Criminology Essays Left Realism Critique

Criminology Essays Left Realism Critique Left Realism Critique. Left realism emerged as an influential theory during the 1980s. Its drive was partly dissatisfaction with the dominant criminological perspectives of the time and partially attributable to the prevailing political climate. This essay will outline the emergence of left realism as a means of explaining its main principles. The discussion will also engage with the criticisms of left realism and identify the criminological perspectives with which it conflicts. An understanding of left realism cannot be gained without an awareness of the prevailing intellectual, ideological and political context that surrounded its emergence. Therefore, it is important to appreciate the background from which left realism emerged. In the period immediately preceding the genesis of left realism, the most prevalent and influential criminological perspectives were based largely upon Marxist theories based upon notions of utopianism that were increasingly coming to be viewed as irrelevant in light of the political ethos of Margaret Thatchers Britain (Jones: 2001, 245). In particular, left realists were extremely critical of the way that radical criminological theories presented a characterisation of criminals as political catalysts against bourgeois hegemony and therefore to attempt to explain criminal behaviour in terms of it being a revolution against the injustices imposed upon the majority of the population by the ruling classes (Moore, 1991). Radical criminological theory saw crime as a consequence of (real or imagined) economic deprivation and under-privilege. Left realists were opposed to this view which allocated responsibility for crime to the State, which was seen as an instrument of the ruling class designed to consolidate the position of the powerful and promote the interests of the rich and powerful, rather than with the individual offender. Left realists also objected to the characterisation of the offender as the victim of the labelling process; a view which was popular with symbolic interactionists who were providing a popular alternative voice to the radical criminologists during the late 1970s and early 1980s: For over two decades [criminology] has neglected the effect of crime upon the victim and concentrated on the impact of the of the state through the process of labelling on the criminalIt became an advocate for the indefensible: the criminal became the victim, the state the solitary focus of attention, while the real victim remained off-stage (Matthews and Young, 1986: iv). The rejection by left realists of these constructions of the offender demonstrated one of their central beliefs which was that the offender should be not be absolved of responsibility for his actions and that it was not appropriate to cast blame on either the institutional or structural nature of society as was the tendency of the radical and interactionist schools of criminological thought. Rather than concur with this characterisation, left realists saw criminals as well-socialised individuals who exercised conscious and rational choice in deciding to offend and who saw crime as a way of resolving their particular problems. For left realists, the problems that offenders were trying to solve came from the capitalist ideology that was predominant in 1980s society. Left realists saw this capitalism as producing egalitarian notions such as that of political equality and the deterioration of views that each individual had an immutable place in the social hierarchy that was pre-determine d at birth. With these views came feelings of deprivation amongst those who were not possessed of material wealth but who were desirous of the benefits that were enjoyed by other members of society. Left realists felt that these individuals would see criminal enterprise as a way of rectifying this perceived inequality and securing their access to the commodities of capitalist society which they craved (Hopkins Burke, 2005: 220). In this respect, left realism could be seen as promoting a return to traditional Marxist views whereby crime was seen as an individual response (by the offender) to structural inequalities created by those in power in society which actually was a counter-active diversion away from the real problems of the causes of these inequalities that could only be solved by political change. Left realism rejected the post-Marxist radical theories that characterised crime as a revolutionary endeavour. In their seminal work, Lea and Young (1984) depicted criminal behaviour as almost an amplification of capitalist normalcy. In other words, the dominant view in the 1980s was that of capitalistic self-advancement in which individual endeavours were rewarded with material gain. Lea and Young asserted that a significant percentage of criminals shared these beliefs and replicated what had become conventional social values based upon the value of individual (and self-interested) effort in a society based upon competition and motivated by material success. However, criminals did not channel their energy into legitimate pursuits such as the endeavour for advancement in employment or entrepreneurial success, preferring instead to pursue socially acceptable goals through illegitimate avenues (criminal activity). As such, left realism viewed crime as the expression of capitalist values but though non-conventional means. In one respect, left realists agree with radical theorists in that it is common ground that crime is a reaction to an unjust society (Lea and Young, 1984: 45). However, there is also disagreement in that, unlike radical criminologists, left realists do not believe that the criminal should not be blamed for responding by engaging in offending behaviour: Crime is one form of egoistic response to deprivation. Its roots are in justice but its growth often perpetrates injustice (Lea and Young, 1984: 72) This notion of crime as the