第一届凝聚态物理会议The 1st Conference on Condensed Matter Physics2015年7月15日- 17日清华大学目录01 会议概况02 组织委员会04 会议日程•总日程•大会报告•分会场报告•海报会场会议概况为了配合凝聚态物理在中国的迅速发展和国际地位的全面提升，进一步加强国内科研工作者在不同前沿领域的交流，推进国内和国际在凝聚态物理领域的相互交流和合作，为青年学生和研究人员学习和了解国际前沿进展创造更广泛的交流平台，拟定在过去已经成功举办了13届的“凝聚态理论与材料计算国际会议”系列会议的基础上，拓宽会议的主题，特别是加强凝聚态物理实验和理论的交流与融合，于2015年7月15日－17日在北京举办“第一届凝聚态物理会议”年会。
2015年第一届凝聚态物理会议是由清华大学物理系、中国科学院物理研究所、北京大学物理学院、量子物质科学协同创新中心联合主办。
这是国内首次在凝聚态物理方面举办的大型学术交流会。
本次会议是凝聚态理论与材料计算国际会议的延续和拓展，旨在增进国内外物理学者的学术交流，分享前沿科研成果，提高国内凝聚态物理的科研水平，扩大学术声誉。
第一届凝聚态物理会议将于2015年7月15日－17日在清华大学举行。
会议主题包括：拓扑量子态和多铁性、超导和多体物理、能源和低维物理、Quantum many-body theory and statistical physics、计算凝聚态物理、量子信息及其它与凝聚态物理的交叉领域等六个主题。
本次会议共设30个专题分会，将以大会特邀报告、分会特邀报告、口头报告和张贴海报等形式进行交流探讨。
组织委员会主办单位•清华大学物理系•中国科学院物理研究所•北京大学物理学院•量子物质科学协同创新中心顾问委员会：（按姓氏拼音序）崔田、杜瑞瑞、冯世平、龚新高、解士杰、李东海、李建新、林海青、李树深、陆卫、卢仲毅、吕力、沈保根、沈健、沈志勋、苏刚、王恩哥、王孝群、王玉鹏、向涛、薛其坤、张富春、张振宇组织委员会•清华大学物理系：陈曦、薛其坤•中科院物理研究所：胡江平、戴希、方忠、丁洪、周兴江、向涛•北京大学物理学院：谢心澄分会场负责人•拓扑量子态和多铁性：胡江平、陈曦、吕力、戴希、翁红明、寇谡鹏、吴从军•超导和多体物理：孙力玲、杨义峰、刘俊明、雒建林、袁辉球、李永庆、万歆、周毅•能源和低维物理：张振宇、李泓、陈弘、赵怀周、张远波•Quantum many-body theory and statistical physics：孟子扬、张广铭、郭文安、姚宏•计算凝聚态物理：姚裕贵、段文晖、龚新高、孟胜•量子信息及其它与凝聚态物理的交叉领域：范珩、田琳、翟荟、崔晓玲会议协调人•清华大学物理系：任俊（总协调人）•中国科学院物理研究所：齐建为、刘青梅•会务组：黄文艳、唐林、井小苏、周丹、骆洁、甘翠云、付德永、杨红、肖琳、胡文婷赞助单位•清华大学物理系•量子物质科学协同创新中心•中国科学院物理研究所•北京大学物理学院2015年第一届凝聚态物理会议分会场主题：A.拓扑量子态和多铁性A1拓扑半金属IA2拓扑半金属IIA3拓扑超导体和Majorana 费米子A4多铁性材料模拟与计算A5多铁性体系B.超导和多体物理B1铬基和锰基超导体B2极端条件下的超导行为B3铁基超导B4凝聚物质的激发态和动力学理论和实验B5重费米子物理C.能源和低维物理C1锂电池中的物理C2二维材料C3二维电子系统中的物理C4硅烯的最新进展C5热电中的新物理D.Quantum many-body theory and statistical physicsD1 Recent developments in strongly correlated quantum systems ID2 Recent developments in strongly correlated quantum systems IID3 Recent developments in strongly correlated quantum systems IIID4 Recent developments in strongly correlated quantum systems IVD5 Recent developments in strongly correlated quantum systems V注意事项：为了尊重外籍邀请报告人，如无特殊情况，D分会场报告请用英文。
IM-1 CHAPTER 1 GLOBALIZATION AND THE MULTINATIONAL FIRMSUGGESTED ANSWERS TO END-OF-CHAPTER QUESTIONSQUESTIONS 1. Why is it important to study international financial management? Answer: We We are are are now now now living living living in in in a a a world world world where where where all all all the the the major major major economic economic economic functions, functions, functions, i.e., i.e., i.e., consumption, consumption, production, production, and and and investment, investment, investment, are are are highly highly highly globalized. globalized. It It is is is thus thus thus essential essential essential for for for financial financial financial managers managers managers to to to fully fully understand understand vital vital vital international international international dimensions dimensions dimensions of of of financial financial financial management. management. This This global global global shift shift shift is is is in in in marked marked contrast to a situation that existed when the authors of this book were learning finance some twenty years ago. At that time, most professors customarily (and safely, to some extent) ignored international aspects of finance. This mode of operation has become untenable since then. 2. How is international financial management different from domestic financial management? Answer: There are three major dimensions that set apart international finance from domestic finance. They are: 1. foreign exchange and political risks, 2. market imperfections, and 3. expanded opportunity set. 3. Discuss the three major trends that have prevailed in international business during the last two decades. Answer: The 1980s brought a rapid integration of international capital and financial markets. Impetus for globalized financial markets initially came from the governments of major countries that had begun to deregulate their foreign exchange and capital markets. The economic integration and globalization that began in the eighties is picking up speed in the 1990s via privatization. Privatization is the process by which a country divests itself of the ownership and operation of a business venture by turning it over to the free market system. Lastly, trade liberalization and economic integration continued to proceed at both the regional and global levels. IM-2 4. How How is is is a a a country‟s country‟s economic economic well well well-being -being -being enhanced enhanced enhanced through through through free free free international international international trade trade trade in in in goods goods goods and and services? Answer: According According to to to David David David Ricardo, Ricardo, Ricardo, with with with free free free international international international trade, trade, trade, it it it is is is mutually mutually mutually beneficial beneficial beneficial for for for two two countries to each specialize in the production of the goods that it can produce relatively most efficiently and and then then then trade trade trade those those those goods. goods. By By doing doing doing so, so, so, the