Search results

The purpose of this paper is to provide some rational perspectives for the flight‐to‐liquidity event rather than simply attributing it to the change in investor sentiment.

The paper builds a model to highlight the inherent difference in investors' investment horizon, and thus their sensitivity to changes in transaction costs in the stock and bond markets. When stock market deterioration results in higher trading costs, the existing marginal investor shifts wealth to bonds instead of remaining indifferent between stocks and bonds. At the new equilibrium, there is a higher fraction of bond ownership and a longer average investment horizon among stock holders. The paper then empirically tests the model predictions using data in the US stock and bond markets.

The authors find evidence strongly supporting this paper's theoretical predictions. Days with high stock illiquidity, high stock volatility and low stock return are associated with high yield spread in the bond market. This contemporaneous linkage between the stock market and the bond market is even stronger during periods with strong net outflows from stock mutual funds and strong net inflows to money market funds. The paper also demonstrates the existence of a maturity pattern that the predicted effects, especially the effects of stock illiquidity, are much stronger over shorter maturities.

The finding of this model that the investment horizon of the marginal investor (and thus the equilibrium price impact in the bond market) responds to changes in market conditions contributes to the theoretical debate on whether transaction costs matter. The flow evidence strengthens our understanding of the asset pricing implications of portfolio rebalancing decisions, and the maturity effect bolsters the case for flights to liquidity/quality due to heterogeneity in investment horizon without resorting to investor irrationality or behavioral attributes. In fact, it is arguably difficult to reconcile with a behavioral explanation.

This study aims at investigating how energy strategies of China impact its energy shipping import through a strategic maritime link, the Straits of Malacca and Singapore (SOMS).

Vector error-correction modelling (VECM) is applied to examine the key energy strategies of China influencing crude oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) shipping import via the SOMS. Strategies investigated include oil storage expansions, government-setting targets to motivate domestic gas production, pipeline projects to diversify natural gas import routes and commercial strategies to ensure oil and gas accessibility and cost-effectiveness.

For the crude oil sector, building up oil storage and diversifying oil import means, routes and sources were found effective to mitigate impacts of consumption surges and price shocks. For the LNG sector, domestic production expansion effectively reduces LNG import. However, pipeline gas import growth is inefficient to relieve LNG shipping import dependency. Furthermore, energy companies have limited flexibility to adjust LNG shipping import volumes via the SOMS even under increased import prices and transport costs.

As the natural gas demand of China continues expanding, utilisation rates of existing pipeline networks need to be enhanced. Besides, domestic production expansion and diversification of LNG import sources and means are crucial.

This study is among the first in the literature using a quantitative approach to investigate how energy strategies implemented in a nation impact its energy shipping volumes via the SOMS, which is one of the most important maritime links that support 40% of the global trades.