illegitimate manifestation of capitalist values is one of the central principles of left realism. However, although crime is seen as a self-interested and individual enterprise, left realists also believe that crime is a group response rather than an individual decision. They believe that crime is an inevitable consequence of a social situation in which a particular group feels that it is subject to disadvantage such as in a situation whereby there is a common ideological drive to measure success in material goods but there exist barriers to the attainment of these goals for some members of society. In such a situation, particularly if there appears to be no way of circumventing the obstacles, crime is certain to result. One of the key criticisms that has been levelled against left realist explanations of crime and criminality is that its focus on economic deprivation explains only economic crime but does nothing to account for the other manifestations of offending behaviour that are prevalent in society. Left realism is prepared to counter this criticism by drawing upon strain theory (Merton, 1968) to explain how the exclusion from legitimate economic opportunity may result in financial crime to rectify the situation or violent crime as a vent for frustration at the denial of a seemingly equitable access to benefits and resources. This actually consolidates one of the key principles of left realism in that reliance is placed upon subculture theories to support the argument of left realism that those who are excluded from the benefits of mainstream society develop their own cultures, norms and principles and operate within these. Inevitably, for those excluded from legitimate avenues of enterprise, t his involves criminal behaviour (Young, 1975). One of the central principles of left realism was a conceptualisation of crime that did not take an offender-centred view. Young proposed a square of crime in which the four key components were the offender, the victim, the agencies of formal control (such as the police) and the agencies of informal control (such as other members of society). This was an important tenet of left realism because it challenged a major paradox within radical theories; that of the powerless working-class criminal driven to offending behaviour as a result of the oppression of the privileged classes. Lea and Young examined official crime statistics and victim report surveys (such as the British Crime Survey) and concluded that although members of the working class appear to commit a disproportionate amount of crime, they often target the other members of the working class as their victims. Left realism addressed the issue of the ordinary victim of crime and thus changed the emphasis within criminological th eory and, gradually, within the practices of the criminal justice system. In particular, the square of crime ensured that crime prevention strategies were evolved which took account of the contributions of each of the four factors: To control crime from a realist perspective involves intervention at each part of the square of crime: at the level of the factors which give rise to the putative offender (such as structural unemployment), the informal system (such as lack of public mobilisation), the victim (such as inadequate target hardening) and the formal system (such as ineffective policing) (Young, 1986: 41). This emphasises one of the main principles of left realism; the belief in a joined up approach to tackling the problems of crime. However, this multi-causal approach that takes account of a variety of factors in explaining criminality could be accused of borrowing from a range of sociological explanations of crime, such as strain and control theories, and amalgamating selected aspects of these and giving them a Marxist slant. It seems reasonable to state that there is nothing particularly new in left realism; it is a pragmatic restatement of a number of established criminological principles taken from a particular ideological perspective (Downes and Rock, 2003: 292). However, left realism did become influential in raising awareness of the plight of victims of crime thus negating their invisibility and overcoming their marginalisation. Lea and Youngs studies showed that official statistics gave an incomplete picture of the extent of victimisation and therefore presented an inaccurate impression of the nature and extent of criminal activity. For Lea and Young, victim studies gave a fair more comprehensive and accurate account of victimisation, firstly because they included information about crimes which had occurred but which victims may not have reported to the police and, secondly, because they were capable of analysis on the basis of geographic location thus giving a true impression of the localised nature of much criminal behaviour. One of the other most notable contributions of left realism to criminological theory that emerged from victim surveys is the recognition of fear of crime as a significant social problem that is just as in need of re solution as actual crime . By acknowledging the existence of victims of crime, left realists gave voice to notions of pre-emptive strategies to counteract attempts at criminal behaviour: The organisation of communities in an attempt to pre-empt crime is of the utmost importance (Lea and Young, 1984: 267). This emphasis on the community and its role and importance in combating crime typifies the principles of cohesion and inclusion that characterises left realism. At its core, left realism is seeking for realistic strategies that will have a quantifiable impact upon crime (and fear of crime) within communities, especially amongst the poor and disadvantaged who are the most frequent victims of crime. This has been said to be a central component of contemporary left realism (Matthews and Young, 1992: 2). Notwithstanding this emphasis on the prevention of crime, it is a fundamental principle of left realism that the