the the two two two countries countries countries can can can increase increase increase their their their combined combined combined production, production, which which allows allows allows both countries both countries to to consume consume consume more more more of of of both both both goods. goods. This This argument argument argument remains remains remains valid even valid even if if a a country country can can can produce produce produce both both both goods goods goods more more more efficiently efficiently efficiently than than than the the the other other other country. country. International International trade trade trade is is is not not not a a …zero …zero--sum‟ game in which one country benefits at the expense of another country. Rather, international trade could be an …increasing -sum‟ game at which all players become winners.5. What considerations might limit the extent to which the theory of comparative advantage is realistic? Answer: The The theory theory theory of of of comparative comparative comparative advantage advantage advantage was was was originally originally originally advanced advanced advanced by by by the the the nineteenth nineteenth nineteenth century century economist David Ricardo as an explanation for why nations trade with one another. The theory claims that economic well-being is enhanced if each country‟s citizens produce what they have a comparative advantage in producing relative to the citizens of other countries, and then trade products. Underlying the the theory theory theory are are are the the the assumptions assumptions assumptions of of of free free free trade trade trade between between between nations nations nations and and and that that that the the the factors factors factors of of of production production production (land, (land, buildings, labor, technology, and capital) are relatively immobile. To the extent that these assumptions do not hold, the theory of comparative advantage will not realistically describe international trade. 6. What are multinational corporations (MNCs) and what economic roles do they play? Answer: A A multinational multinational multinational corporation corporation corporation (MNC) (MNC) (MNC) can can can be be be defined defined defined as as as a a a business business business firm firm firm incorporated incorporated incorporated in in in one one country country that that that has has has production production production and and and sales sales sales operations operations operations in in in several several several other other other countries. countries. countries. Indeed, Indeed, Indeed, some some some MNCs MNCs MNCs have have operations in dozens of different countries. MNCs obtain financing from major money centers around the the world world world in in in many many many different different currencies currencies to to to finance finance finance their their their operations. operations. Global Global operations operations operations force force force the the treasurer‟s office office to to to establish establish establish international international international banking banking banking relationships, relationships, relationships, to to to place place place short short short-term -term -term funds funds funds in in in several several currency denominations, and to effectively manage foreign exchange risk. IM-3 7. Mr. Ross Perot, a former Presidential candidate of the Reform Party, which is a third political party in the the United United United States, States, States, had had had strongly strongly strongly objected objected objected to to to the the the creation creation creation of of of the the the North North North American American American Trade Trade Trade Agreement Agreement (NAFTA), which nonetheless was inaugurated in 1994, for the fear of losing American jobs to Mexico where it is much cheaper to hire workers. What are the merits and demerits of Mr. Perot‟s position on NAFTA? Considering the recent economic developments in North America, how would you assess Mr. Perot‟s position on NAFTA?Answer: Answer: Since Since Since the the the inception inception inception of of of NAFTA, NAFTA, NAFTA, many many many American American American companies companies companies indeed indeed indeed have have have invested invested invested heavily heavily heavily in in Mexico, Mexico, sometimes relocating production from the United sometimes relocating production from the United States States to Mexico. Although this to Mexico. Although this might have temporarily temporarily caused caused caused unemployment unemployment unemployment of of of some some some American American American workers, workers, workers, they they they were were were eventually eventually eventually rehired rehired rehired by by by other other industries often for higher wages. Currently, the unemployment rate in the U.S. is quite low by historical standard. At the same time, Mexico has been experiencing a major economic boom. It seems clear that both both Mexico Mexico Mexico and and and the the the U.S. U.S. U.S. have have have benefited benefited benefited from from from NAFTA. NAFTA. NAFTA. Mr. Mr. Mr. Perot‟s Perot‟s concern concern appears appears appears to to to have have have been been been ill ill founded. 