Fluent Essays

Research elasticity information for two particular goods: one with an elastic demand and one with an inelastic demand. Using elasticity information you gather, predict changes in demand. The United States Department of Agriculture website has a good resource to help with this. Describe how marginal analysis, by avoiding sunk costs, leads to better pricing decisions. Explain the importance of opportunity costs to decision-making and how opportunity costs lead to trade. Evaluate how better business decisions can benefit not just the producer but the consumer and society as a whole. In your evaluation, contrast the deontology and consequentialism approaches to ethics.The IUP Journal of Managerial Economics, Vol. IX, No. 2, 201144 Paradox of Plenty, with Special Reference to Inelastic Demand for Apples Monika Jain* * Associate Professor, IILM College of Management Studies, 17 & 18 Knowledge Park, Greater Noida 201306, India. E-mail: [email protected] © 2011 IUP. All Rights Reserved. Paradox of plenty in agriculture implies that a bumper crop reaped by the farmers brings a smaller total income to them. The fall in the income or revenue of the farmer as a result of the bumper crop is due to the fact that with greater supply the prices of the crop decline drastically and in the context of inelastic demand for them, bring about fall in the income of the farmers. Thus, bumper crop, instead of raising their incomes, reduces them. The reason for this lies in the elasticity of demand for food stuff. The demand for food stuff is fairly inelastic. An increase in their supply tends to lower their price. The lower price does not increase the demand for it as per the law of demand or a normal price-demand relationship. Thus large harvest tends to bring low revenue to the farmers. Introduction The agricultural sector is a very unique sector because it is characterized by demand for and supply of the goods. The principal characteristics of demand are that it is both income and price inelastic, and it is highly dependent on population and their tastes and preferences, which cause demand to be static in both the short and long run. On the other hand, supply is highly volatile in the short run due to extraneous factors because supply is a biological process, though in the long run due to technological advances we tend to observe an increasing trend. Also, because agricultural products are perishable and their production time is long, supply will be inelastic, and so producers will have to supply in the short run even at very low prices. Another characteristic of supply is its atomistic structure and asset fixity. These basically imply that there are a large number of insignificant producers and most agricultural assets are fixed. These have various implications for prices which are very unstable in the short run and in the long run show a declining trend. Similarly, farm incomes tend to be unstable in the short run and converge in the long run, 45Paradox of Plenty, with Special Reference to Inelastic Demand for Apples though it must be noted that this is also due to extensive government subsidization of agriculture. In the short run, demand in the agricultural industry is affected by the fact that it is income inelastic because of Engel’s law that basically states that as income rises, the proportion of income spent on food falls. In other words, the income elasticity of demand for food lies between 0 and 1. At this point it must be noted that consumption is different from expenditure unless all goods have the same price. In other words, the money a consumer spends on food (i.e., expenditure) may increase, remain s1 7 Paper Title Author Institutional Affiliation Class Name Professor Date Title of Paper The introduction of the paper begins here. Include an introductory paragraph explaining the purpose of the paper, and provide a road map; list the headings to be discussed. For example, this essay will evaluate the sociocultural, technological, economic, environmental, and political-legal environment of Coca-Cola. Additionally, this paper distinguishes fragmented and consolidated industries and the corporation’s structure and culture of internal strengths and weaknesses. Do not use first person pronouns, unless requested, to complete the assignment. A paragraph is comprised of three or more sentences. Do not begin sentences with numbers in numerical format, and do not use contractions in academic writing. Level One The syllabus poses several questions and/or topics for essays, which should have level one headings. A paragraph will follow each heading; do not apply a level one heading then a level two heading without a paragraph between explaining the next heading’s topic. Level two headings are necessary if you delve further into subcategories of a topic. For instance, if your syllabus requests you to discuss the socio-cultural environment of Coca-Cola, you may include the following level two headings: beliefs, values, and norms. Format the conclusion heading as a level one heading. Level Two Double-space throughout the paper, including the title page, body of the document, and references (see Figure 1). The body of the essay begins on a new page. The title of the paper (capitalize first letter of each word) is centered on the first line in bold. The introduction begins on the line following the paper title. Do not skip lines. Figure 1 Level Two Headings are used to organize the document and reflect the relative importance of sections. For example, many empirical research articles utilize Methods, Results, and Discussion as level one headings. In turn, the Method section often has subheadings (level two headings) of Participants, Apparatus, and Procedure. Main headings (level one headings) are centered and boldface with uppercase and lowercase letters (e.g., Methods of Research, Results). Subheadings (level two headings) use flush left, boldface, uppercase and lowercase letters (e.g., Study Participants, Apparatus). Further headings have their own specific format. If more specific headings (Level Three and so forth) are needed, view this post on headings on the APA Style Blog 7th edition. Level One Source material must be