attainment of justice is more important than controlling crime. As such, the police play a key role in maintaining social control by establishing, maintaining and nurturing good community relations so as not to alienate the populace to whom they should be fully accountable (Kinsey, Lea and Young, 1986). Many of the criticisms levelled against left realists were voiced by the radical theorists of whom the left realists themselves were so critical. For example, Lea and Young criticised radical theorists for their excessive concentration of corporate crime and their marginalisation of real crime that affects ordinary people even though they accept that corporate crime is worse than working-class crime. Radical theorists counter by questioning why Lea and Young are prepared to view working-class crime as more serious merely because it is what ordinary people fear. Surely, it is argued, the actuality of crime is more potent and more serious than the fear of falling victim to a crime that may never occur. Left realists have no effective rejoinder for this criticism, other than to draw attention to the way in which fear of crime can have a real and negative impact upon ordinary members of society, by preventing them from going about their ordinary business, for example, or avoiding particu lar activities or places (Young, 1999). The multi-causal approach of left realism can also be criticised for failing to explain all forms of criminal behaviour. Feminist criminological theorists have also been critical of left realism in its tackling both of female criminal behaviour and of its failure to explain crimes that are traditionally seen as targeting women, such as rape. Just as it could be criticised for failing to provide an adequate explanation of different types of criminal behaviour, left realism can be accused of an overly one-dimensional focus on young, male, working-class criminal behaviour to the detriment of offenders from other socio-demographic backgrounds. Female criminality is largely unaddressed and, moreover, exposes a central weakness in one of the key principles of left realism; the reliance on relative deprivation as an explanation of criminal behaviour. For example, Lea and Young assert that crime results from the exclusion of a particular group from legitimate opportunities for success and material gain. In light of this, it would be expected that female criminality, which was always extremely low, would decrea se even further as women gained greater equality in the workplace as this would ensure that they were less excluded from legitimate avenues of success. However, the converse proved to be true and the greater prominence of women in the workplace was mirrored by a growth in female offending; an outcome that is directly contrary to the explanation of criminal behaviour propounded by left realists (Smart, 1989). Equally, it is difficult to see how left realism can explain sexual crimes against women unless this falls within the same category as violent crimes that are the result of frustration following a failure to achieve legitimate success. This seems an extremely tenuous argument for such complex crimes and, in any case, left realists have tended not to engage with the issue of rape to any great degree thus the explanation remains speculative (Heidensohn, 1985). Overall, it is clear that the emergence of left realism was both a product of the prevailing political climate and a strong influence on the social and political development of more cohesive approaches to crime control and prevention that drew together a range of players in the criminal justice process rather than focusing exclusively on the offender. As a theoretical perspective, it expanded the focus of criminological enquiry and moved beyond the dominant ideology of the 1970s and early 1980s. As such, its contribution to criminological debate cannot be under-estimated. However, it can be criticised as a rather narrowly-focussed theory that fails to provide an adequate explanation of the full gamut of criminal behaviour. It has, however, provided a building block upon which other theories can build a broader and more wide-ranging explanation of criminality. Bibliography Downes, P. and Rock, P., (2003) Understanding Deviance, 4th ed., Oxford: Oxford University Press Heidensohn, F., (1985) Women and Crime, London: Routledge Hopkins Burke, R., (2005) An Introduction to Criminological Theory, Cullompton: Willan Jones, S., (2001) Criminology, 2nd ed., London: Butterworths Kinsey, R., Lea, J. and Young, J., (1986) Losing the Fight Against Crime, Oxford: Blackwell Press Lea, J. and Young, J., (1984) What is to be Done About Law and Order, Harmondsworth: Penguin Press Matthews, R. and Young, J., (1992) Issues in Realist Criminology, London: Sage Publications Merton, R., (1968) Social Theory and Social Structure, New York: Free Press Moore, S., (1991) Investigating Crime and Deviance, London: Collins Educational Publishers Smart, C., (1989) Feminism and the Power of the Law, London: Routledge Young, J., Left Realism and the Priorities of Crime Control in Stenson, K. and Cowell, D., (eds.) (1999) The Politics of Crime Control, London: Sage Publishing Young, J., Ten Points of Realism in Matthews, R. and Young, J., (1986) Issues in Realist Criminology, London: Sage Publications Young, J., Working Class Criminology in Taylor, I., Walton, P. and Young, J., (eds.) (1975) Critical Criminology, London: Routledge

Feminism Ophelia Hamlet