8. In 1995, a working group of French chief executive officers was set up by the Confederation of French Industry (CNPF) and the French Association of Private Companies (AFEP) to study the French corporate governance governance structure. structure. structure. The The The group group group reported reported reported the the the following, following, following, among among among other other other things things things “The “The “The board board board of of of directors directors should not simply aim at maximizing share values as in the U.K. and the U.S. Rather, its goal should be to serve serve the the the company, company, company, whose whose whose interests interests interests should should should be be be clearly clearly clearly distinguished distinguished distinguished from from from those those those of of of its its its shareholders, shareholders, employees, creditors, suppliers and clients but still equated with their general common interest, which is to safeguard the prosperity and continuity of the company”. Evaluate the above recommendation of the working group. Answer: Answer: The The The recommendations recommendations recommendations of of of the the the French French French working working working group group group clearly clearly clearly show show show that that that shareholder shareholder shareholder wealth wealth maximization is not a universally accepted goal of corporate management, especially outside the United States and possibly a few other Anglo-Saxon countries including the United Kingdom and Canada. To some extent, this may reflect the fact that share ownership is not wide spread in most other countries. In France, about 15% of households own shares. IM-4 9. Emphasizing the importance of voluntary compliance, as opposed to enforcement, in the aftermath of corporate scandals, e.g., Enron and WorldCom, U.S. President George W. Bush stated that while tougher laws might help, “ultimately, the ethics of American business depends on the conscience of America‟s business leaders.” Describe your view on this statement. Answer: There can be different answers to this question. If business leaders always behave with a high ethical standard, many of the corporate scandals we have seen lately might not have happened. Since we cannot cannot fully fully fully depend depend depend on on on the the the ethical ethical ethical behavior behavior behavior on on on the part the part of of business business business leaders, leaders, leaders, the the the society society society should should should protect protect itself itself by by by adopting adopting adopting the the the rules/regulations rules/regulations rules/regulations and and and governance governance governance structure that structure that would would induce induce induce business business business leaders leaders leaders to to behave in the interest of the society at large. 10. Suppose you are interested in investing in shares of Nokia Corporation of Finland, which is a world leader leader in in in wireless wireless wireless communication. communication. communication. But But But before before before you you you make make make investment investment investment decision, decision, decision, you you you would would would like like like to to to learn learn about the company. Visit the website of CNN Financial network () and collect information information about about about Nokia, Nokia, Nokia, including including including the the the recent recent recent stock price stock price history history and and and analysts‟ analysts‟ views views of the of the compa company. ny. Discuss what you learn about the company. Also discuss how the instantaneous access to information via internet would affect the nature and workings of financial markets. Answer: As students might have learned from visiting the website, information is readily available even for for foreign foreign foreign companies companies companies like like like Nokia. Nokia. Nokia. Ready Ready Ready access access access to to to international international international information information information helps helps helps integrate integrate integrate financial financial markets, dismantling barriers to international investment and financing. Integration, however, may help a financial shock in one market to be transmitted to other markets. IM-5 MINI CASE: NIKE‟S DE CISION Nike, a U.S.