Search results

The purpose of this study is to examine the nexus between geopolitical risk, female CEOs and firm performance through a cross-country analysis.

The study period ranges from 2014 to 2021, and the dataset uses an unbalanced panel of 4,955 companies across 50 nations comprising both developed and emerging economies. Our study has employed a fixed-effect panel regression model, to examine this issue. This analysis was supplemented with applying a dynamic panel technique, i.e. System generalized method of moments (SGMM), to address any endogeneity problems.

The study reveals that female CEOs positively impact firm performance, while geopolitical risks decrease it. Gender plays a significant role in this relationship, with firms with female executives tending to make conservative financial decisions amidst increased risks. The study also shows that geopolitical threats (GPRT) have a greater impact on female CEOs-firm performance relationship in developed nations.

This study is a new investigation that explores the intertwining relationship between geopolitical risk, female CEOs and firm performance across the countries.

This study delves into the critical issue of banks' stability and profitability, which are crucial elements for fostering economic growth and preserving depositor confidence. Specifically, we scrutinize the impact of geopolitical risks on the profitability and solvency of banks operating in emerging economies across the Middle East and Africa.

Employing a two-step Generalized Method of Moments (GMM) approach, we analyze a comprehensive dataset comprising 125 banks spanning 13 emerging economies in the Middle East and Africa, covering the period from 2003 to 2019.

Our study reveals a significant sensitivity of Middle Eastern banks to geopolitical risks, wherein effective anticipation or adaptation to these risks positively influences bank performance. Conversely, the impact of geopolitical risk on African banking profitability appears inconclusive and statistically insignificant. These nuanced findings underscore the complex interplay between geopolitical dynamics and financial performance in diverse regional contexts, with implications for policymakers and industry stakeholders.

Our findings underscore the need for nuanced policy responses and risk management strategies tailored to the unique challenges posed by geopolitical dynamics in emerging markets. Furthermore, they highlight the importance of continued research efforts to deepen our understanding of these complex interactions and inform more effective decision-making in the financial sector.

Amidst growing recognition of the importance of geopolitical risks in financial markets, empirical studies exploring their precise impact on bank performance remain scarce. This study fills this gap by offering a pioneering investigation into the influence of geopolitical risks on bank profitability and solvency, using advanced econometric techniques and a substantial, diverse sample of banks in emerging economies across the Middle East and Africa.

The study's objective is to measure the response of the food prices to the aggregate and disaggregate geopolitical risk events, Russia's geopolitical risks and global energy prices in the context of two European regions, i.e. Eastern and Western Europe covering the monthly data from January 2001 to March 2022.

The authors apply a novel and sophisticated econometric method, the cross-quantilogram (CQ) approach, to analyse the authors’ monthly data properties. This method detects the causal relationship between the variables under the bi-variate modelling approach. More importantly, the CQ procedure divulges the bearish and bullish states of the causal association between the variables under short, medium and long memories.

The authors find that aggregate measures of geopolitical risk reduce food prices in the short term in the Eastern Europe but increases food prices in the Western Europe. Besides, the decomposed measures of geopolitical risk “threats” and “acts” have heterogeneous effects on the food prices. More importantly, Russia's geopolitical risk events and global energy prices enhance the food inflation under long memory.

The authors provide diverse policy implications for Eastern and Western Europe based on the authors’ findings. First, the European policymakers should take concrete and joint policy measures to tackle the detrimental effects of geopolitical risks to bring stability to the food markets. Second, this region should emphasize utilizing their unused agricultural lands to grow more crops to avoid external dependence on food. Third, the European Union and its partners should begin global initiatives to help smallholder farmers because of their contribution to the resilience of disadvantaged, predominantly rural communities. Fourth, geopolitically affected European countries like Ukraine should deal with a crippled supply chain to safeguard their production infrastructure. Fifth, fuel (oil) scarcity in the European region due to the Russia-Ukraine war should be mitigated by searching for alternative sources (countries) for smooth food transportation for trade. Finally, as Europe and its Allies impose new sanctions in response to the Russia-Ukraine war, it can have immediate and long-run disastrous consequences on the European and the global total food systems. In this case, all European blocks mandate cultivating stratagems to safeguard food security and evade a long-run cataclysm with multitudinous geopolitical magnitudes for European countries and the rest of the world.

This is the maiden study that considers the aggregated and disaggregated measures of the geopolitical risk events, Russia's geopolitical risks and global energy prices and delves into these dynamics' effects on food prices. Notably, linking the context of the Russia-Ukraine war is a significant value addition to the existing piece of food literature.