Aphelion's struggles in the patriarchal society in which she lives and the loss of her identity as a whole, by not only her father, but other authorial males in her life. Throughout the beginning of the play, Aphelia, is used as somewhat of a pawn by all the male figures in her life, emotionally, physically, and even for sheer politics.Her lack of a mother figure and severe dependence on her father and brother, as well as other males, has literally taken away who she really is, her opportunity to make and act on her own decisions. Aphelia is treated by her father as if she is not only his daughter, but his possession. When Aphelia first speaks to her father about Hamlet, he states â€Å"l do not know, my lord, what I should think,† (1. 2). Polonium responds in an authoritative way, basically attesting himself as the decision maker. When he states â€Å"You do not understand yourself so clearly.. â€Å"(l . 3), he attacks her competence to handle herself. He goes on to say â €˜â€ ¦As it behooves my daughter and your honor†(l . 3), making it clear that it would be in her best interest to behave according to the â€Å"set† standards and how she acts and presents herself, reflects onto him as her father and as a member of the kings court. It is clear he doesn't care for Hamlet and ants his daughter to have nothing to do with him, convincing her that she is nothing to him.. But, after hearing more about Hamlet acted towards her by grabbing her and just staring into her, he takes full advantage of the situation and instructs his daughter to behave according to his best interests, to get closer to the king, Claudia.Aphelia, living in a male dominated world, has over the years, lost herself as a person, as a woman, doing things that she wouldn't normally do, such as be a part of her fathers plan to expose Hamlets reason for his â€Å"madness. † During the time when the play was written, women were marginalia, often dewed as property, even with fathers and daughters. In that society a woman would be required to be a dutiful daughter, wife, and mother, and dare not stray away from those approved roles that were placed upon them. Aphelia, growing up always being the dutiful daughter, obeys her fathers wishes and follows through with the plan.The pitfalls to being a dutiful daughter, in her case, is that she lost the one man that made her happy, her lover, not only says horrid remarks to her, but breaks her down, and any little bit of â€Å"reality' she had was lost forever. The hazards of being a dutiful daughter/mother/wife, are always present. There is the immediate consequences, then there are the ones that over time, as her character â€Å"screams† out to the audience, being oneself becomes obsolete. Her brother, Alerter, who is going back to France, also â€Å"advises† his sister to keep away from Hamlet.Expressing that Hamlet being a prince, would marry for the good of the state and due to the differences in class, Hamlet would not marry Aphelia. Alerter also believes that Hamlet cares for her but â€Å"loves† her only for sexual need. â€Å"Forward, not permanent, sweet, not lasting. † (1. 3). Unfortunately, exposing another â€Å"role† a woman would face in a patriarchal society, sexual roles. He is also concerned with her good name and family reputation, possibly implying that she could get pregnant and he would leave her, thus putting herself in a â€Å"unacceptable† role of a woman; a woman with a past, forever branding her and the family name.Hamlet plays on her emotional strings. He has expressed his love for her and has given her gifts. The sudden death of his father and finding out the reasons behind his death, as well as the disgust of his mother marrying so quickly afterwards, molds Hamlet too man he has never been before; untrusting, and very paranoid about others close to him, and for very good reason. He took out his anger with hi s mother on all who loved him. His only life line was Aphelia, the only one he thought of as true, or tried to make himself believe that she was, by grabbing her and observing her closely, as if he could see right through her.After her ultimate betrayal, by setting him up and lying to him about where her father was, she, cut off his life line. By doing so, he insults her, tells her that he loved her once, and belittles her to no end, until she is ambushed by so many emotions, that she is left in total confusion and heartbreak. With her brother in France, Hamlet rejecting their relationship, Aphelia finds out ere father has been killed by Hamlet. She in a sense, is left â€Å"alone,† and cannot handle herself, without the direction of her father , brother and Hamlet.At this point its clear, Aphelia has gone totally mad, Speaking very little, and if anything it is about her deceased father in chants and song. Now with the males in her life are gone, she has served her purpose i n the story. She starts going down a downward spiral and shortly thereafter, she commits suicide, or at least it was implied that she did, by drowning. In conclusion, although a small, seemingly insignificant character, Aphelia, not only provides the reader to the philanthropic ideals and patriarchal attitudes towards women.But also serves to be somewhat like a mirror to the audience, one by one, â€Å"reflecting† the characters true self/intentions. Maybe being her ONLY purpose in the story to unveil her co-characters motive and who they really are in general. Polonium, her father, uses his daughter as some sort for property, for political gain and interest. Her brother, Alerter, again uses her for political reasons, somewhat, and to protect his name, uses her for the sake of his pride, and introduces sex, as Hamlets true goal with Aphelia.Then Hamlet himself, takes her on a reallocates of love/hate and confusion, labeling her as untrustworthy and corrupt, he destroys her em otional being, rendering her completely helpless and incompetent to handle life on her own. This view was the norm at the time, that many men saw as being true, that a woman will be nothing without a man but also fail to realize that without women men would hardly be anything as well, they need women, as shown in the play, to succeed in their own personal goals, whether financial, political or other. [1180]

