Matching Items (10)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: Arizona
- Creators: Department of Economics
- Member of: Theses and Dissertations
- Resource Type: Text
Description
The passage of 2007's Legal Arizona Workers Act, which required all new hires to be tested for legal employment status through the federal E-Verify database, drastically changed the employment prospects for undocumented workers in the state. Using data from the 2007-2010 American Community Survey, this paper seeks to identify the impact of this law on the labor force in Arizona, specifically regarding undocumented workers and less educated native workers. Overall, the data shows that the wage bias against undocumented immigrants doubled in the four years studied, and the wages of native workers without a high school degree saw a temporary, positive increase compared to comparable workers in other states. The law did not have an effect on the wages of native workers with a high school degree.
ContributorsSantiago, Maria Christina (Author) / Pereira, Claudiney (Thesis director) / Mendez, Jose (Committee member) / School of International Letters and Cultures (Contributor) / Department of Economics (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2018-05
Description
Social impact bonds (SIBs) are a multi-year contract between social service providers, the government, and private investors. The three parties agree on a specific outcome for a societal issue. Investors provide capital required for the service provider to operate the project. The service provider then delivers the service to the target population. The success of the project is evaluated by outside party. If the target outcome is met, the government repays the investors at a premium. Nonprofit service providers can only serve a small community as they lack the funding to scale their programs and their reliance on government funding and philanthropy leads to a lot of time focused on raising money in the short-term and inhibits them from evolving their programs and projects for long-term strategic success. Government budgets decline but social problems persist. These contracts share risk between the government and the investors and allow governments to test out programs and alleviate taxpayer burdens from unsuccessful social service programs. Arizona has a severe homelessness problem. Nightly, 6000 people are homeless in Maricopa County. In a given year, over 32,000 individuals were homeless, composed of single adults, families, children, and veterans. Homelessness is not only a debilitating and difficult experience for those who experience it, but also has considerable economic costs on society. Homeless individuals use a number of government programs beyond emergency shelters, and these can cost taxpayers billions of dollars per year. Rapid rehousing was a successful intervention model that the state has been heavily investing in the last few years. This thesis aimed to survey the Arizona climate and determine what barriers were present for enacting an SIB for homelessness. The findings showed that although there are many competent stakeholder groups, lack of interest and overall knowledge of SIBs prevented groups from taking responsibility as the anchor for such a project. Additionally, the government and nonprofits had good partnerships, but lacked relationships with the business community and investors that could propel an SIB. Finally, although rapid rehousing can be used as a successful intervention model, there are not enough years of proven success to justify the spending on an SIB. Additionally, data collection for homelessness programming needs to be standardized between all relevant partners. The framework for an SIB exists in Arizona, but needs a few more years of development before it can be considered.
ContributorsAhmed, Fabeeha (Author) / Desouza, Kevin (Thesis director) / Lucio, Joanna (Committee member) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor) / Department of Economics (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2016-05
Description
This thesis investigates the environment of support for reclassified English Language Learners (RCELLs) in Arizona schools. Arizona English Language Learner (ELL) policy and pedagogy have been the subjects of research nationwide; many studies demonstrate that ELLs struggle before, during and after participating in Arizona ELL programs (Lillie et al. 2012; Roa 2012; Garcia, Lawton & de Figuieredo 2012; Office of Civil Rights 2012). Despite evidence that the achievement gap between RCELLs and mainstream students is not closing, little information is available about additional language support that RCELLs might receive in mainstream classrooms. This thesis addresses that void of information through: 1) A literature review of the framework of RCELL support, as outlined by the Arizona Department of Education and relevant studies, and 2) a study of teacher and principal opinion about support components for RCELLs and whether such support is adequate. Study findings present that teachers and principals generally believe RCELLs are well-supported, in terms of both the availability and quality of study-defined support components. Yet there is only weak consensus among teachers that support components are adequate. Additionally, teachers' knowledgeability related to important RCELL support components is low, undermining the reliability of teacher responses. The disconnect between participants' optimistic perceptions of support and the external evidence of low RCELL achievement is rationalized by two conjectures. The first is that teachers are not knowledgeable about RCELL support components and cannot accurately gauge the quality of such support. The second is that existing support components are effective at assisting RCELLs with English learning but are not sufficient to close RCELL academic content achievement gaps.