-based company with a globally recognized brand name, manufactures athletic shoes in such such Asian Asian Asian developing developing developing countries countries countries as as as China, China, China, Indonesia, Indonesia, Indonesia, and and and Vietnam Vietnam Vietnam using using using subcontractors, subcontractors, subcontractors, and and and sells sells sells the the products in the U.S. and foreign markets. The company has no production facilities in the United States. In In each each each of of of those those those Asian Asian Asian countries countries countries where where where Nike Nike Nike has has has production production production facilities, facilities, facilities, the the the rates rates rates of of of unemployment unemployment unemployment and and underemployment underemployment are are are quite quite quite high. high. high. The The The wage wage wage rate rate rate is is is very very very low low low in in in those those those countries countries countries by by by the the the U.S. U.S. U.S. standard; standard; hourly wage rate in the manufacturing sector is less than one dollar in each of those countries, which is compared with about $18 in the U.S. In addition, workers in those countries often are operating in poor and unhealthy environments and their rights are not well protected. Understandably, Asian host countries are are eager eager eager to to to attract attract attract foreign foreign foreign investments investments investments like like like Nike‟s Nike‟s Nike‟s to to to develop develop develop their their their economies economies economies and and and raise raise raise the the the living living standards of their citizens. Recently, however, Nike came under a world-wide criticism for its practice of hiring workers for such a low pay, “next to nothing” in the words of critics, and condoning poor working conditions in host countries. Evaluate Evaluate and and and discuss discuss discuss various various various …ethical‟ …ethical‟ as as well well well as as as economic economic economic ramifications ramifications ramifications of of of Nike‟s Nike‟s decision decision to to invest in those Asian countries. Suggested Solution to Nike‟s DecisionObviously, Obviously, Nike‟s Nike‟s investments investments in in in such such such Asian Asian Asian countries countries countries as as as China, China, China, Indonesia, Indonesia, Indonesia, and and and Vietnam Vietnam Vietnam were were motivated to take advantage of low labor costs in those countries. While Nike was criticized for the poor working working conditions conditions conditions for for for its its its workers, workers, workers, the the the company company company has has has recognized recognized recognized the the the problem problem problem and and and has has has substantially substantially improved the working environments recently. Although Nike‟s workers get paid very low wages by t he Western standard, they probably are making substantially more than their local compatriots who are either under- or unemployed. While Nike‟s detractors may have valid points, one should not ignore the fact that the company is making contributions to the economic welfare of those Asian countries by creating job opportunities. IM-6 CHAPTER 1A THEORY OF COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGESUGGESTED SOLUTIONS TO APPENDIX PROBLEMSPROBLEMS 1. Country C can produce seven pounds of food or four yards of textiles per unit of input. Compute the the opportunity cost of producing food instead of textiles. opportunity cost of producing food instead of textiles. Similarly, compute the opportunity cost of producing textiles instead of food. Solution: The opportunity cost of producing food instead of textiles is one yard of textiles per 7/4 = 1.75 pounds of food. A pound of food has an opportunity cost of 4/7 = .57 yards of textiles. 2. Consider the no-trade input/output situation presented in the following table for Countries X and Y. Assuming that free trade is allowed, develop a scenario that will benefit the citizens of both countries. IM-7 INPUT/OUTPUT WITHOUT TRADE _______________________________________________________________________ Country X Y Total ________________________________________________________________________ I. Units of Input (000,000) _______________________ ______________________________ Food 70 60 Textiles 40 30 ________________________________________________________________________ II. Output per Unit of Input (lbs or yards) ______________________ ______________________ ______________________________ ______________________________ Food 17 5 Textiles 5 2 ________________________________________________________________________ III. Total Output (lbs or yards) (000,000) ______________________ ______________________ ______________________________ ______________________________ Food 1,190 300 1,490 Textiles 200 60 260 ________________________________________________________________________ IV . Consumption (lbs or yards) (000,000) _____________________ ______________________________ Food 1,190 300 1,490 Textiles 200 60 260 ________________________________________________________________________ IM-8 Solution: Examination of the no-trade