4 resultados para big-box retailing
em WestminsterResearch - UK
Resumo:
This study examined the body weight and waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) preferences of “fat admirers” (FAs), that is, individuals who are sexually attracted to heavier partners. Fifty-six heterosexual men involved in the FA community rated a series of line drawings that varied in three levels of body weight and six of WHR for physical attractiveness and health. The results showed significant main effects of body weight and WHR, as well as a significant body weight × WHR interaction for both health ratings. In general, there was a preference for heavyweight figures and high WHRs for ratings of attractiveness and normal-weight figures and mid-ranging WHRs for ratings of health. Limitations of the study and explanations for fat admiration are discussed.
Resumo:
The neighbourhood in both the UK and Europe continues to dominate thinking about the quality of life in local communities, representation and empowerment, and how local services can be delivered most effectively. For several decades a series of centrally funded programmes in neighbour- hood governance have targeted localities suffering deprivation and social exclusion in England. From these much can be learnt about the strengths and limitations of a local approach to achieving multiple objectives.We review the findings of a case study of neighbourhood governance in the City of Westminster and draw on evaluations of two national programmes. In the conclusions we discuss the problems arising from multiple objectives and examine the prospects for neighbourhood governance as the national paradigm moves away from `big state' solutions towards the less-well-defined `big society' approach and the reinvention of `localism'. While the rationale for neighbourhood governance may change, the `neighbourhood' as a site for service delivery and planning remains as important now as in the past.
Resumo:
Purpose: In recent years, there has been a big increase in the use of ethical attributes as marketing appeals. This paper examines consumers’ willingness to pay for three selected ethical attributes, namely ‘Organic’, ‘Recyclable Packaging’ and ‘Fairtrade’ in monetary terms. Design/Methodology/Approach: A modified choice-based experimental design with manipulation of the key constructs was used to estimate the mean value of how much consumers are willing to pay for the selected attributes attached to a box of premium chocolates. The results are based on the responses of a total of 208 consumers. Findings: Of the three attributes, ‘Recyclable Packaging’ has the strongest influence on the purchase decision, although this attribute generates the least additional value. The aggregated result shows that although consumers are willing to pay more for the product with ethical attributes than the one that is without, still around a half of them are not willing to pay more. In terms of demographics, the results show no significant differences between the two genders or different age groups in their willingness to pay for ethical attributes. As might be expected, willingness to pay was correlated with the level of consciousness of the ethical attributes. Originality/Value: The findings of this study help management to think practically about the value consumers willing to pay for the selected attributes. The results show a significant synergy in a combination of ethical attributes in products.
Resumo:
This article considers the idea of the ‘Big Society’ as part of a long-standing debate about the regulation of housing. Situating the concept within governance theory, the article considers how the idea of the Big Society was used by the UK coalition government to justify a radical restructuring of welfare provision. The fundamental rationale for this transformation was that the UK was forced to respond to a conjunction of crises in morality, the state, ideology and economics. Representing a fundamental departure from earlier attempts at welfare reform, the government has undertaken a reform programme which has had a severe effect on the social housing sector. The article argues that the result has been a combination of libertarianism and authoritarianism, alongside an intentionally more destructive combination of stigmatization and fatalism. The consequence is to undermine the principle of social housing which will not only prove detrimental for residents but raises significant dilemmas for those working in the housing sector.