This study aims to empirically analyze the impact of budget allocation by the Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information (KISTI) on national research competitiveness, thereby reassessing the value of investing in research infrastructure within a knowledge-based society. In the 21st century, research and development (R&D) have emerged as a pivotal element of national competitiveness, underlining the increasing importance of investments aimed at constructing and enhancing research infrastructure. However, empirical studies examining the causal relationship between research infrastructure investment and national research competitiveness are still notably scarce. Accordingly, this research endeavors to systematically delineate the effect of research infrastructure investment, with a focus on KISTI’s budget allocation, on enhancing national R&D outcomes. To achieve this, the structural relationship between KISTI’s budget, national R&D budget, and various academic and industrial performance indicators was analyzed using multiple regression and simple regression analysis. In particular, by demonstrating the mechanism through which the budget management of research support organizations like KISTI contributes to strengthening national research competitiveness, this study aims to shed new light on the strategic value of research infrastructure investment in a knowledge-based society. Furthermore, these findings are expected to provide valuable evidence for the formulation of national R&D policies in Korea and the strategic planning of budget operations for research support organizations. Through strategic investment of limited budgets, this could enhance the efficiency of national R&D investments and contribute to strengthening the capacity for scientific and technological innovation required in a knowledge-based society.

This study explores the impact of environmental degradation on public debt in the largest Southeast Asian (ASEAN-5) countries. Prior research has not examined environmental degradation as a possible determinant of public debt in the ASEAN region. As such, the primary objective is to examine key determinants of public debt, notably economic growth, trade openness, investment, and environmental degradation. Utilizing the Fully Modified Ordinary Least Squares (FMOLS) method and data from 1996 to 2021, the study reveals a negative correlation between investment and public debt. Conversely, a positive relationship exists between economic growth, environmental degradation, and public debt levels. These findings hold significant implications for policymakers seeking to craft effective economic and environmental strategies to ensure sustainable development in the ASEAN-5 region. Stronger economic growth can drive up public debt. Importantly, the study highlights the importance of tailored approaches, considering each country’s unique fiscal and developmental characteristics. Applying the Two-Gap Model enhances the understanding of these complex dynamics in shaping public debt and its relationship with environmental factors.

Professional judgments in business valuation should be based on persuasive comparative data and conclusive empirical studies. However, these judgments are frequently made without these conditions, causing professional skepticism. An appraiser should explain in detail what was done to get the market value because valuation is the initial crucial step in the investment decision process. In socially responsible investment schemes, an appraiser has a fiduciary duty and a vital role in protecting the public from fraud and the risk of asset value destruction. Professional skepticism is essential to direct the appraiser’s judgment towards independent valuation for the public interest, assisting in evaluating the relevance and reliability of information, especially relating to social, environmental, and ethical issues. This paper studies the business valuation process from a behavioral finance perspective in the United States and Indonesia, aiming to tweak business valuation practices, identify biases, and mitigate them to ensure the market value does not shift far from fairness opinion. The case study explores experiences from the professional role-learning process. The results highlight the need for an appraisal protocol in business valuation, improvements in the discount for lack of marketability application, and these findings are pertinent to business appraisers and regulators. Recommendations include enhancing the clarity of professional judgments and the integration of recent empirical studies into practice.

This study updates Pereira and Pereira by revisiting the macroeconomic and budgetary effects of infrastructure investment in Portugal using a dataset from the Portuguese Ministry of the Economy covering 1980–2019, thereby capturing a period of austerity and decreased investment in the 2010s. A vector-autoregressive approach re-estimates the elasticity and marginal product of twelve infrastructure types on private investment, employment, and output. The most significant long-term accumulated effects on output accrue from investments in airports, ports, health, highways, water, and railroads. In contrast, those in municipal roads, electricity and gas, and refineries are statistically insignificant. All statistically significant infrastructure investments pay for themselves over time through additional tax revenues. Compared to the previous study, highways, water, and ports have more than doubled their estimated marginal products due to a significant increase in relative scarcity over the last decade. In addition, our analysis reveals an important shift in the impacts of infrastructure investment, now producing more substantial immediate effects but weaker long-term impacts. This change offers policymakers a powerful tool for short-term economic stimulus and is particularly useful in addressing immediate economic challenges.