44 research outputs found

    How Active is Your Fund Manager? A New Measure That Predicts Performance

    Get PDF
    Abstract We introduce a new measure of active portfolio management, Active Share, which represents the share of portfolio holdings that di¤er from the benchmark index holdings. We compute Active Share for domestic equity mutual funds from 1980 to 2003. We relate Active Share to fund characteristics such as size, expenses, and turnover in the cross-section, and we also examine its evolution over time. Active Share predicts fund performance: funds with the highest Active Share signi…cantly outperform their benchmarks, both before and after expenses, and they exhibit strong performance persistence. Non-index funds with the lowest Active Share underperform their benchmarks. JEL classi…cation: G10, G14, G20, G2

    Magna Carta, the Rule of Law and the Limits on Government

    Get PDF
    This paper surveys the legal tradition that links Magna Carta with the modern concepts of the rule of law and the limits on government. It documents that the original understanding of the rule of law included substantive commitments to individual freedom and limited government. Then, it attempts at explaining how and why such commitments were lost to a formalist interpretation of the rule of law from 1848 to 1939. The paper concludes by arguing how a revival of the substantive commitments of the rule of law is central in a project of reshaping modern states

    Metrics for optimising the multi-dimensional value of resources recovered from waste in a circular economy: A critical review

    Get PDF
    © 2017 The Authors - Established assessment methods focusing on resource recovery from waste within a circular economy context consider few or even a single domain/s of value, i.e. environmental, economic, social and technical domains. This partial approach often delivers misleading messages for policy- and decision-makers. It fails to accurately represent systems complexity, and obscures impacts, trade-offs and problem shifting that resource recovery processes or systems intended to promote circular economy may cause. Here, we challenge such partial approaches by critically reviewing the existing suite of environmental, economic, social and technical metrics that have been regularly observed and used in waste management and resource recovery systems' assessment studies, upstream and downstream of the point where waste is generated. We assess the potential of those metrics to evaluate ‘complex value’ of materials, components and products, i.e., the holistic sum of their environmental, economic, social and technical benefits and impacts across the system. Findings suggest that the way resource recovery systems are assessed and evaluated require simplicity, yet must retain a suitable minimum level of detail across all domains of value, which is pivotal for enabling sound decision-making processes. Criteria for defining a suitable set of metrics for assessing resource recovery from waste require them to be simple, transparent and easy to measure, and be both system- and stakeholder-specific. Future developments must focus on providing a framework for the selection of metrics that accurately describe (or at least reliably proxy for) benefits and impacts across all domains of value, enabling effective and transparent analysis of resource recovery form waste in circular economy systems.We gratefully acknowledge support of the UK Natural Environ-ment Research Council (NERC) and the UK Economic and SocialResearch Council (ESRC) who funded this work in the context of‘Complex Value Optimisation for Resource Recovery’(CVORR)project (Grant No. NE/L014149/1)

    Sustainability Risk Disclosure Practices of Listed Companies in Australia

    No full text
    This paper investigates the extent to which the top 100 ASX listed companies disclosed economic, environmental and social sustainability risk factors during the 2014/15 financial year in light of the changes introducing Recommendation 7.4 to the third edition of the Corporate Governance Principles and Recommendations in 2014. While all companies complied with the Recommendation, questions of substance over form were raised because some companies had risks that were not disclosed according to Recommendation 7.4. Our conclusion outlines how this research contributes to the growing literature on sustainability and corporate governance. We add to the continuing debate on mandatory versus voluntary disclosures, advocating that Australia may need to introduce mandatory guidelines, beyond the ASX, to regulate the disclosure of material economic, environmental and social risks. Additionally, we conclude that Recommendation 7.4 is unlikely to substantially change Australian corporate reporting and disclosure practices \u2013 that, for most companies, it is \u2018business as usual\u2019. However, under business as usual, we can naturally expect to see further increases in sustainability and alternative reporting frameworks, such as integrated reporting, as well as increasing use of the Internet to report and disclose sustainability risks
    corecore