The nature and extent of our knowledge of stock market efficiency are examined. The development of “efficiency”, as a way of thinking about stock markets, is traced from Roberts (1959) and Fama (1965) onward. The early work successfully introduced competitive economic theory to the study of stock markets and paved the way for a flood of empirical research on the relation between information and stock prices. This literature irreversibly altered our views on stock market behavior. The theory and evidence of seemingly‐rational use of information lay in sharp contrast to prior beliefs. It was associated with a widespread increase in respect for stock markets, financial markets, and markets in general, at the time. Researchers began developing and using a variety of formal models of security prices. Nevertheless, “efficiency” has its limitations, both theoretically (as a way of characterizing markets) and empirically (by stretching the quality of the data, the estimation techniques used, and our knowledge of price behavior in competitive markets). Extensive evidence of anomalies suggests either that the market systematically misprices securities or that the theoretical or empirical limitations are binding, or both. The less interesting research question now is whether markets are efficient, and the more interesting question is how we can learn more about price and transactions behavior in competitive stock markets. The concept of an “efficient stock market” has stimulated both insight and controversy since Fama (1965) introduced it to the financial economics literature. As a construct, “efficiency” models the stock market in terms of the reaction of prices to the flow of information. Like all theory choices, modelling the market in this fashion involved tradeoffs. The benefits included opening the literature to an abundance of high‐quality researchable data, covering a variety of information, and the resulting insights obtained on the role of information in setting prices. The opportunity costs included temporarily closing the literature to alternative ways of viewing stock markets, for example by modelling public information as a homogenous good and thus ignoring factors such as differences in beliefs among investors, differences in information processing costs, and the “animal spirits” that might drive group behavior. The costs also included reliance on particular asset‐pricing models of how an “efficient” market would set prices. Not surprisingly, the ensuing deluge of research has produced some startling evidence, for and against the proposition that financial markets are “efficient”. Strongly‐conflicting views and puzzling anomalies remain. The early evidence seemed unexpectedly consistent with the theory. The theory, and its implications, also seemed clear at the time. After a period that seems short in retrospect, the growing body of evidence in favor of the efficient market hypothesis emerged as one of the most influential empirical areas of economics. Fama's (1970) review described a flourishing, coherent and confident literature. This research had an irreversible effect on our knowledge of and attitude toward stock markets, and financial markets generally. It coincided with an emergence of interest in, and respect for, all markets among economists and politicians, and influenced the worldwide trend toward “liberalizing” financial and other markets. The research consistently appeared to show an unbiased reaction of stock prices to public information. The property of “unbiased reaction” to public information, which formed the basis of the early definitions of “efficiency”, was seen to be an implication of rational, maximizing investor behavior in competitive securities markets (Fama 1965, p.4). Reduced to a basic level, the reasoning was that any systematicallybiased reaction to public information is costlessly publicly observable, and thus provides pure profit opportunities to be competed away. Characterizing the market in terms of its reaction to information is only one of many feasible ways of modelling stock price behavior, but it introduced economic theoryto the empirical studyof stock prices, which had received little serious attention from economists prior to that point. Despite the subsequent spate of anomalies, the early efficiency literature not only adapted standard economic theoryto provide the first formal economic insights into how stock prices behave, but it helped pave the way for an outporing of theoretical and empirical work on stock markets and capital markets in general. Subsequent empirical research was not as consistent with the theory. Evidence of “anomalous” return behavior now is widespread and well‐known. It generallytakes the form of variables (for example, size, day‐of‐the‐week, P/E ratio, market/book value ratio, rank of scaled earnings change, dividend yield) that are significantly but inexplicablyrelated to subsequent abnormal stock returns. Much of this evidence has defied rational economic explanation to date and appears to have caused many researchers to strongly qualify their views on market efficiency. Disagreement has not been not confined to the evidence. The literature has produced a variety of research designs, ranging from the “market model” of Fama, Fisher, Jensen and Roll (FFJR, 1969) to Shiller's (1981a,b) variance‐bounds tests. The very term “efficiency” has engendered controversy: there is a modest literature on precisely what efficiency means, on the role of transaction costs, and on whether efficient markets are logically feasible. Making sense of this literature requires careful definition of “efficiency” in this context and careful analysis of the type of evidence that has been offered in relation to it. This involves an assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of both the theory of efficient markets, as a way of characterizing stock markets, and of the data and research designs used in testing it. Not surprisingly, a mixed conclusion emerges. While the concept of efficient markets was an audacious departure from the comparative ignorance and suspicion among economists of stock markets that preceded it, and provides valuable insights into their behavior, the concept has its limitations, in terms of both its internal logical coherence and its fit with the data. Section 1 ofthis survey sketches the development of the efficient market theory, reviewing the principal contributions in terms of their usefulness in guiding and evaluating empirical research. Section 2 addresses the limitations inherent in what is knowable about stock market efficiency, given the present state of theory about how security prices might behave in an “efficient” market. It argues that there are binding limitations in the theoryof asset pricing, some of which are known and others of which are unknown or even unknowable. These limitations must be borne in mind when choosing whether to interpret the data as evidence of: (1) market efficiency, under the maintained hypothesis that a specific research design, including a specific model of asset pricing used to benchmark price behavior, correctly describes pricing in an efficient market; or (2) the ability of our models and research designs to encapsulate how prices behave in an efficient market, under the maintained hypothesis of efficiency. Against this background, section 3 then provides an assessment of the accomplishments of the theory of stock market efficiency, including an interpretation of the evidence. It focuses on the nature and influence of the evidence and does not attempt to provide a comprehensive literature taxonomy. The final section offers conclusions. The principal conclusion is that the theory of efficient markets has irreversibly enhanced our knowledge of and respect for stock markets (and perhaps for all financial market or even for markets in general) but that, like all theories, it is fundamentally flawed.