Dividend Policy With Reference To British Sky Broadcasting Group Plc - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 10 Words: 2922 Downloads: 10 Date added: 2017/06/26 Category Finance Essay Type Cause and effect essay Did you like this example? Dividends and the implication of dividend choices have been the subject of much debate, particularly in the recent economic crisis where investors and other stakeholders are becoming increasingly nervous about the financial standing of companies in which they have an interest. On a basic level, dividends also provide a regular income to investors and, as such, the choice of how much dividend to pay out is seen as a critical signal from the management team. Investors will often select certain companies, based on the possibility that they are likely to receive a regular dividend and any changes in the underlying policies can have a very detrimental impact on the perceptions of both current and prospective investors. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Dividend Policy With Reference To British Sky Broadcasting Group Plc" essay for you Create order Although some investors will invest in a company for capital growth, the dividend level is still seen as a strong signal; therefore, regular analysis of dividend policies and payout rates are likely to be undertaken. In this report, Sky (British Sky Broadcasting Group PLC (BSY.L)) will be looked at, in terms of the way in which it has approached dividend payout in the last five years. Theory relating to dividend policy and the approaches taken will then be considered in order to determine whether Sky has complied with general theories, or whether it has deviated from what would be expected based on theory. Empirical data is contained in the appendices. Background to Sky Before going on to consider the dividend policies and how these have been applied by Sky, it is helpful to put the matter in context and to determine the way in which the company has been performing, in recent years, so that this can be correlated with any changes in dividend policy. The company was formed in its current standing, back in 1990, when there was a merger of British Satellite Broadcasting and Sky Television. This was an equal merger and created the company that we see today, Sky. Prior to the merger, both companies were sustaining heavy financial losses and it was found that by undertaking the merger, it was possible to gain economies of scale. It was also possible for the two companies to draw on each others strengths, for example, British Satellite Broadcasting had a range of solid advertisers, whereas Sky Television was renowned for having a wider range of channels. By pooling these two resources, it was possible for the company to go from strength to strength and it would be expected that this will be reflected in the financial performance of the company, from this point onwards. At the point of the merger, Sam Chisholm was the Chief Executive Officer and he remained in place, until 1997. He then handed over to Mark Booth; and, in 1999, Tony Ball went on to lead Sky during the period within which Sky Television was introduced. It was during this period that the company returned to profit and subscriber members rose at a substantial rate. As is the case with many large companies, Sky was not without its difficulties within the boardroom, particularly when James Murdoch was appointed, in 2003, as there were allegations of internal dealings from the shareholders and a general feeling of discontent, during this period. These difficulties rumbled on and in 2007 Rupert Murdoch, the father of James Murdoch, stepped down from his role as non-executive chairman, but was then replaced by his son who stepped down from the position of CEO, being replaced by Jeremy Darroch. During 2010, a takeover bid was made by News Corp where it attempted to gain control of the 61% of shares that it did not own, but were owned by other shareholders. The price offered was 700 pence per share; the shareholders rejected this offer, stating that they believed an offer of in excess of 800 pence per share would be necessary to make the deal appropriately valuable for the shareholders. It should be noted that, were this takeover to continue, it would be necessary to gain permission from both the European Commission and the Office of Fair Trading, due to anti-competitive dangers of having such a large player in one industry. Over the last 10 years, the profit within Sky has gone up and down with a particularly bad period being experienced during 2000 to 2002. Sky suffered a further drop in profit, in 2008, although this was largely attributed to the general financial crisis and individual inability to pay for what was perceived to be a luxury product. These difficulties and corporate movements are likely to have a direct impact on the perceptions of investors and are therefore relevant to the way in which management boards deal with dividend payouts. Maintaining confidence in the company is critically important and when there are period of difficulties, such as those experienced in 2008, the decisions relating to issues such as dividend become even more critical for the management board, which is likely to pay particular attention to the messages that it is sending out through its dividend decisions. Based on this, when the dividend payments are being considered and the policies looked at, it is important to bear in mind that there are underlying commercial issues that could have a direct bearing on the choices being made and the impact that these choices have on the company. Sky Dividend Approach Despite the variable performance of Sky (BSkyB, 2010), it has maintained a growth policy when it comes to dividends. This is indicated by the fact that, when looking at the discussion on dividends, during the last five years reports, there is an emphasis placed on management confidence and the decision to offer strong dividends, even when the profit levels are weak. Appendix 1 contains the earnings per share calculations, as well as the dividend per share calculations. Earnings per share reflect the amount of profit that can be attributed to each share. For example, in 