The pricing of audit and non-audit services in a regulated environment: a longitudinal study of the UK life insurance industry

This paper studies the relationship between audit and non-audit service fees paid to the statutory auditor by UK life insurance firms, utilising an extensive panel data sample set for the period 1999-2009. Consistent with a knowledge spill over (impairment of independence) hypothesis, we predict and find that audit fees are positively (negatively) associated with actuarial (tax service) fees. Additionally, our results indicate that regulatory changes enforced after 2004 deterred UK life insurance firms from purchasing non-audit services that are perceived to impair auditor independence. Finally, we find evidence concerning the inter-temporal determination of audit fees

Firm performance, corporate governance and executive compensation in Pakistan

yesThis study examines the effects of firm performance and corporate governance on chief executive officer (CEO) compensation in an emerging market, Pakistan. Using a more robust Generalized Method of Moments (GMM) estimation approach for a sample of non-financial firms listed at Karachi Stock Exchange (KSE) over the period 2005 to 2012, we find that both current and previous year accounting performance has positive influence on CEO compensation. However, stock market performance does not appear to have a positive impact on executive compensation. We further find that ownership concentration is positively related with CEO compensation, indicating some kind of collusion between management and largest shareholder to get personal benefits. Inconsistent with agency theory, CEO duality appears to have a negative influence, while board size and board independence have no convincing relationship with CEO compensation, indicating board ineffectiveness in reducing CEO entrenchment. The results of dynamic GMM model suggest that CEO pay is highly persistent and takes time to adjust to long-run equilibrium

Alternatives Assessment Frameworks: Research Needs for the Informed Substitution of Hazardous Chemicals

BACKGROUND: Given increasing pressures for hazardous chemical replacement, there is growing interest in alternatives assessment to avoid substituting a toxic chemical with another of equal or greater concern. Alternatives assessment is a process for identifying, comparing, and selecting safer alternatives to chemicals of concern (including those used in materials, processes, or technologies) on the basis of their hazards, performance, and economic viability. OBJECTIVES: The purposes of this substantive review of alternatives assessment frameworks are to identify consistencies and differences in methods and to outline needs for research and collaboration to advance science policy practice. METHODS: This review compares methods used in six core components of these frameworks: hazard assessment, exposure characterization, life-cycle impacts, technical feasibility evaluation, economic feasibility assessment, and decision making. Alternatives assessment frameworks published from 1990 to 2014 were included. RESULTS: Twenty frameworks were reviewed. The frameworks were consistent in terms of general process steps, but some differences were identified in the end points addressed. Methodological gaps were identified in the exposure characterization, life-cycle assessment, and decision–analysis components. Methods for addressing data gaps remain an issue. DISCUSSION: Greater consistency in methods and evaluation metrics is needed but with sufficient flexibility to allow the process to be adapted to different decision contexts. CONCLUSION: Although alternatives assessment is becoming an important science policy field, there is a need for increased cross-disciplinary collaboration to refine methodologies in support of the informed substitution and design of safer chemicals, materials, and products. Case studies can provide concrete lessons to improve alternatives assessment. CITATION: Jacobs MM, Malloy TF, Tickner JA, Edwards S. 2016. Alternatives assessment frameworks: research needs for the informed substitution of hazardous chemicals. Environ Health Perspect 124:265–280; http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.140958

How Should National Governing Bodies of Sport Be Governed in the UK? An Exploratory Study of Board Structure

Manuscript Type: Empirical Research Question/Issue: This study explores the most appropriate board structure for national governing bodies (NGBs) of sport in the UK. Sports are a very important aspect of UK society, involving a significant number of participants and spectators, occupying a key role in furthering the nation's health, and, at the elite level, a source of considerable national pride. From a governance perspective, NGBs of sport are non‐profit organizations, managing both professional and amateur sports, and administering the allocation of considerable amounts of funds, especially public funds. The study was motivated by a renewed interest, not least from government, in ensuring NGBs had an appropriate structure to ensure optimal decision‐making for their stakeholders. Research Findings/Insights: We interviewed 22 senior administrators involved in sports in the UK. Our interviews sought to ascertain their views on the appropriateness of applying a number of key board reforms, currently seen as good practice, to NGBs of sport. The overall consensus is as follows: (1) NGBs should reform the composition of their boards to better reflect business demands; (2) board size should be in the range of five to 12 members; (3) NGBs should have different individuals occupying the positions of CEO and chairman; and (4) boards of NGBs should possess more non‐executive directors. Theoretical/Academic Implications: This research adds to our understanding of governance in non‐profit organizations generally and NGBs of sport in particular. Ascertaining the views of key administrators and advisors in sport provides a novel contribution to the governance in sport literature. Our findings allow us to develop a number of propositions capable of being examined further in subsequent research. Practitioner/Policy Implications: The results of this study feed into an important on‐going debate regarding the appropriate governance structure of sport NGBs in the UK. A key finding is that boards in NGBs should move away from being only representative, but should also include members with specific business expertise as well as a greater element of non‐executive monitoring