Aim of the present monograph is the economic analysis of the role of MNEs regarding globalisation and digital economy and in parallel there is a reference and examination of some legal aspects concerning MNEs, cyberspace and e‐commerce as the means of expression of the digital economy. The whole effort of the author is focused on the examination of various aspects of MNEs and their impact upon globalisation and vice versa and how and if we are moving towards a global digital economy.

The purpose of this study is to analyze the dynamic changes of the arms trade network not only from the network structure but also the influence mechanism from the aspects of the economy, politics, security, strategy and transaction costs.

The study employs the Temporal Exponential Random Graph Model and the Separable Temporal Exponential Random Graph Model to analyze the endogenous network structure effect, the attribute effect and the exogenous network effect of 47 major arms trading countries from 2015 to 2020.

The results show that the international arms trade market is unevenly distributed, and there are great differences in military technology. There is a fixed hierarchical structure in the arms trade, but the rise of emerging countries is expected to break this situation. In international arms trade relations, economic forces dominate, followed by political, security and strategic factors.

Economic and political factors play an important role in the arms trade. Therefore, countries should strive to improve their economic strength and military technology. Also, countries should increase political mutual trust and gain a foothold in the industrial chain of arms production to enhance their military power.

The contribution of this paper is to analyze the special trade area of arms trade from a dynamic network perspective by incorporating economic, political, security, strategic and transaction cost factors together into the TERGM and STERGM models.

The literature shows that e-commerce adoption brings many benefits to farmers and agricultural businesses. However, the literature offers very limited guidance on the most effective ways for them to utilize e-commerce platforms. In this study, we unfold how a farmer's choice between endogenous (their own) vs. exogenous (third-party) e-commerce platforms should be aligned with the external (support from agricultural cooperative) and internal (usage of quality labels) resources they can leverage and the performance goals they want to achieve (market expansion vs. price premium).

Our study draws on transaction cost economics (TCE) and resource-based theory (RBT) to test the conceptual model with data from a cross-sectional survey of 324 farmers from two provinces in PR China.

Our findings show that external and internal resources shed additional light on the effectiveness of endogenous vis-à-vis exogenous e-commerce platforms. For farmers who rely on exogenous e-commerce, support from an agricultural cooperative appears to be critical in increasing their market expansion. On the other hand, farmers seeking to earn a price premium should focus on developing their own e-commerce platforms, while at the same time emphasizing the quality labels of their agricultural products.

Farmers should pay close attention to the value-added benefits provisioned through farmers' cooperatives, as well as the benefits of acquiring quality labels for their agricultural products. However, the decision to utilize these resources should be aligned with the chosen e-commerce platform (endogenous vs. exogenous) as well as with the performance goal the farmer wants to achieve.

Our work goes beyond the traditional focus on transaction costs and efficiency of e-commerce channels and provides specific insights into when an endogenous or exogenous e-commerce model might provide benefits for farmers. On top of this, we argue and show that this decision should reside with the farmer's ability to leverage external and internal resources, envisioned through support from an agricultural cooperative and the quality labels of agricultural products.

The authors consider a dynamic emission-reduction technology investment decision-making problem for an emission-dependent dyadic supply chain consists of a manufacturer and a retailer under subsidy policy for carbon emission reduction. The consumers are assumed to prefer to low-carbon products and formulate a supply chain optimal control problem.

The authors adopt differential game to analyze investment strategies of cost subsidy coefficient with respect to vertical incentive of a manufacturer and a retailer. A comparison analysis under four different decision-making situations, including decentralized decision-making, centralized decision-making, maximizing social welfare, is obtained.

