Firm entry through e-commerce in the U.S. agricultural input distribution industry

2003 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 123-133 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas Kalaitzandonakes ◽  
James Kaufman ◽  
Xinghe Wang
Keyword(s):  
Theoretical Model ◽  
Supply Chains ◽  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
End Users ◽  
Firm Entry ◽  
Input Distribution ◽  
The Us ◽  
Input Markets ◽  
Agricultural Input ◽  
The U.S

US agricultural input supply chains have been chronically burdened with excess inventories and inefficient coordination. In the late 1990s, new e-commerce firms sought to streamline the chain by efficiently connecting end-users with upstream suppliers while displacing incumbent intermediaries. Despite promising conditions, e-commerce entrants have been only marginally successful in the US agricultural input markets while incumbents have remained firmly in place. In this paper, we develop a theoretical model to examine the conditions under which e-commerce firms could enter and disintermediate agricultural input markets. We then evaluate these conditions against empirical evidence for the 1998-2000 period — when most e-commerce firm entry occurred in the US-and provide an explanation for the apparent failure of many of the early entrants.

Problems of the US Economic Policy

2013 ◽  
pp. 129-143
Author(s):  
V. Klinov
Keyword(s):  
Economic Policy ◽  
Real Estate ◽  
Full Employment ◽  
Tax Rates ◽  
Equitable Distribution ◽  
Investment Rate ◽  
The Us ◽  
Budget Systems ◽  
Enterprise Activity ◽  
The U.S

How to provide for full employment and equitable distribution of incomes and wealth are the keenest issues of the U.S. society. The Democratic and the Republican Parties have elaborated opposing views on economic policy, though both parties are certain that the problems may be resolved through the reform of the federal tax and budget systems. Globalization demands to increase incentives for labor and enterprise activity and for savings to secure proper investment rate. Tax rates for labor and enterprise incomes are to be low, but tax rates for consumption, real estate and land should be progressive.

Palestine Unbound

2018 ◽  
Vol 47 (3) ◽  
pp. 130-134
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Task Force ◽  
The United States ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Tel Aviv ◽  
The Us ◽  
Intention To Move ◽  
Arab Israeli Conflict ◽  
The U.S

This section, updated regularly on the blog Palestine Square, covers popular conversations related to the Palestinians and the Arab-Israeli conflict during the quarter 16 November 2017 to 15 February 2018: #JerusalemIstheCapitalofPalestine went viral after U.S. president Donald Trump recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and announced his intention to move the U.S. embassy there from Tel Aviv. The arrest of Palestinian teenager Ahed Tamimi for slapping an Israeli soldier also prompted a viral campaign under the hashtag #FreeAhed. A smaller campaign protested the exclusion of Palestinian human rights from the agenda of the annual Creating Change conference organized by the US-based National LGBTQ Task Force in Washington. And, UNRWA publicized its emergency funding appeal, following the decision of the United States to slash funding to the organization, with the hashtag #DignityIsPriceless.

Meddling in the Ballot Box

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dov H. Levin
Keyword(s):  
Statistical Analysis ◽  
Theoretical Model ◽  
Preliminary Analysis ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
Archival Research ◽  
Micro Level ◽  
Election Results ◽  
Level Analysis ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Scholarly Attention

This book examines why partisan electoral interventions occur as well as their effects on the election results in countries in which the great powers intervened. A new dataset shows that the U.S. and the USSR/Russia have intervened in one out of every nine elections between 1946 and 2000 in other countries in order to help or hinder one of the candidates or parties; the Russian intervention in the 2016 U.S. elections is just the latest example. Nevertheless, electoral interventions receive scant scholarly attention. This book develops a new theoretical model to answer both questions. It argues that electoral interventions are usually “inside jobs,” occurring only if a significant domestic actor within the target wants it. Likewise, electoral interventions won’t happen unless the intervening country fears its interests are endangered by another significant party or candidate with very different and inflexible preferences. As for the effects it argues that such meddling usually gives a significant boost to the preferred side, with overt interventions being more effective than covert ones in this regard. However, unlike in later elections, electoral interventions in founding elections usually harm the aided side. A multi-method framework is used in order to study these questions, including in-depth archival research into six cases in which the U.S. seriously considered intervening, the statistical analysis of the aforementioned dataset (PEIG), and a micro-level analysis of election surveys from three intervention cases. It also includes a preliminary analysis of the Russian intervention in the 2016 U.S. elections and the cyber-future of such meddling in general.

scholarly journals An Exploratory Study of Research Data Governance in the U.S.

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 122-142
Author(s):  
Inna Kouper ◽  
Anjanette H Raymond ◽  
Stacey Giroux
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Exploratory Study ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Science And Society ◽  
Data Governance ◽  
Knowledge Commons ◽  
Multiple Voices ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Commons ◽  
The U.S

AbstractMaking decisions regarding data and the overall credibility of research constitutes research data governance. In this paper, we present results of an exploratory study of the stakeholders of research data governance. The study was conducted among individuals who work in academic and research institutions in the US, with the goal of understanding what entities are perceived as making decisions regarding data and who researchers believe should be responsible for governing research data. Our results show that there is considerable diversity and complexity across stakeholders, both in terms of who they are and their ideas about data governance. To account for this diversity, we propose to frame research data governance in the context of polycentric governance of a knowledge commons. We argue that approaching research data from the commons perspective will allow for a governance framework that can balance the goals of science and society, allow us to shift the discussion toward protection from enclosure and knowledge resilience, and help to ensure that multiple voices are included in all levels of decision-making.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document