Issue link: http://www.e-digitaleditions.com/i/58061
Research "ZONE PRICING" PRACTICES BY OIL COMPANIES ACTUALLY TRANSLATE INTO FAIRER—AND LOWER—PRICES AT THE PUMP. Christopher Ball Mark Gius Matthew Rafferty 'Zone Pricing' of Oil Could Lower Gas Prices A study by three economics professors in the Quinnipiac University School of Business in Hamden, Connecticut, has shown that "zone pricing" prac- tices by oil companies actually trans- late into fairer—and lower—prices at the pump. In the oil industry, zone pricing refers to the practice of charging different prices for gas based on the location of the gas station. Where demand is high and competition low, prices are higher; where drivers are from lower income brackets and gas stations are plenti- ful, prices are lower. Connecticut lawmakers have sought to outlaw zone pricing, submitting several proposals for vote this year. The six-month study was com- missioned by the American Petro- leum Institute and conducted by Christopher Ball, assistant professor of economics; Mark Gius, professor of economics; and Matthew Raf- ferty, associate professor of econom- ics. The researchers determined that zone pricing was not only beneficial to gasoline consumers, but also fell in line with supply-and-demand economic principles. "When zone pricing is banned, stations in low-competition areas don't have a reason to lower their 58 BizEd MAY/JUNE 2007 prices," says Ball. "It was a little surprising to me that it really raises the price all over the state." The researchers point out that, while it's illegal in the U.S. for gas companies themselves to set the pump, charg- ing different prices to different con- sumers is actually typical of many markets outside the oil industry. "We charge lower prices for chil- dren and senior citizens to go to museums and movies," says Raffer- ty. The practice, he adds, is not evi- dence of a money-hungry monopo- ly. The researchers hope their study will prompt lawmakers to abandon attempts to ban zone pricing. Impact of Sustainable Consumption A recent report from the United Kingdom's Manchester Business School in the United Kingdom, conducted for the Department of Environment, Farm- ing, and Rural Affairs (DEFRA), finds that eco-friendly acts such as patronizing local businesses and pur- chasing organic foods may not be as beneficial to the environment as once thought. To compile the report, research- ers looked at the environmental impact of 150 top-selling food items, from cultivation, through transport and processing, to their purchase and consumption by the public. According to the report, "The Environmental Impact of Food Production and Consump- tion," there is no clear evidence that purchasing products locally, rather than globally, has a ben- eficial environmental impact. In fact, globally purchased products may sometimes be the more eco- conscious option. In addition, the research found no clear correlation between organic foods and envi- ronmental benefit. Ken Green, a professor with the business school and project director, notes that it makes more ecological sense to import some foods. "The evidence available so far shows that 'local' is not always the best option for the environment," Green says. To read the full report, go to www.defra.gov.uk/environment/ business/scp/research/themes/ food.htm. Leaders, Be Assertive— In Moderation Leaders who are perceived as either too assertive or not assertive enough may also be perceived as ineffec- tive, according to researchers Daniel Ames, a professor at Columbia Busi- ness School in New York, New York, and Francis Flynn, a professor at the Stanford School of Business in California. In fact, appearing to be over- or under-assertive may be the most common weakness that afflicts aspiring business leaders. In a series of studies, outlined in their paper "What Breaks a Leader: the Curvilinear Relation Between Assertiveness and Leadership," Ames and Flynn surveyed workers on what they perceived to be their col- leagues' biggest leadership strengths