2010, the calculation reflected profits before tax of 878 million divided by 1743 million shares, resulting in earnings per share of 50.4 pence. This earnings per share figure is the highest seen, in the last five years, with a figure in 2006 being 30.2 pence, dropping to a negative figure in 2008, before recovering, in 2009. Despite this dramatic fluctuation in the earnings per share, the company has maintained a consistent dividend policy because it had confidence in the strength of its position in the market. This consistent growth and confidence can be seen when looking at the dividend per share which is a reflection of the amount of equity dividends paid out per share. As would be expected, this is the highest in 2010; however, even in 2008, where the profit levels were negative, the dividend per share still increased on the 2007 figure. In fact, in every year of the last five y ears, the dividend per share figure has grown from the original figure of 12.2 pence per share, in 2006 to the current 19.4 pence per share. Essentially, these dividend per share figures show that the company has smoothed the negative impact of the downturn, in 2008. Appendix 2 shows the dividend cover and dividend yield within the company, in the last five years. Dividend cover effectively shows how many times the profit could have paid the dividends actually paid. This is a measure of the companys ability to pay its dividends and is a reflection of how realistic the dividend payments are. Interestingly, the coverage rate in 2010 is very similar to that in 2006, at 2.6 times and 2.5 times, respectively. This suggests that the financial health of the company, in terms of the dividend promised, has remained relatively consistent, over the five years. However, as indicated earlier, there was a substantial drop in 2008 and this is reflected in the fact that the coverage ratio shows that the profits did not cover the dividend payments, during this period. Although it recovered slightly, in 2009, with the coverage of 1.2 times, it was not until 2010 that recovery was seen on the ratio returned to 2.6. Again, this would be expected, given the fact that the dividend payment increased year-on-year, despite a substantial dip in profits, during 2008. It has, however, shown by the confidence displayed by the management team, in 2008, that recovery was imminent and this confidence was correctly placed with those investors that have stayed with the company for the previous five year s being rewarded by a higher dividend payment and higher share prices that they can now obtain for their shares. Finally, we shall now look at the dividend yield, i.e. the return an investor obtains on the capital, which involves taking the dividend per share and dividing it by the share price. Many investors see this as the key figure as it indicates the financial return that they are receiving on each share and this can be used in comparison with alternative investment that may be available to the investor, for example bank accounts. In this case, the dividend yield has fluctuated, in the last five years, reaching a high point in 2009, before dropping in 2010. It is not entirely unexpected, given the fact that, in 2009, the share prices were reasonably low after the poor performance of 2008 and the lack of general investor confidence and desirability of the shares. Despite this low share price that was in existence, in 2009, the dividends remained relatively high and therefore the return was naturally higher. As confidence increased in the shares, the share price would naturally rise, as there was a greater demand for shares in Sky and this will have the impact of reducing the dividend yield, as the dividends do not increase at the same rate. It should be noted, however, that the dividend yield is based on the share price in that given year and it is possible that investors who had purchased the shares, at an earlier date, when the prices were either higher or lower will find that there individual return is diffe rent. This supports the notion that those investors that have stayed with the company for the difficult period of 2008 and 2009 or alternatively those that chose to purchase shares during the troubled period will be gaining an increasing dividend yield, now the company is recovering. The approach taken by Sky will be considered in the context of wider dividend policy theories, in the following section. Dividend Policy Underlying Theories Given the importance of dividends to the investors in the companies, it is unsurprising that there is a range of different theories underlying the ways in which companies deal with the dividend policy. From the previous analysis, it can be seen that Sky has opted to maintain a policy of dividend growth, regardless of underlying profit levels, in order to maintain confidence in the company and, in this case, confidence has been well-placed due to the fact that there was a substantial recovery, in 2010, despite the weak performance, in 2008. However, alternative theories exist that could have been used in order to determine the appropriate dividend policy for Sky, during the previous five-year period. One theory which is often subscribed to is that of the residual policy. In accordance with this theory, a company will only pay dividends when it has residual earnings in place, for example, where it has taken advantage of all possible internal investment approaches. The argument in favour of this type of approach is that the shareholders will feel that the company is undertaking all possible action, in order to promote its long-term growth. By paying dividends when the company simply does not have the residual earnings to do so, there is an argument that the company is not putting itself in a good position for long-term growth. A secondary benefit from following this type of approach is that it refocuses the management team on ensuring that investment is undertaken and dividend policy becomes almost