This special issue of the Journal of Benefit–Cost Analysis is dedicated to the memory of Jerry Ellig, a brilliant economist whose untimely death in 2021 cut short a productive and influential career in government and academia. Jerry was adept at applying economic concepts and empirical analysis to improve public policy, and he enjoyed not only studying real policy problems, but finding practical solutions to them. He was also a generous mentor, supporting and collaborating with graduate students and colleagues to publish prolifically in peer-reviewed economics, public administration, and political science journals, as well as law reviews and more popular outlets. He was a great communicator, able to take his academic work and translate it for different audiences, including through testimony, seminars, op-eds, short presentations, and classroom teaching. In addition to these immense talents, Jerry was genuinely kind and unpretentious; he wore Wal-Mart suits and garish ties. And he was laugh-out-loud funny, a master at diffusing difficult situations with a witty, but never mean, quip.

Prior research on status has focused primarily on the cognitive perspective, exploring the effects of status and offering a limited understanding of the impact of positive status change and its emotional mechanisms. This study draws upon the two-facet model of pride to examine how positive status change influences the behaviors of new status holders. Specifically, we propose that when status differentiation is low, positive status change enhances new status holders' prosocial behavior through their authentic pride, while in cases of high status differentiation, it increases their self-interested behavior through their hubristic pride. To test our hypotheses, we conducted a series of studies, including a laboratory experiment, a scenario experiment, and a time-lagged multilevel and multisource field study. Our multilevel analyses of the data provided strong support for our hypotheses. Our findings shed light on when and why positive status change triggers different behaviors among new status holders, offering important insights into the emotional mechanisms that underlie the effects of status change.

This article examines the role of state-owned firms in economic growth. While some scholars denigrate state firms, most analysts of East Asian development have noted their importance. To date, however, little work has been done on how state firms operate and how they have actually contributed to industrial development and economic growth. Looking closely at postwar Taiwan as a newly industrializing country and the case of Taiwan Machinery Manufacturing Corporation (TMMC), this article argues that state enterprises resolved coordination failures and provided manufacturing capacity to infant industries. Drawing on company archives and state records, I argue that TMMC helped drive growth through the provision of manufacturing machinery, equipment, parts, repairs, and upgrading. By supplying firms with the necessary technology and materials to modernize production and be competitive on the global market, I show how TMMC helped facilitate Taiwan’s economic miracle.

As I read Zhang and Chen's (2024) perspective paper, I was impressed with the authors' flexibility moving into the medical field and the impact of their research. Moreover, I agreed wholeheartedly with their call to learn by working across fields and with their assessment of how differently management and healthcare scholarship is created, disseminated, and used. Yet I was quite stumped by the editor's request that I suggest some ‘urgent and pressing’ issues that might help management scholars achieve the kind of practical relevance of medical researchers.

Leader exemplification involves implicit and explicit claims of high moral values made by a leader. We employed a 2 × 3 experimental design with samples of 265 students in Study 1 and 142 working adults in Study 2 to examine the effects of leader exemplification (exemplification versus no exemplification) and ethical conduct (self-serving, self-sacrificial, and self-other focus) on perceived leader authenticity, trust in leader, and organizational advocacy. In Study 1, we found that exemplification produced elevated levels of perceived authenticity, trust, and advocacy in the form of employment and investment recommendations. We also showed that leader ethical conduct moderated this effect, as ratings were highest following a leader’s self-sacrificial conduct, lowest for self-serving conduct, and moderate for conduct reflecting self-other concerns. In Study 2, we replicated these findings for perceived authenticity and trust, but not organizational advocacy, which yielded mixed results. The leadership implications and future research directions are discussed.

The early months of the COVID pandemic prompted a flood of research aimed at illuminating all facets of the disease and its spread. Scholars sought to create and assess practical interventions that ranged from vaccines to government lockdown policies to workplace practices. To date, there are nearly a half-million publications on the pandemic, and more are in process.

Mask mandates were controversial policies during the pandemic. Although there is considerable research on the benefits of masks, there has been no research on the distribution of perceived costs of compliance with mask mandates. This article presents the results from a hypothetical set of questions related to mask-wearing behavior and opinions that were asked of a nationally representative sample of over 4,000 participants in early 2022. We use survey valuation methods to assess how much participants would be willing to pay to be exempted from rules of mandatory community masking. The survey asks specifically about a 3-month exemption. We find that the majority of respondents (56%) are not willing to pay to be exempted from mandatory masking. However, the average person was willing to pay $525, and a small segment of the population (0.9%) stated they were willing to pay over $5,000 to be exempted from the mandate. Younger respondents stated higher willingness to pay to avoid the mandate than older respondents. Combining our results with standard measures of the value of a statistical life, we estimate that a 3-month masking order was perceived as cost-effective through willingness to pay questions only if at least 13,333 lives were saved by the policy.

This article examines China’s outward investment in the European automotive industry since the late twentieth century. By mapping and analyzing the main investment operations, we argue that private companies played a key role in the internationalization of the Chinese automotive sector. Chinese state-owned enterprises took part, especially in the initial stages of international expansion. Our contribution also analyzes the pattern of internationalization followed by Chinese companies, arguing that it differed from the one followed by well-established automotive firms in advanced economies during previous decades. The findings reveal that achieving the most advanced technology was the key driver of outward investment decisions. However, Chinese investors’ strategy was not uniform; it was flexible and varied significantly depending on the European country and the size of the company targeted. Furthermore, Chinese government industrial policies greatly influenced the international strategies of both state-owned and private companies, particularly the “Go Out” policy.

During the 1690s, both the English and Ottoman states developed new institutions for longer-term borrowing and reformed their imperial monetary systems. These synchronous but divergent developments present a puzzle that has not been answered by rigidly separate English and Ottoman historiographies. “Empires of Obligation” follows merchants trading between England and the Ottoman Empire to understand how both states responded differently to the challenges of global trade and fiscal crisis. At this time, English merchants were the most powerful European traders in the Ottoman Empire, and the Ottoman Empire represented England’s greatest single market for its woolen textiles, its largest industry. As Levant Company merchants swapped woolens for silk, they also blended international private credit with domestic public finance. They were the largest merchant investors relative to the size of their trade in the Bank of England and helped facilitate Ottoman longer-term public borrowing through the mālikāne system. From within England’s bureaucracy, they also worked to ease global trade through an “intrinsic value” theory of money, the idea that coins represented a government commitment to provide a fixed amount of precious metal. At the same time, the Ottoman state sought to redefine money as an instrument of the state, not a tool of trade. Following merchants who themselves bridged two empires that are rarely compared shows interconnected but divergent responses to the challenges of making money work both within and between states at the end of the seventeenth century.

Much of the history of Indian businesses and merchants outside the subcontinent has emphasized the role of specific trading groups that created and utilized ties with India. The rise of Trinidad’s Indian shopkeepers tells an alternative story: former labor migrants turned to commerce. Indentured labor formed the connection between India and Trinidad, an area outside traditional Indian merchant activity. Trinidad’s organic Indian business community arose owing to the absence of traditional trading groups in the immigrant population, the large distance from India, and the growth of the Indian population that in turn demanded services. Shopkeepers came disproportionately from upper castes, who possibly relied on their greater social status and new network ties in Trinidad. However, shopkeepers did not rise into the upper echelons of commerce. This break shows the limits of traditional Indian traders in establishing ties in the farthest reaches of the British Empire.