Carman G. Blough\u27s contributions to accounting: An overview

A focus on the years of Carman G. Blough\u27s life in which he made significant contributions to the accounting profession

Carman G. Blough: A personal profile

The only time I met Carman G. Blough was March 29, 1979, in Bridgewater, Virginia. Two months before, I telephoned him to arrange the meeting for I was beginning work on my dissertation noting the contributions of Blough. I felt the intervening time would be adequate to organize the dissertation and to formulate questions. However, as I began studying Mr. Blough\u27s writings, I found myself overpowered by the breadth and depth of his experiences. From 1935 to 1961 Blough held a series of important positions, each demanding unique skills and abilities. Starting with his appointment as Chief Accountant (1935-1938) to his appointment as Director of Research (1944-1961), Blough was constantly faced with developing the functions and duties of a new or rapidly developing office. In each case, with a minimum of guidance, he was not only successful in developing policies to meet current needs but also established concepts that are still being followed

PRODUCTION OF HIGH LEVELS OF TRANSGENC FACTOR IX WITHOUT GENE RESCUE, AND ITS THERAPEUTIC USES

A non-human transgenic mammalian animal, as described above, contains an exogenous double stranded DNA sequence stably integrated into the genome of the animal, which comprises cis-acting regulatory units operably linked to a DNA sequence encoding human FIX protein without the benefit of the presence of a complete milk gene sequence for gene rescue, and a signal sequence is active in directing newly expressed Factor IX into the milk of the animal at levels in an unactivated form that is suitable for Subsequent processing for therapeutic applications in treating Hemophilia B. The transgenic mammals are preferably pigs, cows, sheep, goats and rabbits. The applications include milk derivatives for oral delivery and oral tolerization in the treatment of Hemophilia B

The Proposed U.S.-South Korea Free Trade Agreement (KORUS FTA): Provisions and Implications

[Excerpt] On June 30, 2007, U.S. and South Korean trade officials signed the proposed U.S.-South Korean Free Trade Agreement (KORUS FTA) for their respective countries. If approved, the KORUS FTA would be the second-largest FTA that South Korea has signed to date, after the agreement with the European Union (EU). It would be the second-largest (next to North American Free Trade Agreement, NAFTA) in which the United States participates. South Korea is the seventhlargest trading partner of the United States and the United States is South Korea’s third-largest trading partner. Various studies conclude that the agreement would increase bilateral trade and investment flows. The final text of the proposed KORUS FTA covers a wide range of trade and investment issues and, therefore, could have substantial economic implications for both the United States and South Korea. The agreement will not enter into force unless Congress approves implementation legislation. The negotiations were conducted under the trade promotion authority (TPA), also called fast-track trade authority, that Congress granted the President under the Bipartisan Trade Promotion Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-210). Under TPA the President has the discretion on when to submit the implementing legislation to Congress. President Bush did not submit the legislation because of differences with the Democratic leadership over treatment of autos and beef, among other issues. Early in his Administration, President Obama indicated the need to resolve those issues before he would submit the implementing legislation. On December 3, 2010, after a series of arduous negotiations and missed deadlines, President Obama and President Lee announced that their negotiators reached agreement on modifications in the KORUS FTA, and that they were prepared to move ahead to getting the agreement approved by the respective legislatures. The White House is expected to send implementing legislation to the 112th Congress and that it would like to see Congress approve the agreement by July 1 of this year. The modifications are in the form of changes in phase-out periods for tariffs on autos, a new safeguard provision on autos, and concessions by South Korea on allowing a larger number of U.S. cars into South Korea under U.S. safety standards than was the case under the original KORUS FTA provisions. The issue of full U.S. beef access was not resolved because of the political sensitivity of the issue in South Korea. In 2008, when President Lee reached a separate agreement with the United States to lift South Korea’s ban on U.S. beef imports, massive anti-South Korean government protests forced the two governments to renegotiate its terms. The U.S. beef sector has largely supported the KORUS FTA. A broad swath of the U.S. business community supports the KORUS FTA . With the modifications in the agreement reached in December, this group also includes the three Detroit-based auto manufacturers and the United Auto Workers (UAW) union. It still faces opposition from some labor unions and other groups, including Public Citizen. Many U.S. supporters view passage of the KORUS FTA as important to secure new opportunities in the South Korean market, while opponents claim that the KORUS FTA does not go far enough to break down South Korean trade barriers or that the agreement will encourage U.S. companies to move their production offshore at the expense of U.S. workers. Other observers have suggested the outcome of the KORUS FTA could have implications for the U.S.-South Korean alliance as a whole, as well as on U.S. Asia policy and U.S. trade policy, particularly in light of an FTA signed in by South Korea and the EU that is expected to go into effect on July 1, 2011

The EU-South Korea Free Trade Agreement and Its Implications for the United States