secondary. Furthermore, it reduces the chances of having to raise further equity by issuing new shares because any investment has been funded from the internal earnings; this can also ha ve a benefit to shareholders, as their own shareholding will not be diluted. This is not an approach that has been taken by Sky as, had it followed this type of approach, no dividend would have been paid, in 2008. Instead, the company prioritised a dividend growth theory and did not make investments a priority (Gordon, 1963). Another theory which has been developed by Modigliani and Miller (MM), back in the 1960s, is that which argued that dividend policy was irrelevant when all factors were pulled together (Baker, 2009). They argued that the way in which a firm divides its earnings pot between paying out to shareholders and retaining the funds, internally is, in essence, irrelevant in the long term. When developing the theory, MM relied on a range of assumptions including the notion that the way in which the company invests in growth is independent of its dividend decisions, and also that the company operates within a perfect capital market. For example, there are no transaction costs and no taxes and all investors have exactly the same information, at the same time. In theory, they argue that investors will act in a way that produces the correct level of dividend by either buying or selling shares, depending on how the company is performing. For example, if the company is not producing the level of divi dend that an investor requires, then it will simply purchase more shares to get more dividends and vice versa. This suggests that the dividend policy of Skys management team would be largely irrelevant, as investors would simply shift, in order to obtain the returns that suit their own needs. John Lintner (1962) also developed a dividend theory, namely the bird in the hand theory. The theory suggested that investors generally prefer to receive regular dividend payments, rather than reinvesting capital growth, in the future. This suggests that investors, on the whole, are risk-averse and prefer to receive dividend, in the current year, rather than potential growth in 5 to 10 years time. To a certain extent, Sky has followed this approach, because it recognises that providing a return to investors, on a year by year basis, is seen as preferable to promising long-term investment. Clearly, however, this type of theory will vary, depending on the needs of the individual investor. Some investors will be investing in shares with the view to long-term growth and therefore are less likely to pay attention to the dividend returns, on a year by year basis, (Frankfurter and Wood, 2002). Finally, and arguably the most influential theory, when it comes to the approach taken by Sky is that of the dividend signalling theory. It is argued that, contrary to the dividend irrelevant theory, the dividend value actually does have a dramatic impact on the share price, due to the fact that the choice of dividend policy gives a signalling effect as to how well the management team thinks the company will perform, in the future (Brittain, 1966). A change in the dividend payment, either upwards or downwards, has been argued to offer a signal to shareholders and investors, in terms of what the likely future earnings will be. For example, if the management team is positive about the future of the company as a whole and that they may maintain a high dividend. When dividend payment is reduced, this can often negative signal to the market and is therefore something that a company will often avoid, even where profit levels are low, as was seen in the case of Sky, in 2008. Summary and Conclusion By analysing the background commercial position of Sky, in the last five years, its financial performance in relation to dividends and also wider dividend policy theories, it is clear to see that Sky is following a dividend signalling approach, as well as the dividend growth theory, by increasing its dividend, year-on-year, regardless of the underlying position of the company. There are several concerns associated with this approach. Firstly, where dividends are being paid out at a high level in years where the income is simply not there to sustain this level, it is possible that the company is missing out on investment opportunities and therefore long-term growth may not be as rapid as it could be. Clearly, this depends on the underlying ethos of the company and whether or not investment is essential to sustain growth or whether it prefers to follow the bird in hand theory, which suggests that shareholders prefer to have immediate returns. Furthermore, paying out high levels of divi dend, even when there is no profit at all, is only sustainable for a certain period of time. Whilst, in this case, Sky returned to profit rapidly in 2009 and 2010 and therefore paying dividends in 2008 did not produce long-term financial difficulties for the company, had this not occurred, it is possible that the company would, ultimately, have suffered and run out of money to pay dividends. This may have required it to take out additional long-term loans, or to issue equity, which would eventually have had the impact of increasing costs and making the position within the company even more difficult to return to profit. In this case, however, the management team at Sky correctly assessed that the company was in a strong position and likely to grow, in the coming years and signalled as much to the shareholders through maintaining a high level of dividend. This, in turn, meant that the share prices increased and this has been reflected in the dividend yield dropping slightly, in 2010. Overall, Sky has followed a growth and signalling theory, which has resulted in positive trends of the company, but nonetheless, caution should be used when applying this type of approach, as it relies on recovery, in order to be sustainable.

Genetically Modified Foods And Its Impact On The...

