Discussing Chevalier’s data on the efficiency of tariffs for american and french canals in the 1830s

This article revisits Michel Chevalier’s work and discussions of tariffs. Chevalier shifted from Saint-Simonism to economic liberalism during his life in the 19th century. His influence was soon perceived in the political world and economic debates, mainly because of his discussion of tariffs as instruments of efficient transport policies. This work discusses Chevalier’s thoughts on tariffs by revisiting his masterpiece, Le Cours d’Économie Politique. Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) was conducted to test Chevalier’s hypothesis on the inefficiency of French tariffs. This work showed that Chevalier’s claims on French tariffs are not validated by DEA.

On the length of bank-firm relationships: an empirical application to a major French bank

NIPE - WP 01/ 2016

Investor sentiment and the cross-section of stock returns in the French stock market

Dissertação de mestrado em Finanças

Gender, sex and sexuality in two open access communication journals published in Portugal: a critical overview of current discursive practices

The links between gender, sex and sexuality and their relevance are theoretically and politically problematic (Richardson, 2007). One of the difficulties in understanding their interconnections is that these terms are often used differently and ambiguously by different authors (and even by the same authors). This article reports the results of an analysis of the articles published in open access communication journals with known impact factor, edited in Portugal and published between 2005 and 2012. The diverse conceptualisations of those three basic concepts and of their (inter)relationships within communication research are identified. The complexity and the intricate (and often implicit) nature of both the meanings of these categories and their relationships underlie and justify our attention and further research. What the findings suggest about the current communication research into gender issues published in the two journals surveyed is that the ‘Gender differences discourse’ (Sunderland, 2004) is the most pervasive discourse (also) in academic practice. Additionally, they show that gender and sex are mainly taken for a fact, not a question that is worth being studied. The editors of these journals, as well as the scholars submitting manuscripts, need to be more aware of the traditional nature of the theoretical and methodological choices that they make regarding gender- and sex-related issues, as well as of the relative lack of attention to sexuality as a research subject.