input/output input/output table table indicates that Country X X has has has an an absolute advantage advantage in in in the the the production production production of of of f f ood ood and and and textiles. textiles. Country Country X X X can can can “trade “trade “trade off” off” off” one one one unit unit unit of of of production production needed needed to to to produce produce produce 17 17 17 pounds pounds pounds of of of food food food for for for five five five yards yards yards of of of textiles. textiles. Thus, Thus, a a a yard yard yard of of of textiles textiles textiles has has has an an opportunity cost of 17/5 = 3.40 pounds of food, or a pound of food has an opportunity cost of 5/17 = .29 yards of textiles. Analogously, Country Y has an opportunity cost of 5/2 = 2.50 pounds of food per yard of textiles, or 2/5 = .40 yards of textiles per pound of food. In terms of opportunity cost, it is clear that Country X is relatively relatively more more more efficient in producing food and efficient in producing food and Country Y is relatively more efficient in producing producing textiles. textiles. textiles. Thus, Thus, Thus, Country Country Country X X X (Y) (Y) (Y) has has has a a a comparative comparative comparative advantage advantage advantage in in in producing producing producing food food food (textile) (textile) (textile) is is comparison to Country Y (X). When there are no restrictions or impediments to free trade the economic-well being of the citizens of both countries is enhanced through trade. Suppose that Country X shifts 20,000,000 units from the production of textiles to the production of food where it has a comparative advantage and that Country Y shifts shifts 60,000,000 60,000,000 60,000,000 units units units from from from the the the production production production of of of food food food to to to the the the production production production of of of textiles textiles textiles where where where it it it has has has a a comparative comparative advantage. advantage. Total output will now be (90,000,000 x 17 =) 1,530,000,000 pounds of food and [(20,000,000 x 5 =100,000,000) + (90,000,000 x 2 =180,000,000) =] 280,000,000 yards of textiles. Further suppose that Country X and Country Y agree on a price of 3.00 pounds of food for one yard of textiles, and that Country X sells Country Y 330,000,000 pounds of food for 110,000,000 yards of textiles. Under Under free free free trade, trade, trade, the the the following following following table table table shows shows shows that that that the the the citizens citizens citizens of of of Country Country Country X X X (Y) (Y) (Y) have have have increased increased increased their their consumption of food by 10,000,000 (30,000,000) pounds and textiles by 10,000,000 (10,000,000) yards. IM-9 INPUT/OUTPUT WITH FREE TRADE __________________________________________________________________________ Country X Y Total __________________________________________________________________________ I. Units of Input (000,000) _______________________ ________________________________ Food 90 0 Textiles 20 90 __________________________________________________________________________ II. Output per Unit of Input (lbs or yards) ______________________ ______________________ ________________________________ ________________________________ Food 17 5 Textiles 5 2 __________________________________________________________________________ III. Total Output (lbs or yards) (000,000) _____________________ ________________________________ Food 1,530 0 1,530 Textiles 100 180 280 __________________________________________________________________________ IV . Consumption (lbs or yards) (000,000) _____________________ ________________________________ Food 1,200 330 1,530 Textiles 210 70 280 __________________________________________________________________________ 。
CHAPTER 1 GLOBALIZATION AND THE MULTINATIONAL FIRMSUGGESTED ANSWERS TO END-OF-CHAPTER QUESTIONSQUESTIONS1. Why is it important to study international financial management?Answer: We are now living in a world where all the major economic functions, i.e., consumption, production, and investment, are highly globalized. It is thus essential for financial managers to fully understand vital international dimensions of financial management. This global shift is in marked contrast to a situation that existed when the authors of this book were learning finance some twenty years ago. At that time, most professors customarily (and safely, to some extent) ignored international aspects of finance. This mode of operation has become untenable since then.2. How is international financial management different from domestic financial management?Answer: There are three major dimensions that set apart international finance from domestic finance. They are:1. foreign exchange and political risks,2. market imperfections, and3. expanded opportunity set.3. Discuss the three major trends that have