Norman Borlaug once said, â€Å"Man s survival, from the time of Adam and Eve until the invention of agriculture, must have been precarious because of his inability to ensure his food supply.† Throughout the history of mankind, the global food supply has become a battleground for politicians, scientists, and farmers. Genetically modified organisms, or GMOs, have been in the spotlight throughout much of the last four decades, offering a viable solution to world hunger issues. It is through genetic engineering that scientists can achieve the creation of genetically modified crops, creating new crop varieties designed to yield more products with less inputs. Genetically modified foods offer numerous benefits, such as boosting our economy, eradicating hunger and malnutrition, and also provide a safe food source for a growing population. Genetically modified foods are economically viable, able to help ease world hunger issues and are in fact safe to eat. Genetically modified foods have a major positive economic impact on the agricultural industry worldwide. The Monsanto Corporation is a United States based agricultural biotechnology corporation, and one of the world’s leading producers of genetically modified seeds and crops. The Monsanto Corporation is also a global leader in scientific research, development and also studies assessing the economic impacts of genetically modified foods designed for human consumption. â€Å"Agri-businesses are seeing greater profits due to the increaseShow MoreRelatedAre Gmo s Good For Humans? Essay1743 Words   |  7 Pagesonline video, Talking about food safety, Monsanto s lead toxicologist, Shawna Lemke says that, In recent years people have become increasingly interested in where their food comes from, and how it is produced....there is still conflicting and confusing information about Genetically Modified Foods, but because of the intense work the scientists that work here do, we all f eel confident in feeding them to our kids. Monsanto is a Fortune 500 sustainable agricultural company that started in 1901Read MoreThe New Gmo Labeling Bill S. 764 Essay1521 Words   |  7 Pagesbill will have serious implications not only in our economy and agricultural industry, but many economies and agricultural industries worldwide. Recent studies of how extensive the effect of this bill will be on the consumers of the United States are estimating upwards of $1,050 annual increase in our grocery spending to accommodate. The damage occurs when food producers that use GMOs inevitably follow the trend of agricultural industries before them and switch to non-GMO ingredients if they believeRead MoreBenefits Of Genetically Modified Foods1203 Words   |  5 PagesGenetically modified organisms, sometimes known as GMO’s, are plants or animals that are created through the process of genetic engineering. Modified foods are often viewed as a valuable solution to ending world hun ger, because they take less time to produce into larger crops. The use of gmos have increased in recent years,because they can grow bigger and faster than regular fruits and vegetables in much harsher environments.Also have seem to sustain and fight off many of the pests that have troubledRead MoreHow Technology Has Changed The Quality Of The Food1750 Words   |  7 Pagestechnology of transgenic contemporary biological science, is widely used in various fields. For example, through the cultivation of genetically modified cotton for diagnosis and treatment of genes to be used in transgenic technology. How to change the quality of the food to make it more suitable for human use has become a hot issue. GM technology is widely used in medicine, industry, agriculture, energy, environmental protection, and new materials. GM technology is the first wave of GM technology medicineRead MoreU.s. Agriculture And Agricultural Productivity1073 Words   |  5 Pagesmodifications in U.S. agriculture has remained in agricultural input markets. The exceptional development in yields and agricultural total factor productivity owes much to biological innovations in crop seeds, development of hybrid crops in the early part of the 20th century, with adoption of high-yielding varieties and modern biotechnology. Development of new types of pesticides and seeds has substantially improved agricultural productivity (). Agricultural input markets have evolved and family–ownedRead MoreGenetically Modified Organisms ( Gmo ) Essay1737 Words   |  7 PagesGenetically Modified Organisms The genetically modified organisms (GMO) correspond to plants, animals as well as microorganisms whose DNA has been altered. They are also known as transgenic, genetically manipulated, or engineered organisms. The intentional incorporation or deletion of their genes is intended to introduce or modify some of its characteristics. Although this has been seen as a great advantage by many scientists and supporters of this technology, transgenic organisms suppose a dangerRead MoreGenetically Modified Foods Essay1171 Words   |  5 Pages Introduction. Genetically modified foods are foods produced from organisms that have had specific changes (adding, deleting, changing segments) introduced into their DNA using the methods of genetic engineering.(King 2009) So they could produce desirable traits or eliminate undesirable traits, a process that enables transfer of genes between different species that would not interbreed in nature. 1983 marked the first ever transgenic plant. This was a tobacco plant that was created with antibioticRead MoreGlobalization Is It Good Or Bad?1719 Words   |  7 Pageschanges in the food industry in the face of globalization. I will present its pros and cons, but it is your choice if whether globalization as beneficial or not. I will want to help you make that decision. Introduction Food security is one of the most important social needs. Global agriculture is increasingly developing not freely, but controlled by transnational processes of economic, political and natural. Nowadays, people are witnessing contemporary realities of the food industry and the effectsRead MoreThe Impact of Genetically Modified Foods1368 Words   |  6 PagesIt is not a secret that GMF-ed foods have spread out rapidly to the whole world.Genetically modified foods most commonly refers to the plants, which has been modified in the laboratory to enhance improved nutritional content and aimed traits created for human beings and animals. With progress in various types of technology, especially in genetic engineering, farmers and scientists have changed the way in which food is grown and made, raising questions about the methods, their risks and possibleRead MoreGenetic Modification ( Gm )1619 Words   |  7 Pagesan organism such as plants or animals. No one is permitted to deal with a genetically modified organism (GMO) in Australia unless the Australian Gene Technology Regulator has determined that the GMO is safe to human health and the surrounding environment. As the world’s population continues to increase and is expected to double within the next few years, the world’s demand for food and fibre has increased drastically. GM foods and fibres seem to be the only means for a solution to provide for the high