Search results1 – 3 of 3
The purpose of this paper is to explore possible contributions of natural resources for the historic urban landscape (HUL) approach. It points to several possible avenues…
The purpose of this paper is to explore possible contributions of natural resources for the historic urban landscape (HUL) approach. It points to several possible avenues for collaborative research, which can expand the discourse on the topic of urban sustainability with different disciplines of heritage studies, natural resource management, urban planning and disaster risk reduction.
There are already several UNESCO initiatives such as the Man and Biosphere Programme, World Heritage Forests Programme and the World Heritage Programme for Small Island Developing States, which the HUL approach can learn from to understand approaches that integrate natural resource management in urban planning methods. Different cases from the USA, Japan and Singapore applying landscape approaches have also been documented in this research.
Several examples have been found in which natural resources are integrated to bigger strategies of urban planning. Japan has enacted the “Landscape Law” in 2004 to highlight the importance of preserving landscapes in improving the quality and viability of community life. The “Mauritius Strategy” created by small island developing states is another example. It holistically looks at policies to deal with environmental challenges while advocating economic growth and protecting cultural and natural heritage, among other concerns. The long tradition of creating greenways in the USA have also contributed in presenting heritage assets and providing environmental benefits. The High Line in New York City is a good example of this.
In line with the HUL approach, the research points out possibilities of non-traditional collaborations in solving current urban challenges. Finding ways of linking natural resources to a bigger urban framework can inspire new solutions for the interlinked problems of urban growth, heritage management and nature conservation amidst climate change.
The purpose of this paper is to examine the effects of bank mergers on systemic and systematic risks on the relative merits of product and market diversification…
The purpose of this paper is to examine the effects of bank mergers on systemic and systematic risks on the relative merits of product and market diversification strategies. It also observes determinants of M&A deals criteria, product and market diversification positioning, crisis threshold and other regulatory and market factors.
This research examines the impact and association between merger announcements and regulatory reforms at bank and system levels by investigating the impact of various bank consolidation strategies on firms’ risks. We estimate beta(s) as an index of financial institutions’ systematic risk. We then develop an index of the estimated equity value loss as the long-rum marginal expected shortfall (LRMES). LRMES contributes to compute systemic risk (SRISK) contribution of these firms, which is the capital that a firm is expected to need if we have another financial crisis.
Large acquiring banks decrease systemic risk contribution in cross-border M&As with a non-bank financial institution, and witness profitability (ROA) gains, supporting geographic diversification stability. Capital requirements, activity restrictions and bank concentration increase systemic risk contribution in national mergers. Bank mergers with investment FIs targets enhance productivity but impair technical efficiency, contrary to bank-real estate deals where technical efficiency change accompanied lower systemic risk contribution.
Financial institutions are recommended to avoid trapped capital and liquidity by efficiently using local balance sheet and strengthening them via implementing models that clearly set diversification and netting benefits to determine capital reserves and to drive capital efficiency through the clarity on product–activity–geography diversification and focus. This contributes to successful ringfencing, decreases compliance costs and maximises returns and minimises several risks including systemic risk.
Policy implications: the adversative properties of bank mergers in respect of systemic risk require strict and innovative monitoring of bank mergers from the bidding level by both acquirers and targets and regulators and competition supervisory bodies. Moreover, emphasis on regulators/governments intervention and role, as it provides a stabilising factor of the markets and consecutively lower systemic risk even if the systematic idiosyncratic risk contribution was significant. However, such roles have to be well planned and scaled to avoid providing motives for banks to seek too-big-too-fail or too-big-to-discipline status.
This research contributes to the renewing regulatory debate on banks sustainable structures by examining the risk effect of bank diversification versus focus. The authors aim to address the multidimensional impacts and risks inherent to M&A deals, by examining the extent of the interconnectedness of M&A and its implications within and beyond the banking sector.