prevailed in international business during the last two decades.Answer: The 1980s brought a rapid integration of international capital and financial markets. Impetus for globalized financial markets initially came from the governments of major countries that had begun to deregulate their foreign exchange and capital markets. The economic integration and globalization that began in the eighties is picking up speed in the 1990s via privatization. Privatization is the process by which a country divests itself of the ownership and operation of a business venture by turning it over to the free market system. Lastly, trade liberalization and economic integration continued to proceed at both the regional and global levels.4. How is a country’s economic well-being enhanced through free international trade in goods and services?Answer: According to David Ricardo, with free international trade, it is mutually beneficial for two countries to each specialize in the production of the goods that it can produce relatively most efficiently and then trade those goods. By doing so, the two countries can increase their combined production, which allows both countries to consume more of both goods. This argument remains valid even if a country can produce both goods more efficiently than the other country. International trade is not a ‘zero-sum’ game in which one country benefits at the expense of another country. Rather, international trade could be an ‘increasing-sum’ game at which all players become winners.5. What considerations might limit the extent to which the theory of comparative advantage is realistic?Answer: The theory of comparative advantage was originally advanced by the nineteenth century economist David Ricardo as an explanation for why nations trade with one another. The theory claims that economic well-being is enhanced if each country’s citizens produce what they have a comparative advantage in producing relative to the citizens of other countries, and then trade products. Underlying the theory are the assumptions of free trade between nations and that the factors of production (land, buildings, labor, technology, and capital) are relatively immobile. To the extent that these assumptions do not hold, the theory of comparative advantage will not realistically describe international trade.6. What are multinational corporations (MNCs) and what economic roles do they play?Answer: A multinational corporation (MNC) can be defined as a business firm incorporated in one country that has production and sales operations in several other countries. Indeed, some MNCs have operations in dozens of different countries. MNCs obtain financing from major money centers around the world in many different currencies to finance their operations. Global operations force the treasurer’s office to establish international banking relationships, to place short-term funds in several currency denominations, and to effectively manage foreign exchange risk.7. Mr. Ross Perot, a former Presidential candidate of the Reform Party, which is a third political party in the United States, had strongly objected to the creation of the North American Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which nonetheless was inaugurated in 1994, for the fear of losing American jobs to Mexico where it is much cheaper to hire workers. What are the merits and demerits of Mr. Perot’s position on NAFTA? Considering the recent economic developments in North America, how would you assess Mr. Perot’s position on NAFTA?Answer: Since the inception of NAFTA, many American companies indeed have invested heavily in Mexico, sometimes relocating production from the United States to Mexico. Although this might have temporarily caused unemployment of some American workers, they were eventually rehired by other industries often for higher wages. Currently, the unemployment rate in the U.S. is quite low by historical standard. At the same time, Mexico has been experiencing a major economic boom. It seems clear that both Mexico and the U.S. have benefited from NAFTA. Mr. Perot’s concern appears to have been ill founded.8. In 1995, a working group of French chief executive officers was set up by the Confederation of French Industry (CNPF) and the French Association of Private Companies (AFEP) to study the French corporate governance structure. The group reported the following, among other things “The board of directors should not simply aim at maximizing share values as in the U.K. and the U.S. Rather, its goal should be to serve the company, whose interests should be clearly distinguished from those of its shareholders, employees, creditors, suppliers and clients but still equated with their general common interest, which is to safeguard the prosperity and continuity of the company”. Evaluate the above recommendation of the working group.Answer: The recommendations of the French working group clearly show that shareholder wealth