ContributorsKelly, Cary Shepherd (Author) / Garcia, David (Thesis director) / Garcia, Eugene (Committee member) / Seleznow, Steven (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / Department of Economics (Contributor) / W. P. Carey School of Business (Contributor)
Created2014-12
Description
Executive compensation is broken into two parts: one fixed and one variable. The fixed component of executive compensation is the annual salary and the variable components are performance-based incentives. Clawback provisions of executive compensation are designed to require executives to return performance-based, variable compensation that was erroneously awarded in the year of a misstatement. This research shows the need for the use of a new clawback provision that combines aspects of the two currently in regulation. In our current federal regulation, there are two clawback provisions in play: Section 304 of Sarbanes-Oxley and section 954 of The Dodd\u2014Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. This paper argues for the use of an optimal clawback provision that combines aspects of both the current SOX provision and the Dodd-Frank provision, by integrating the principles of loss aversion and narcissism. These two factors are important to consider when designing a clawback provision, as it is generally accepted that average individuals are loss averse and executives are becoming increasingly narcissistic. Therefore, when attempting to mitigate the risk of a leader keeping erroneously awarded executive compensation, the decision making factors of narcissism and loss aversion must be taken into account. Additionally, this paper predicts how compensation structures will shift post-implementation. Through a survey analyzing the level of both loss- aversion and narcissism in respondents, the research question justifies the principle that people are loss averse and that a subset of the population show narcissistic tendencies. Both loss aversion and narcissism drove the results to suggest there are benefits to both clawback provisions and that a new provision that combines elements of both is most beneficial in mitigating the risk of executives receiving erroneously awarded compensation. I concluded the most optimal clawback provision is mandatory for all public companies (Dodd-Frank), targets all executives (Dodd-Frank), and requires the recuperation of the entire bonus, not just that which was in excess of what should have been received (SOX).
ContributorsLarscheid, Elizabeth (Author) / Samuelson, Melissa (Thesis director) / Casas-Arce, Pablo (Committee member) / WPC Graduate Programs (Contributor) / School of Accountancy (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2018-12
Description
This thesis project provides a thorough cost-benefit analysis of the golf industry in Arizona. We begin by examining the economic, environmental, and social costs that the industry requires. One of the largest costs of the industry is water consumption. Golf courses in Arizona are currently finding ways to reduce water consumption through various methods, such as turf reduction and increasing the usage of drip irrigation. However, even at current levels of consumption, golf only consumes 1.9% of water in Arizona, compared to the 69% consumed by agriculture. Of the water consumed by the golf industry, 26.3% is wastewater, otherwise known as effluent water. Since the population in Arizona is projected to grow significantly over the next decade, the amount of effluent water produced will also increase. Due to this, we recommend that the golf industry move towards using as much effluent water as possible to conserve clean water sources. Additionally, we examine land allocation and agricultural tradeoffs to the state. Most golf courses are built in urban areas that would not be suitable for agriculture. The same land could be used to build a public park, but this would not provide as many economic benefits to the state. Many courses also act as floodplains which protect the communities surrounding them from flooding. These floodplains have proven to be crucial to protect from occasional flash floods by diverting the excess water away from homes. We also discuss golf's primary social cost in terms of its perception as being a sport played exclusively by privileged and wealthy people. This is proven to be false due to many non-profit organizations centered around the game, as well as municipal courses that provide affordable options for all citizens who want to play. We provide an in-depth analysis of the benefits that the industry provides to the state and its citizens primarily through business and tax revenue, employment, and property values. Including multiplier effects, the golf industry contributed 42,000 full- and part-time jobs, $3.9 billion in sales, $1.5 billion in labor income, and $2.1 billion value added in 2014. An estimated $72 million in state and local taxes were generated from golf facilities alone, without including taxes from indirectly impacted businesses. This tax revenue provides a great benefit to the public sector and increases Arizona's GDP. Also, much of this economic contribution is from the golf tourism industry, which brings new revenue into the state that would otherwise not exist. Golf courses also increase the surrounding real estate prices anywhere from 4.8% to 28%, providing a positive externality to community members in addition to scenic views. Finally, we provide a case study of the Waste Management Phoenix Open (WMO) to illustrate the impact of Arizona's single largest golf event each year. In 2017, the event brought an estimated $389 million into Arizona's economy in one week alone. Also, it regularly hosts massive crowds with a record-breaking 719,179 people attending the event in 2018. The WMO has also taken a "Zero Waste Challenge" to promote eco-friendly and sustainable practices by diverting all of the waste and materials produced by the tournament from landfills. The WMO has been dubbed both the "Greatest Show On Grass" and the "Greenest Show On Grass" due to the entertainment value provided as well as its effort to improve the environment.
