Search results

The history and prospects of European integration are both fascinating and exciting. Analysts of every aspect of this process, including its cultural, economic, financial, historical, political, and social dimensions, should recall that its main rationale remains as it has always been, to permanently end conflict and to secure peace and prosperity for all Europeans. As the European Union's (EU's) own website (see http://europa.eu.int) points out Europe has been the scene of many and frequent bloody wars throughout the centuries. In the 75-year period between 1870 and 1945, for example, France and Germany fought each other three times with huge loss of life. The history of modern European integration commenced in earnest with the realization in the early 1950s that the best way to prevent future conflict is to secure more economic and political integration. This led to the establishment of the European Coal and Steel Community in 1951, followed shortly by the European Economic Community (EEC) in 1957. Since then, the process of integration and enlargement has progressed at varying speeds, but always moving forwards. In 1967, the founding institutions of the EEC were merged to form today's European Commission (EC), the Council of Ministers, and the European Parliament. The members of the European Parliament were initially chosen by the member governments of the EEC, but direct elections commenced in 1979, and have continued every 5 years since then. The Treaty of Maastricht created the EU in 1992 and established the process of economic and monetary union (EMU) that culminated in the introduction of the euro in 12 of the 15 Member States in 2002.

Yusaf Akbar is Associate Professor of International Business at the Southern New Hampshire University, United States. His teaching and research interests are in foreign direct investment, public policy and strategy, and his geographical area interests are in East and Central Europe. He has published widely in peer-reviewed journals including Journal of World Business, Thunderbird International Business Review and World Competition. Yusaf has been Visiting Professor at various schools around the world, including the American University in Bulgaria, ESSCA, the KMBS, the MIB School of Management-Trieste, and Thunderbird.

We examine how the international financial crisis of 2007–2010 has impacted on the performance of emerging market MNCs relative to their developed market counterparts. We present our multinational classification system and categorise the world's largest firms, the Global Fortune 500 (GF500), according to their degree of multinationality. We show that the number of GF500 firms from emerging markets has increased significantly over the past decade, and that the international financial crisis of 2007–2010 has further enhanced this trend. We compare the relative risk-adjusted performance of emerging and developed markets before and since the international financial crisis. We show that although the GF500 firms from developed markets tend to be more multinational than the GF500 firms from emerging markets, the latter have outperformed the former over the past decade – both before and after the recent international financial crisis.

We study up to 27 years of weekly data on nine currencies to examine the importance of the Japanese yen in exchange rate determination in North and Southeast Asia. We combine a time-varying methodology alongside a focus on long-run equilibrium. Our findings suggest that the Japanese yen had virtually no influence on Asian exchange rates in the 10-year period prior to the Asian financial crisis in the late 1990s. Since the crisis, the yen and the German mark in particular have exerted a significant influence over the region's exchange rates except for the Chinese yuan, the Hong Kong dollar and the Malaysian ringgit, which continue to be closely related to the US dollar.

Understanding economic development in the transition economies of Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) requires an analysis of investment in these economies. Previous analyses, however, have focused primarily if not singularly on the role of foreign direct investment (FDI; Akbar & McBride, 2004; Clague & Rausser, 1992; Uhlenbruck & De Castro, 2000). This focus follows that of regional policy-makers, who heavily encouraged FDI through acquisition or greenfield investments (Frydman, Rapaczynski, & Earle, 1993). These policy-makers, however, additionally established stock exchanges in each of their countries. There are now at least 24 operating stock exchanges in CEE and the countries that previously made up the former Soviet Union and the former Yugoslavia.¹ The role of the development of these local stock exchanges in the development (LSED) of local economies (primarily through foreign portfolio investment) has not yet been systematically examined, nor has it been linked explicitly to the role of FDI. Finally, the role of local companies’ listings on foreign exchanges (FSEL) has not been examined in tandem with the role of FDI or LSED (for an examination of the relationship between FDI, LSED, and FSEL, however, see Claessens, Klingebiel, & Schmukler, 2001).

Overnight risk is of particular interest for many market participants including traders who provide liquidity to the market, but also to market participants with longer investment horizons who want to determine whether a given risk–return tradeoff can justify possible intermediate portfolio hedging transactions. Overnight risk may in particular play a highly significant role in emerging markets, given that information is incorporated into prices at a slower rate and liquidity may hinder a quick unwinding of portfolio positions.

This chapter analyses the operational framework for monetary policy implementation in some central European countries that have recently joined the European Union (EU).¹ For the sake of simplicity, they will be referred to as “non-euro area countries” in the rest of the chapter (although such a classification also includes Denmark, Sweden and the United Kingdom) which are not analysed here. The analysis is based on public information collected for 2001; since then, the operational framework of these central banks has not changed substantially. Most of the recent changes in the operational framework have taken place in the Eurosystem (or euro area, as it is also commonly known). For this reason, more recent euro area data is reported for 2003 and 2004, and a detailed analysis is made wherever appropriate. The study therefore presents an uptodate comparison of operational frameworks across the countries. The remainder of the chapter is organised as follows. Section 2 examines the characteristics of the minimum reserve system in the euro area. Section 3 examines open market operations, Section 4 examines the standing facilities and Section 5 looks at counterparties. Finally, chapter 6 describes at eligible collateral.

The banking sector in the new European Union Member States (NMS)¹ has changed dramatically since the transition from centrally planned to market-based economies.² In 1993, the ratio of average banking assets to gross domestic product (GDP) was 53 per cent, and this had increased to 72 per cent by 2000. However the banking sector in NMS is, however, still relatively small compared to the former European Union 15 (EU-15), for which the same ratio was 140 per cent in 2000. In NMS the level of bank intermediation is also low. In 2000, the ratio of private sector credit to GDP was less than 40 per cent, whereas in the euro area it was 100 per cent. A third distinguishing feature of NMS banks is that foreign investors now dominate ownership. In 1995, 8 per cent of banking assets were in foreign hands, and by 2002 this had increased to 88 per cent.³ In contrast, banks in the former EU-15 are mainly domestically owned or are traded on national stock markets.