue is a selected bibliography covering the subject of leadership.

Communications regarding this column should be addressed to Mrs. Cheney, Peabody Library School, Nashville, Tenn. 37203. Mrs. Cheney does not sell the books listed here. They are available through normal trade sources. Mrs. Cheney, being a member of the editorial board of Pierian Press, will not review Pierian Press reference books in this column. Descriptions of Pierian Press reference books will be included elsewhere in this publication.

It has often been said that a great part of the strength of Aslib lies in the fact that it brings together those whose experience has been gained in many widely differing fields but who have a common interest in the means by which information may be collected and disseminated to the greatest advantage. Lists of its members have, therefore, a more than ordinary value since they present, in miniature, a cross‐section of institutions and individuals who share this special interest.

We highlight key assumptions implicit in the models used by academics conducting research on market efficiency. Most notably, many academics assume that investors can borrow unlimited amounts and construct long-short portfolios at zero cost. We relax these assumptions and examine the attractiveness of long-short strategies as stand-alone investments and as a part of a diversified portfolio. Our analysis illustrates that the key benefit of long-short investing is adding diversification to a portfolio beyond what the market provides. We show that as stand-alone investments, nontrivial risk remains in the “hedge” strategies and that the returns generally do not beat the market in a head-to-head contest. Our findings raise questions about the degree of inefficiency in anomaly studies because plausible measures of costs generally offset strategy returns. The ability to achieve greater diversification may be, but is not necessarily, due to market inefficiency. We also highlight the key role of the generally ignored but critically important short interest rebate and show that absent this rebate, the long-short strategies we examine generally yield insignificant returns.

The United States government is the world's largest publisher. Its presses churn out thousands of items annually, covering every conceivable subject. Even though most of the items deal with present day concerns, the United States government is responsible for the publication of a large number of histories. Unfortunately, these works, with the possible exception of the Department of Defense's Military History Series, have received little exposure and limited use. In an effort to bring this valuable resource to light, the following bibliography presents annotated citations to nearly 150 histories published from mid‐1977 through mid‐1979.

A history of twentieth‐century censorship. Shakespeare's company staged the first production of The Merchant of Venice sometime between 30 July 1596 and 22 July 1598. From the day of that presentation, it is probable that the play has annoyed, perhaps even offended, many who have seen or read it, the source of the offense being the disparaging portrait of a major character, Shylock. On the stage for many years, there have been radically discrepant interpretations of the Jewish usurer. Since the day of Sir Henry Irving, actors and directors have often chosen to present Shylock in a way that transforms the role from that which Elizabethan playgoers may have seen and heard, or may have thought they had seen and heard, to the complex, ambivalent personality depicted in all productions since Irving first projected Shylock as a tragic hero.

States that there has been a recent explosion in the publication of reference works in the field of African American studies which indicates the mature field of scholarship being achieved in this area. Provides a bibliographic guide for those wishing to identify and use research tools for studying African American literature.