maximization is not a universally accepted goal of corporate management, especially outside the United States and possibly a few other Anglo-Saxon countries including the United Kingdom and Canada. To some extent, this may reflect the fact that share ownership is not wide spread in most other countries. In France, about 15% of households own shares.9. Emphasizing the importance of voluntary compliance, as opposed to enforcement, in the aftermath of corporate scandals, e.g., Enron and WorldCom, U.S. President George W. Bush stated that while tougher laws might help, “ultimately, the ethics of American business depends on the conscience of America’s business leaders.” Describe your view on this statement.Answer: There can be different answers to this question. If business leaders always behave with a high ethical standard, many of the corporate scandals we have seen lately might not have happened. Since we cannot fully depend on the ethical behavior on the part of business leaders, the society should protect itself by adopting the rules/regulations and governance structure that would induce business leaders to behave in the interest of the society at large.10. Suppose you are interested in investing in shares of Nokia Corporation of Finland, which is a world leader in wireless communication. But before you make investment decision, you would like to learn about the company. Visit the website of Yahoo () and collect information about Nokia, including the recent stock price history and analysts’ views of the company. Discuss what you learn about the company. Also discuss how the instantaneous access to information via internet would affect the nature and workings of financial markets.Answer: As students might have learned from visiting the website, information is readily available even for foreign companies like Nokia. Ready access to international information helps integrate financial markets, dismantling barriers to international investment and financing. Integration, however, may help a financial shock in one market to be transmitted to other markets.MINI CASE: NIKE AND SWEATSHOP LABORNike, a company headquartered in Beaverton, Oregon, is a major force in the sports footwear and fashion industry, with annual sales exceeding $ 12 billion, more than half of which now come from outside the United States. The company was co-founded in 1964 by Phil Knight, a CPA at Price Waterhouse, and Bill Bowerman, college track coach, each investing $ 500 to start. The company, initially called Blue Ribbon Sports, changed its name to Nike in 1971 and adopted the “Swoosh” logo—recognizable around the world—originally designed by a college student for $35. Nike became highly successful in designing and marketing mass-appealing products such as the Air Jordan, the best selling athletic shoe of all time.Nike has no production facilities in the United States. Rather, the company manufactures athletic shoes and garments in such Asian countries as China, Indonesia, and Vietnam using subcontractors, and sells the products in the U.S. and international markets. In each of those Asian countries where Nike has production facilities, the rates of unemployment and under-employment are quite high. The wage rate is very low in those countries by U.S. standards—the hourly wage rate in the manufacturing sector is less than $ 1 in each of those countries, compared with about $ 20 in the United States. In addition, workers in those countries often operate in poor and unhealthy environments and their rights are not particularly well protected. Understandably, host countries are eager to attract foreign investments like Nike’s to develop their economies and raise the living standards of their citizens. Recently, however, Nike came under worldwide criticism for its practice of hiring workers for such a low rate of pay—“next to nothing” in the words of critics—and condoning poor working conditions in host countries.Initially, Nike denied the sweatshop charges and lashed out at critics. But later, the company began monitoring the labor practice at its overseas factories and grading the factories in order to improve labor standards. Nike also agreed to random factory inspections by disinterested parties.Discussion points1.Do you think the criticism of Nike is fair, considering that the host countries are in dire needsof creating jobs?2.What do you think Nike’s executives might have done differently to prevent the sensitivecharges of sweatshop labor in overseas factories?3.Do firms need to consider the so-called corporate social responsibilities in making investmentdecisions?Suggested Solution to Nike and Sweatshop LaborObviously, Nike’s investments in such Asian countries as China, Indonesia, and Vietnam were motivated to take advantage of low labor costs in those countries. While Nike was criticized for the poor working conditions for its workers, the company has recognized the problem and has substantially improved