Suchergebnisse

chapter 1 Institutional challenges for China's business reforms in a globalized econom -- chapter 2 Industrial restructuring and corporate governance in China's large-scale state-owned enterprises -- chapter 3 Regional comparative analysis of China's banking system -- chapter 4 Solving agency problems in a cross-border environment -- chapter 5 Foreign banks-market entry and foreign investment -- chapter 6 Accounting for intangible assets and the relevance of financial statements in developed and emerging capital markets: Australia and China -- chapter 7 Changing structure of Chinese enterprises and human resource management practices in China -- chapter 8 The management of human resources in Shanghai -- chapter 9 SECTION THREE -- chapter 10 Pension reform in China: imperatives, constraints and outcomes -- chapter 11 Globalization and occupational health and safety regulation in China -- chapter 12 SECTION FOUR -- chapter 13 Raw entrepreneurship and the rise of the new private sector in western China.

AbstractThis article tests for hysteresis by applying panel data unit root tests to quarterly unemployment rates for Australian states and territories between 1982:2 and 2002:1. Panel tests proposed by Levin and Lin (1992) using ordinary least squares and O'Connell (1998) using feasible generalised least squares (which assume that under the alternative hypothesis of stationarity, all labour markets revert to the natural rate at the same speed) provide evidence in support of the natural rate hypothesis. However, the panel test proposed by Im, Pesaran and Shin (1997), which does not assume that all cross‐sectional units converge towards the equilibrium value at the same speed under the alternative and is therefore less restrictive than the other two panel tests, finds evidence of hysteresis. Given the advantages of the Im et al. (1997) test over the other two panel tests the results can be interpreted as being consistent with the existence of hysteresis in unemployment

This article examines the role of a judge's social background & the role of the leadership of the chief justice in explaining variations in dissent rates on the High Court of Australia between 1903 & 1975. It is of interest for students of comparative judicial politics because it is the first study to consider whether many of the factors used to explain variations in dissent rates for the United States Supreme Court are applicable to courts outside the US. The study finds that Latham's period as chief justice had a statistically significant negative effect on the dissent rate, while there is mixed support for the hypotheses linking dissent rates to judges' social background. 3 Tables, 2 Figures. Adapted from the source document.

This article examines voting patterns in two sub‐periods of the Latham Court (1935‐1940 and 1940‐1950), where voting is defined as a decision (and associated judgements) by the Justices participating in the disposition of a particular case. There are two main findings. First, from 1935 to 1940 there was a clear four‐Justice core consisting of Justices Sir George Rich, Sir Owen Dixon, Herbert Vere Evatt and Sir Edward McTiernan. Over this period, both Chief Justice Sir John Latham and Justice Sir Hayden Starke were outside the core. Second, with the retirement of Justice Evatt, and appointment of Justice Sir Dudley Williams in 1940, the decision‐making structure of the Court changed. From 1940 to 1950 there was a loose five‐Justice core consisting of Chief Justice Latham, Justices Rich, Dixon, McTiernan and Williams with Justice Starke on the outside. The article argues that observed voting patterns can be explained in terms of personal relationships and ideological differences between the Justices.

This article examines voting patterns in two subperiods of the Latham Court (1935-1940 & 1940-1950), where voting is defined as a decision (& associated judgments) by the justices participating in the disposition of a particular case. There are two findings. First, from 1935 to 1940, there was a clear four-justice core consisting of Justices Sir George Rich, Sir Owen Dixon, Herbert Vere Evatt, & Sir Edward McTiernan. Over this period, both Chief Justice Sir John Latham & Justice Sir Hayden Starke were outside the core. Second, with the retirement of Justice Evatt, & appointment of Justice Sir Dudley Williams in 1940, the decision-making structure of the Court changed. From 1940 to 1950, there was a loose five-justice core consisting of Chief Justice Latham & Justices Rich, Dixon, McTiernan, & Williams, with Justice Starke on the outside. The article argues that observed voting patterns can be explained in terms of personal relationships & ideological differences between the justices. 8 Tables. Adapted from the source document.