documented in the body of the paper by citing the author(s) and date of the sources. This is to give proper credit to the ideas and words of others. The reader can obtain the full source citation from the list of references that follows the body of the paper. When the names of the authors of a source are part of the formal structure of the sentence, the year of the publication appears in parenthesis fResearch Article A Quantitative Method to Delineate the Influence Area of Work Zone Considering Route Choice Inertia and Elastic Demand Guanfeng Wang ,1 Hongfei Jia ,1 Jingjing Tian ,1 Yu Lin ,2 Ruiyi Wu ,1 Zhendong Liu ,1 and Heyao Gao 1 1College of Transportation, Jilin University, Changchun 130022, China 2Faculty of Maritime and Transportation, Ningbo University, Ningbo 315211, China Correspondence should be addressed to Hongfei Jia; [email protected] Received 3 December 2021; Accepted 22 March 2022; Published 20 April 2022 Academic Editor: Lina Kattan Copyright © 2022 Guanfeng Wang et al. +is is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. +e work zone on the urban road network will affect the surrounding road traffic. To represent the influence area of the work zone, the concept of a subnetwork is proposed in this paper. Delineating a suitable subnetwork quantitatively is a challenging problem. To address this issue, the node synthesized indexes (NSI) are deployed as a variability measure that captures both the change of link flow and origin-destination (OD) demand. +e inertia-based stochastic user equilibrium with the elastic demand (ISUEED) model is proposed to accurately provide the data of link flow and OD demand for the network with the work zone. Corre- spondingly, the data of the network without a work zone can be obtained by the stochastic user equilibrium (SUE) model. According to the value of NSI, the initial range of the subnetwork is determined. Finally, the connectivity and compactness can be guaranteed by the modified L-shell algorithm. To demonstrate the performance of the method, two case studies and sensitivity analyses are conducted based on the Braess network and the local road network in Changchun, China. +e proposed method is beneficial to reduce the complexity of the traffic model by substituting the entire network with a subnetwork. 1. Introduction +e long-term presence of a work zone will cause two thorny issues for the traffic network, which are as follows: con- gestion and safety problems [1]. It induces link saturation and causes the accident rate surrounding the work zone to increase noteworthily [2]. Especially, for urban areas with a high road network density, the effects are even more pro- found. Hence, traffic agencies usually implement a series of traffic adjustment measures around the work zone, so that the deterioration of road network performance does not exceed the acceptable threshold. Generally speaking, the network performance will be better as the application scope of traffic adjustment measures expands. However, it is not desirable in terms of sustainability and economy. +erefore, to achieve a trade-off between the application effect and expenditure of the measures, the sub- network should be delineated appropriately. UnfortunatelTHE PROBLEMS AND PROMISE OF ENTREPRENEURIAL PARTNERSHIPS: DECISION-MAKING, OVERCONFIDENCE, AND LEARNING IN FOUNDING TEAMS JOHN S. CHEN University of Florida DANIEL W. ELFENBEIN Washington University in St. Louis HART E. POSEN University of Wisconsin–Madison MING ZHU WANG Washington University in St. Louis How should decision-making be organized in entrepreneurial teams when founders exhibit confidence biases? New ventures are commonly founded by teams of entrepre- neurs, who must employ a decision-making structure that implicitly or explicitly defines how individual beliefs are aggregated into team decisions. We consider this issue through the lens of organizational economics, which focuses on decision-making governance. Using a computational model, we consider three archetypal decision-making structures: partnership voting, a boss with employees, and a buyout option (partnership convertible to boss structure). We highlight the conditions under which partnership voting is an effec- tive means of governing market entry and exit decisions when teams’ decision-making is informed by efforts to learn about the merits of uncertain opportunities. The promise of partnership voting is realized when entrepreneurs are either unbiased or optimistic about their likelihood of success. Partnership voting is problematic when entrepreneurs differ in their biases or respond too rapidly to new information, in which case a buyout option is better. From a policy perspective, we show that confidence biases may be man- aged by selectively matching the decision-making structure to entrepreneurs’ biases, and that doing so may substantially improve the performance of new ventures. When a new venture is founded by a team of entre- preneurs, how should they organize decision-making? A founding team must employ a decision-making structure that implicitly or explicitly defines how individuals’ beliefs about, for instance, market entry and exit are aggregated into team decisions. Should the founders be voting partners, jointly responsible for critical decisions, or should one of the founders be the boss? How should the decision-making structure change when the founders exhibit confi- dence biases? Although it has long been known that new ventures are frequently founded by teams (e.g., Cooper, Woo, & Dunkelberg, 1989), the question of how decision-making should be organized remains largely unaddressed in the extant literature, which has instead focused on issues such as team formation, composition, and affect.1 To shed light on these Equal coauthors listed in alphabetical order. We thank Alphonso Gambardella, Tarek Ghani, Lamar Pierce, Eric Van Den Steen, seminar participants at the Bocconi Uni- versity, the University of Minnesota, conference partici- pants at the Strategy Science, AOM, and SMS 2019, and Associate Editor Joseph Mahoney for their helpful insights in developing this paper. 1 For recent reviews of these bodies of research, see the following: process of