the working environments recently. Although Nike’s workers get paid very low wages by the Western standard, they probably are making substantially more than their local compatriots who are either under- or unemployed. While Nike’s detractors may have valid points, one should not ignore the fact that the company is making contributions to the economic welfare of those Asian countries by creating job opportunities.CHAPTER 1A THEORY OF COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGESUGGESTED SOLUTIONS TO APPENDIX PROBLEMSPROBLEMS1. Country C can produce seven pounds of food or four yards of textiles per unit of input. Compute the opportunity cost of producing food instead of textiles. Similarly, compute the opportunity cost of producing textiles instead of food.Solution: The opportunity cost of producing food instead of textiles is one yard of textiles per 7/4 = 1.75 pounds of food. A pound of food has an opportunity cost of 4/7 = .57 yards of textiles.2. Consider the no-trade input/output situation presented in the following table for Countries X and Y. Assuming that free trade is allowed, develop a scenario that will benefit the citizens of both countries.INPUT/OUTPUT WITHOUT TRADE_______________________________________________________________________CountryX Y Total________________________________________________________________________ I. Units of Input(000,000)_______________________ ______________________________70 60FoodTextiles 40 30________________________________________________________________________ II. Output per Unit of Input(lbs or yards)______________________ ______________________________17 5FoodTextiles 5 2________________________________________________________________________ III. Total Output(lbs or yards)(000,000)______________________ ______________________________Food 1,190 300 1,490260Textiles 200 60________________________________________________________________________ IV. Consumption(lbs or yards)(000,000)_____________________ ______________________________Food 1,190 300 1,490260Textiles 200 60________________________________________________________________________Solution:Examination of the no-trade input/output table indicates that Country X has an absolute advantage in the production of food and textiles. Country X can “trade off” one unit of production needed to produce 17 pounds of food for five yards of textiles. Thus, a yard of textiles has an opportunity cost of 17/5 = 3.40 pounds of food, or a pound of food has an opportunity cost of 5/17 = .29 yards of textiles. Analogously, Country Y has an opportunity cost of 5/2 = 2.50 pounds of food per yard of textiles, or 2/5 = .40 yards of textiles per pound of food. In terms of opportunity cost, it is clear that Country X is relatively more efficient in producing food and Country Y is relatively more efficient in producing textiles. Thus, Country X (Y) has a comparative advantage in producing food (textile) is comparison to Country Y (X).When there are no restrictions or impediments to free trade the economic-well being of the citizens of both countries is enhanced through trade. Suppose that Country X shifts 20,000,000 units from the production of textiles to the production of food where it has a comparative advantage and that Country Y shifts 60,000,000 units from the production of food to the production of textiles where it has a comparative advantage. Total output will now be (90,000,000 x 17 =) 1,530,000,000 pounds of food and [(20,000,000 x 5 =100,000,000) + (90,000,000 x 2 =180,000,000) =] 280,000,000 yards of textiles. Further suppose that Country X and Country Y agree on a price of 3.00 pounds of food for one yard of textiles, and that Country X sells Country Y 330,000,000 pounds of food for 110,000,000 yards of textiles. Under free trade, the following table shows that the citizens of Country X (Y) have increased their consumption of food by 10,000,000 (30,000,000) pounds and textiles by 10,000,000 (10,000,000) yards.INPUT/OUTPUT WITH FREE TRADE__________________________________________________________________________CountryX Y Total__________________________________________________________________________ I. Units of Input(000,000)_______________________ ________________________________90 0FoodTextiles 20 90__________________________________________________________________________ II. Output per Unit of Input(lbs or yards)______________________ ________________________________17 5FoodTextiles 5 2__________________________________________________________________________ III. Total Output(lbs or yards)(000,000)_____________________ ________________________________Food 1,530 0 1,530180280Textiles 100__________________________________________________________________________ IV. Consumption(lbs or yards)(000,000)_____________________ ________________________________Food 1,200 330 1,530280Textiles 210 70__________________________________________________________________________。
