Firm size and competition: a comparison of the housebuilding industries in Australia, the UK and the USA

Housebuilding is frequently viewed as an industry full of small firms. However, large firms exist in many countries. Here, a comparative analysis is made of the housebuilding industries in Australia, Britain and the USA. Housebuilding output is found to be much higher in Australia and the USA than in Britain when measured on a per capita basis. At the same time, the degree of market concentration in Australia and the USA is relatively low but in Britain it is far greater, with a few firms having quite substantial market shares. Investigation of the size distribution of the top 100 or so firms ranked by output also shows that the decline in firm size from the largest downwards is more rapid in Britain than elsewhere. The exceptionalism of the British case is put down to two principal reasons. First, the close proximity of Britain’s regions enables housebuilders to diversify successfully across different markets. The gains from such diversification are best achieved by large firms, because they can gain scale benefits in any particular market segment. Second, land shortages induced by a restrictive planning system encourage firms to takeover each other as a quick and beneficial means of acquiring land. The institutional rules of planning also make it difficult for new entrants to come in at the bottom end of the size hierarchy. In this way, concentration grows and a handful of large producers emerge. These conditions do not hold in the other two countries, so their industries are less concentrated. Given the degree of rivalry between firms over land purchases and takeovers, it is difficult to envisage them behaving in a long-term collusive manner, so that competition in British housebuilding is probably not unduly compromised by the exceptional degree of firm concentration. Reforms to lower the restrictions, improve the slow responsiveness and reduce the uncertainties associated with British planning systems’ role in housing supply are likely to greatly improve the ability of new firms to enter housebuilding and all firms’ abilities to increase output in response to rising housing demand. Such reforms would also probably lower overall housebuilding firm concentration over time.

Micelle size characterization of lipopeptides produced by B. subtilis and their recovery by the two-step ultrafiltration process

The aim of this work was to investigate the lipopeptides aggregation behavior in single and mixed solutions in a wide range of concentrations, in order to optimize their separation and purification following the two-step ultrafiltration process and using large pore size membranes (up to MWCO = 300 kDa). Micelle size was determined by dynamic light scattering. In single solutions of lipopeptide both surfactin and mycosubtilin formed micelles of different size depending on their concentration, micelles of average diameter = 5–105 nm for surfactin and 8–18 nm for mycosubtilin. However when the lipopeptides were in the same solution they formed mixed micelles of different size (d = 8 nm) and probably conformation to that formed by the individual lipopeptide, this prevents their separation according to size. These lipopeptides were purified from fermentation culture by the two-step ultrafiltration process using different MWCO membranes ranging from 10 to 300 kDa. This led to their effective rejection in the first ultrafiltration step by membranes with MCWO = 10–100 kDa but poor rejection by the 300 KDa membrane. The lipopeptides were recovered at 90% purity (in relation to protein) and with 2.34 enrichment in the permeate of the second ultrafiltration step with the 100 KDa membrane upon addition of 75% ethanol.

Quantifying particle size and turbulent scale dependence of dust uplift in the Sahara using aircraft measurements

The first size-resolved airborne measurements of dust fluxes and the first dust flux measurements from the central Sahara are presented and compared with a parameterization by Kok (2011a). High-frequency measurements of dust size distribution were obtained from 0.16 to 300 µm diameter, and eddy covariance fluxes were derived. This is more than an order of magnitude larger size range than previous flux estimates. Links to surface emission are provided by analysis of particle drift velocities. Number flux is described by a −2 power law between 1 and 144 µm diameter, significantly larger than the 12 µm upper limit suggested by Kok (2011a). For small particles, the deviation from a power law varies with terrain type and the large size cutoff is correlated with atmospheric vertical turbulent kinetic energy, suggesting control by vertical transport rather than emission processes. The measured mass flux mode is in the range 30–100 µm. The turbulent scales important for dust flux are from 0.1 km to 1–10 km. The upper scale increases during the morning as boundary layer depth and eddy size increase. All locations where large dust fluxes were measured had large topographical variations. These features are often linked with highly erodible surface features, such as wadis or dunes. We also hypothesize that upslope flow and flow separation over such features enhance the dust flux by transporting large particles out of the saltation layer. The tendency to locate surface flux measurements in open, flat terrain means these favored dust sources have been neglected in previous studies.

What controls the vertical distribution of aerosol? Relationships between process sensitivity in HadGEM3–UKCA and inter-model variation from AeroCom Phase II

The vertical profile of aerosol is important for its radiative effects, but weakly constrained by observations on the global scale, and highly variable among different models. To investigate the controlling factors in one particular model, we investigate the effects of individual processes in HadGEM3–UKCA and compare the resulting diversity of aerosol vertical profiles with the inter-model diversity from the AeroCom Phase II control experiment. In this way we show that (in this model at least) the vertical profile is controlled by a relatively small number of processes, although these vary among aerosol components and particle sizes. We also show that sufficiently coarse variations in these processes can produce a similar diversity to that among different models in terms of the global-mean profile and, to a lesser extent, the zonal-mean vertical position. However, there are features of certain models' profiles that cannot be reproduced, suggesting the influence of further structural differences between models. In HadGEM3–UKCA, convective transport is found to be very important in controlling the vertical profile of all aerosol components by mass. In-cloud scavenging is very important for all except mineral dust. Growth by condensation is important for sulfate and carbonaceous aerosol (along with aqueous oxidation for the former and ageing by soluble material for the latter). The vertical extent of biomass-burning emissions into the free troposphere is also important for the profile of carbonaceous aerosol. Boundary-layer mixing plays a dominant role for sea salt and mineral dust, which are emitted only from the surface. Dry deposition and below-cloud scavenging are important for the profile of mineral dust only. In this model, the microphysical processes of nucleation, condensation and coagulation dominate the vertical profile of the smallest particles by number (e.g. total CN  >  3 nm), while the profiles of larger particles (e.g. CN  >  100 nm) are controlled by the same processes as the component mass profiles, plus the size distribution of primary emissions. We also show that the processes that affect the AOD-normalised radiative forcing in the model are predominantly those that affect the vertical mass distribution, in particular convective transport, in-cloud scavenging, aqueous oxidation, ageing and the vertical extent of biomass-burning emissions.