ContributorsShershenovich, Andrew (Co-author) / Wilhelm, Spencer (Co-author) / Goegan, Brian (Thesis director) / Van Poucke, Rory (Committee member) / Department of Finance (Contributor) / W.P. Carey School of Business (Contributor) / Department of Economics (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2018-05
Description
The purpose of this paper is to review the effects of the Dodd-Frank Title VII Clearing Regulations on the Over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives market and to analyze if the benefits of the Title VII regulations have outweighed the costs in the OTC derivatives market by reducing systematic(market) risk and protecting market participants or if the Title VII regulations’ costs have made things worse by lessening opportunities in the OTC derivatives market and stifling economics benefits by over regulating the market. This paper strives to examine this issue by explaining how OTC are said to have played a part in the 2008 Financial crisis. Next, we give a general overview of financial securities, and what OTC are. Then we will give a general overview of what the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Acts are, which are the regulations to come out of the 2008 Financial crisis. Then the paper will dive into Dodd-Frank Title VII Clearing Regulations and how they regulated OTC derivatives in the aftermath of the 2008 Financial crisis. Next, we discuss the Clearing House industry. Then the paper explores the major change of central clearing versus the previous bilateral clearing system. The paper will then cover how these rules have affected OTC derivatives market by examining the works of authors, who both support the regulations and others, who oppose the regulations by looking at logical arguments, historical evidence, and empirical evidence. Finally, we conclude that based on all the evidence how the Dodd-Frank Title VII Clearing Regulations effects on the OTC derivatives market are inconclusive at this time.
ContributorsCharette, John (Co-author) / Thacker, Harshit (Co-author) / Aragon, George (Thesis director) / Stein, Luke (Committee member) / Department of Finance (Contributor) / Department of Economics (Contributor) / Dean, W.P. Carey School of Business (Contributor) / Department of Information Systems (Contributor) / School of Accountancy (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2019-05
Description
Given its impact on the accounting profession and public corporations, Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002(SOX) is a widely researched regulation among accounting scholars. Research typically focuses on the impact it has had on corporations, executives and auditors, however, there is limited research that illustrates the impact SOX may have on average Americans. There were several US criminal code sections that resulted from the passing of SOX. Statute 1519, which is often referred to as the "anti-shredding provision", penalizes anyone who "knowingly alters, destroys, mutilates, conceals, covers up, falsifies, or makes a false entry in any record, document, or tangible object with the intent to" obstruct a current or foreseeable federal investigation. This statute, although intended to punish behavior similar to that which occurred in the early 2000s by corporations and auditors, has been used to charge people beyond its original intent. Several issues with the crafting of the statute cause its broad application and some litigation even reached the Supreme Court due to its vague wording. Not only is the statute being applied beyond the intent, there are other issues that legal scholars have critiqued it for. This statute is far from being the only law facing these issues as the same issues and critiques are found in the 14th amendment. Rewriting the statute seems to be the most effective way to address the concerns of judges, lawyers and defendants regarding the statute. In addition, Congress could have passed this statute outside of SOX to avoid being seen as overreaching if obstruction of justice related to documents was actually an issue outside of corporate fraud.
ContributorsGonzalez, Joana (Author) / Samuelson, Melissa (Thesis director) / Lowe, Jordan (Committee member) / School of Accountancy (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2016-12
Description
As temperatures increase across the United States, some populations are more at risk for heat-related death and illness than others. One of these at-risk demographics is mobile home and trailer park inhabitants, who are disproportionately represented among indoor heat-related deaths (Solís, “Heat, Health”). In this paper, we outline a cost-benefit analysis that was used to calculate the net present economic value of projects related to reducing heat burden on mobile home owners and parks in Maricopa County. We use this model to assess solutions developed by student teams under the Knowledge Exchange for Resilience’s Summer Heat Resilience Challenge. We find that one of the seven solutions has a positive net present value (NPV) even in the lowest effectiveness (10%), while three more solutions have a positive NPV in the mid-level (50%) effectiveness scenario, showcasing their economic viability.
ContributorsRobinson, Jacob (Author) / Solís, Patricia (Thesis director) / Markolf, Samuel (Committee member) / Department of Psychology (Contributor) / Department of Finance (Contributor) / Department of Economics (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2021-05
ContributorsOsborn, Talen (Author) / Murff, Scott (Thesis director) / O'brian, Cole (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / Department of Economics (Contributor) / School of Sustainable Engineering & Built Envirnmt (Contributor)
Created2023-12
ContributorsOsborn, Talen (Author) / Murff, Scott (Thesis director) / O'brian, Cole (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / Department of Economics (Contributor) / School of Sustainable Engineering & Built Envirnmt (Contributor)
Created2023-12