This paper aims to investigate the sentiment connectedness among 10 European stock markets between January 2020 and July 2022, associating such connectedness with the level of the geopolitical risk index.

For this purpose, a time-varying parameter vector autoregressive connectedness framework is used.

Results show a high degree of sentiment connectedness. Overall, the sentiments of Portugal, France, the Netherlands, Spain, Germany and Italy are net transmitters of shocks while those of Poland, Sweden, Norway and Romania are net receivers. Additional evidence indicates that when geopolitical risks increase, the sentiment connectedness tends to decrease. However, the reverse holds under extremely high levels of geopolitical risks.

Overall, this study provides some significant contributions to the literature. First, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is among the first few studies to examine the dynamic connectedness among stock market sentiment across countries. This issue needs special consideration for European countries because of their close geographical distance and strong integration due to the European Union’s co-development strategies. Second, the association of sentiment connectedness with geopolitical risk is examined for the first time. This is even more meaningful in the context of growing geopolitical risks stemming from the Ukraine war, which could affect international financial markets.

This paper aims to study the impact of geopolitical uncertainty on corporate cost of debt and the moderating role of information asymmetry between creditors and borrowing firms.

This study uses 5,223 firm-quarter observations on German-listed firms spanning 2010:Q1–2021:Q4. This study regresses the cost of debt financing on the geopolitical risk, accounting quality and other control variables. Information asymmetry is measured using the performance-matched Jones-model discretionary accrual and the stock bid-ask spread. It uses interaction terms to check if information asymmetry moderates the impact of geopolitical uncertainty on the cost of debts and control for the moderating role of business risk. For the sake of robustness check, it uses long-term cost of debt and bond spread as alternative dependent variables. In addition, this study executes instrumental variables regression and propension score matching to control for potential endogeneity problems.

Estimation results show that geopolitical uncertainty exerts a positive impact on the cost of debt. This impact is found to be more important on the cost of long-term debts. Information asymmetry is found to exacerbate the positive impact of geopolitical risk on the cost of debt. These results are robust to the change of the dependent variable and to the mitigation of potential endogeneity. At high levels of information asymmetry, this impact is more important for firms belonging to “Transportation”, “Automobiles and auto parts”, “Chemicals”, “Industrial and commercial services”, “Software and IT services” and “Industrial goods” business sectors.

Geopolitical uncertainty should be seriously considered when setting strategies for corporate financial management in Germany and similar economies that are directly exposed to geopolitical risks. Corporate managers should design a comprehensive set of corporate policies to improve their transparency and accountability during increasing uncertainty. Policymakers are required to implement innovative monetary and fiscal policies that take into consideration the heterogeneous impact of geopolitical uncertainty and information transparency in order to contain their incidence on German business sectors.

Despite its relevance to corporate financing conditions, little is known about the impact of geopolitical uncertainty on the cost of debt financing. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, there is still no empirical evidence on how information asymmetry between creditors and borrowing firms shapes the impact of geopolitical uncertainty on the cost of debt. This paper tries to fill this gap by interacting two measures of information asymmetry with geopolitical uncertainty. In contrast with previous studies, this study shows that the impact of geopolitical uncertainty on the cost of debt is non-linear and heterogeneous. The results show that the impact of geopolitical uncertainty does not exert the same impact on the cost of debt instruments with different maturities. This impact is found to be heterogeneous across business sectors and to depend on the level of information asymmetry.

This paper aims to explore the spillover impacts that domestic or global aspects of geopolitical risk generate on uncertainty. The latter is derived from a spectrum of different sources in the USA (economic policy, monetary policy, fiscal policy, national security, government spending, taxation) from 1985 up to November 2022.

Vector autoregressive schemes are used to detect causality and reverse causality between each aspect of geopolitical risk and each source of US uncertainty.

Notably, national security generates higher geopolitical risk by almost 8% in the first month but decreases GPR by 2% in the third month after the shock. USA is found to constitute a cornerstone as regards global peace and that the overall economic or monetary conditions or war status in the USA are remarkably more influential toward domestic and global geopolitical uncertainty than separate strands of fiscal policymaking. Reverse causality displays sizably weaker effects overall.

This study sheds light on the determinants of geopolitical risk and domestic instability by an international perspective and provides a compass for better decision-making for fiscal and monetary policymakers and market participants.

This study aims to examine the influence of geopolitical uncertainty on cryptocurrency markets (CM).

