Investor preferences for positive social externalities and state-owned enterprises’ facilitated access to capital

State-ownership of commercial companies exists around the world, and it is important to understand its effect on financing and investment decisions. Empirically, firms that are partially state-owned (SOE) usually profit from easier access to capital. We propose a novel explanation for this: investors’ social preferences can affect capital allocation if SOEs are perceived as socially beneficial. In support of this we found that people attribute social benefits more to SOEs than to private firms, and their propensity to invest depends on this attitude. Further, in an incentivized modified stochastic public goods game, participants invested in risky options with positive externalities even when the aggregate of private return and externality was lower than the return of an investment option with only private returns. For the case of the EU, we discuss alternative explanations such as state guarantees and political lending in the light of regulations of state aid. We conclude that even if these regulations prohibit direct or indirect state aid for SOEs, state-ownership can affect capital allocation through investors’ social preferences.     

A Subjective Spin on Roulette Wheels

We provide a simple behavioral definition of ‘subjective mixture’ of acts for a large class of (not necessarily expected‐utility) preferences. Subjective mixtures enjoy the same algebraic properties as the ‘objective mixtures’ used to great advantage in the decision setting introduced by Anscombe and Aumann (1963). This makes it possible to formulate mixture‐space axioms in a fully subjective setting. For illustration, we present simple subjective axiomatizations of some models of choice under uncertainty, including Bewley's model of choice with incomplete preferences (2002).     

规模不经济下互惠偏好对闭环供应链的影响研究

本文考虑闭环供应链成员的互惠偏好行为,在生产规模不经济下分析互惠偏好行为对闭环供应链的影响,构建了包含供应商和规模不经济生产商的闭环供应链模型,分别探讨了无互惠偏好情形以及双向互惠偏好情形。研究发现,规模不经济会降低回收率和系统利润;系统成员的互惠偏好行为总会提高对方的利润,而降低自身的利润;供应商的互惠偏好总会提高系统利润,渠道效率和消费者剩余,而生产商互惠偏好产生的影响还取决于供应商的互惠态度;仅生产商具互惠偏好时,系统总利润不变;一定条件下,互惠偏好行为会对环境造成影响,但是,该行为能够有效提高整个社会的总福利。     

Measuring the Benefit of Offering Auxiliary Services: Do Bag‐Checkers Differ in Their Sensitivities to Airline Itinerary Attributes?

When firms evaluate their service system design choices, there is typically more uncertainty surrounding the value that a particular auxiliary service provides than there is on the cost of providing that service. To help inform this decision, we propose an approach where we compare the relative value of the segment of passengers who use an auxiliary service to the relative value of the segment that does not use it. We demonstrate this approach for a typical auxiliary service common to the airline industry. In 2008, most US airlines implemented checked baggage fee policies to decrease their costs by reducing the number of customer service agents needed in the check‐in and baggage handling processes. The success of this change has led to a current debate at many of these airlines on whether to make further staffing cuts in these areas, essentially making it even less attractive for passengers to check their baggage. Our proposed methodology helps answer whether passengers who continue to check bags in today's baggage‐fee era are more or less valuable than passengers who do not check bags. We explore this question empirically by examining, through a stated preference survey, if a history of checking or not checking bags can be used to segment passengers based on how their itinerary choices are influenced by common airline service attributes (on‐time performance, itinerary time, number of connections, airfare, and schedule delay). Contrary to the opinions of some top airline executives, we find that the passengers who continue to check bags at airlines that charge baggage fees are generally less sensitive to differences in three of these important service attributes and are less likely to switch airlines when a competing airline improves its offerings along these dimensions. Thus, airlines that charge for checked bags should consider improving the customer experience for their bag‐checking passengers, as they represent a potentially more valuable segment class to the airline.