[Excerpt] On October 6,2010, the 27 member European Union (EU) and South Korea signed a bilateral free trade agreement (FTA). The agreement is expected to go into effect on July 1, 2011, pending approval by the European Parliament and the South Korean National Assembly. If enacted, the South Korea-EU FTA (KOREU FTA) would be the largest FTA in terms of market size that South Korea has entered into. The KOREU FTA reflects the EU and South Korean trade strategies to use FTAs to strengthen economic ties outside their home regions. It also builds upon the surge in trade and investment flows between South Korea and the EU over the past decade. This agreement has possible implications for U.S. trade with South Korea and congressional action on the proposed U.S.-South Korea FTA (KORUS FTA). The proposed KOREU FTA is very comprehensive. It would reduce and eliminate tariffs and other trade barriers in manufactured goods, agricultural products and services and would also cover such trade-related activities as government procurement, intellectual property rights, labor rights and environmental issues. Most studies done on the potential impact of the KOREU FTA estimate that the agreement will have a small but positive effect on the economies of the EU and South Korea as a whole and that the larger relative impact would be on the South Korean economy. The greatest economic impact of the KOREU FTA would be on specific sectors in each economy. EU services providers would be expected to experience gains from the agreement, especially in the areas of retail and wholesale trade, transportation services, financial services, and business services. In terms of trade in goods, EU exporters of pharmaceuticals, auto parts, industrial machinery, electronics parts, and some agricultural goods and processed foods would be expected to gain from the KOREU FTA\u27s implementation. At the same time, South Korean manufacturers of cars, ships, wireless telecommunications devices, chemical products, and imaging equipment would be expected to increase their exports to the EU market. The KOREU FTA is similar to the proposed KORUS FTA in many respects. Both agreements are comprehensive and both would eliminate tariffs on most trade in goods soon after they enter into force. However, they differ in other respects. Phase-out periods for tariffs on some manufactured goods differ. In addition, the KOREU FTA does not cover foreign direct investment. Unlike the KORUS FTA, the KOREU FTA would not allow trade sanctions to be applied where violations of the workers\u27 rights, and environment provisions have been deemed to occur. In addition, the KORUS FTA would cover a broader range of trade in services than would the KOREU FTA. It is not clear whether these differences in the structures of the FTAs would result in appreciable differences in outcomes in terms of economic gains and losses. U.S. and European firms are close competitors in a number of sectors and industries, particularly autos. Some business representatives argue that enactment of the KOREU FTA before enactment of the KORUS FTA would give European competitors commercial first mover advantages, since EU firms, such as those in the auto industry or the services sector, could gain greater market opportunities in South Korea not afforded to US. firms. On the other hand, other factors could also mitigate such advantages. For example, U.S. multinational firms operating in the EU could benefit from the KOREU FTA. Nevertheless, the content and fate of the KOREU FTA could influence the pace and tone of any debate in the United States on the KORUS FTA in the 112th Congress

Guide to writing a biographical analysis

The maturing of a profession begins with recognizing the contributions of pioneers who have laid the theoretical foundation on which the profession is based. In recent years, the accounting profession has begun documenting the contributions of accountants who have played a major role in developing generally accepted accounting principles. These writings on the contributions of noted accountants have been helpful in understanding the personal behavior of the individual accountants and the economic forces that influenced their decisions. However, methods used to analyze the individuals being researched have varied greatly and to some extent have not been as complete as might be hoped. Reasons for this wide range of form and style are varied, but to a large degree have resulted from a lack of knowledge regarding the organizing and writing of a biographical analysis. This is to be expected because the study of accounting history is, for the most part, in its initial stages of development. The objectives of this paper are to give guidance on how to select an accountant to analyze and how to organize the research effort

Guest editorial: Mindfulness and relational systems in organizations: enabling content, context and process

©2024 Emerald Publishing Limited. This manuscript version is made available under the Creative Commons Attribution–NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY–NC 4.0) license, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/fi=vertaisarvioitu|en=peerReviewed

Deletion of the trpc4 gene and its role in simple and complex strategic learning

The TRPC4 ion channel is expressed extensively in corticolimbic and a subpopulation of midbrain dopamine neurons. While TRPC4 knockout (KO) rats exhibit reduced sociability and social exploration, little is known about the role of TRPC4 in motivation and learning. To identify a function for TRPC4 channels in learning processes  we tested TRPC4 KO and normal wild type (WT) rats. TRPC4 KO and WT rats exhibited no differences in Y-­maze learning or simple discrimination learning. Furthermore, on a more complex serial reversal shift task designed  to assess strategic learning where the reward and non-­reward cues were repeatedly reversed between training sessions both TRPC4 KO and WT rats   performed equally well. Finally, we found no   performance differences when using a conditional reversal shift task where a tone signals the reversal of reward and non-reward cues within sessions. These data suggest that although TRPC4 channels may play a role in social interaction/anxiety  they exert a minimal role in simple and complex strategic learning

Home Ranges of Rat Snakes (Colubridae: Elaphe) in Different Habitats

Based on our findings, we suggest that rat snakes represent not only a major predator of kites, but also of other canopy and mid-story nesting species in the southeastern United States. For example, rat snakes are the most dominant snake nest predator of bird nests throughout the Southeast (DeGregorio et al. 2014) and are skilled tree climbers that often occupy arboreal habitats (Jackson 1976, Keller and Heske 2000, Sperry et al. 2009), particularly in bottomland forests (Mullin et al. 2000, Carfagno and Weatherhead 2009). Thus, the role of rat snakes as predators of nests above the understory is likely underappreciated because of the paucity of information on causes of failure among mid-story and canopy nest