The results show that the economic benefit and environmental pressure have a win–win performance in centralized decision-making. In four different game models, equilibrium strategies, profits and social welfare show changing diversity and have a consistent development trend as time goes on.

The authors estimate the demand function is a linear function in this paper. According to the consumers’ preference to low-carbon products, consumer’s awareness meets the law of diminishing marginal utility like advertising goodwill accumulation. The carbon-sensitive coefficient might be a quadratic expression, which will complicate the problem and be consistent with reality.

It captures that there is a necessity to strengthen cooperation and exchange of carbon emission technology among the enterprises by simulation of different decision-makings when government granted cost subsidy.

The results provide significant guidelines for the supply chain to make decision-makings of emission-reduction technology investment and relevant government departments to determine emission subsidies costs.

An endogenous subsidies coefficient is produced by the social welfare function. Distinguished from previous study, it also considered the influences of carbon emission trade policy and consumer preference.

This paper focuses on execution costs as liquidity measure. Execution costs are related to volatility and are an important component of a firm’s cost of capital. The purpose of this paper is to examine whether emerging market firms have lower execution costs when they face less restrictions on foreign investment and when they have more foreign shareholders.

The authors begin by documenting the cross-sectional behavior of execution costs. The authors then obtain preliminary evidence on the interaction between execution costs, the investability index and actual foreign investment. These results foreshadow those the authors obtain with the regression analysis. The ordinary least square results show that more investable firms have lower execution costs after the authors control for firm size, stock price, return volatility, industry effects and country effects. This evidence is very robust and highly significant. Direct foreign ownership (FO) in emerging market firms also appear to be associated with lower execution costs. The economic benefit from lowering the investability index on trade execution costs is highly significant.

Using a large cross-sectional sample from 23 emerging markets, the authors show that firms with more ex ante restrictions on FO, measured by the investability index, have lower execution costs, such as quoted spreads (QS) and effective spreads (ES), after the authors control for firm size, stock price, return volatility, industry factors and country effects. In addition, direct FO in emerging market firms appears to be associated with lower execution costs. However, ex ante restrictions on FO dominate the influence of direct FO. For a 0.5 increase in the investability index in the range of 0–1, the QS will be reduced by 17 percent of the mean QS, and the ES will be reduced by 12 percent of the mean ES from the sample stocks.

There are important differences between the approach and most of the financial liberalization studies. First, whereas most of the earlier studies are conducted at the level of country or market analysis, the investigation is at the level of individual stocks. Second, the authors focus on a cross-sectional association that avoids a criticism leveled at time series analyses. Over-time studies often use specific time points to represent financial liberalization watersheds. This approach can be misleading when financial liberalizations are viewed as processes that unfold over time. Third, the proxies for financial openness are available not only for individual firms across markets, but the authors also make a distinction between potential and actual foreign investment. The authors further categorize actual foreign investment into direct and indirect FO.

The global slack hypothesis is central to the discussion of the trade-offs that monetary policy faces in an increasingly more integrated world. The workhorse New Open Economy Macro (NOEM) model of Martínez-García and Wynne (2010), which fleshes out this hypothesis, shows how expected future local inflation and global slack affect current local inflation. In this chapter, I propose the use of the orthogonalization method of Aoki (1981) and Fukuda (1993) on the workhorse NOEM model to further decompose local inflation into a global component and an inflation differential component. I find that the log-linearized rational expectations model of Martínez-García and Wynne (2010) can be solved with two separate subsystems to describe each of these two components of inflation.

I estimate the full NOEM model with Bayesian techniques using data for the United States and an aggregate of its 38 largest trading partners from 1980Q1 until 2011Q4. The Bayesian estimation recognizes the parameter uncertainty surrounding the model and calls on the data (inflation and output) to discipline the parameterization. My findings show that the strength of the international spillovers through trade – even in the absence of common shocks – is reflected in the response of global inflation and is incorporated into local inflation dynamics. Furthermore, I find that key features of the economy can have different impacts on global and local inflation – in particular, I show that the parameters that determine the import share and the price-elasticity of trade matter in explaining the inflation differential component but not the global component of inflation.