Utilizing two distinct sets of daily returns data spanning from January 1, 2019, to May 4, 2023, the analysis employs the geopolitical risk (GPR) index formulated by Caldara and Iacoviello (2022), which encapsulates two pivotal events: the COVID-19 pandemic and the Russia–Ukraine conflict. The cryptocurrency market (CM) encompasses Bitcoin (BTC), Ethereum (ETH), Litecoin (LTC) and Dogecoin (DOGE). Employing the DCC-GARCH model and supplementing it with wavelet coherence analysis to discern perceptual distinctions between short- and long-term market reactions.

The main findings indicate that the GPR index clearly impacts the return of CM in the short-, mid- and long-term periods. BTC exhibited the highest volatility in response to changes in the GPR index. The cryptocurrency market offers a better diversification opportunity, and the impact of geopolitical events varies across time, with their direction and magnitude closely related to the specificity of the CM.

This research is helpful for financial market investors, portfolio and risk managers, make informed decisions about including cryptocurrencies in their investment portfolios to mitigate the risks in uncertainty period.

Cryptocurrency market volatility is treated weakly during the risk period. With advanced statistical method, this study links two important events: the COVID-19 pandemic and the Russia–Ukraine conflict and selects the top four cryptocurrencies constituting 80% of the market. This study examines the impact of geopolitical risk on the cryptocurrency market and shows that this market is considered a safe haven.

Geopolitical risks associated with the return of great power politics and growing nationalism have generated new challenges for foreign investors across industries. Oil and gas companies are well acquainted with such risks and have developed strategies to manage them. This paper reviews five of these strategies: divorcing ownership control from operating control in designing collaborative ventures; proactively managing stakeholder relationships; ensuring transparency and communication; diversifying risks while proactively positioning for emerging opportunities; and deliberately planning for exit should such an eventuality arise. Firms outside of oil and gas can draw on these strategies as they navigate the emerging geopolitical context.

This paper reviews five strategies that oil and gas companies can use to manage geopolitical risk: divorcing ownership control from operating control in designing collaborative ventures; proactively managing stakeholder relationships; ensuring transparency and communication; diversifying risks while proactively positioning for emerging opportunities; and deliberately planning for exit should such an eventuality arise.

This study identifies several strategies that oil and gas companies have used to manage geopolitical risks. These tools will be increasingly important in the shifting global political landscape.

Drawing on the experiences of oil and gas companies, this study has identified several strategies that companies can use to shield themselves from the risks that are currently emanating from geopolitics. While these best practices originate in the experiences of oil and gas firms, the ability to deftly manage geopolitical risks is becoming an important prerequisite for companies across industries.

The purpose of this paper is to examine how changes in the global geopolitical climate have created new and more acute reputation risks for multinational corporations.

This viewpoint examines recent shifts in the global geopolitical claims covered in international media and analyzes variety of instances in which these shifts have created new and more intense reputation risks. From this analysis, the authors derive insights into how companies can prepare for and manage their operations to mitigate potential reputation risks.

The author finds that the increases in reputation risk created by shifting global geopolitical structures expose weaknesses in the infrastructure and skill sets by which companies manage their corporate reputation and makes recommendations about overcoming these weaknesses.

The geopolitical issues analyzed and the reputation risks exposed are selective; therefore, this is not a comprehensive review of all the potential risks.

Companies can do a great deal to protect themselves from new reputation risks created by the geopolitical shifts discussed by setting up a new infrastructure for managing and reporting on these risks and hiring communications professionals with the appropriate capabilities for analyzing and managing the risks.

If these new risks are well managed, the potential for significant business disruption and the safety and security of corporate employees could be significantly reduced.

To the best of the author's knowledge, this is the first discussion of geopolitical shifts and corporate reputation.

Our aim in this study is to investigate the relative importance of the economic policy uncertainty and of the geopolitical risk on U.S. REITs (Real Estate Investment Trusts) returns with a special focus on the different real estate sectors.

We use an augmented Fama-French (1993)’s asset pricing model, including economic policy uncertainty indices (EPU), introduced by Baker et al. (2016), and geopolitical risk indices (GPR) recently developed by Caldara and Iacoviello (2022), to price the potential risk factors for U.S. Nareit indices returns. To obtain robust economic results, we correct for the problems of errors-in-variables in linear asset pricing models; we advocate the use of higher moments estimators as instruments in a generalized method of moments (GMM) framework.

Our results report that economic policy uncertainty (EPU), and geopolitical risk (GPR) are priced for the different Nareit sectors for the last three decades. The GPR index stands as a relevant risk factor. The coefficient estimates are low compared to Fama-French risk factors. They are higher for Shopping Centers, Retail and Region Malls and lower for Health Care and Lodging/Resorts. EPU indices are also priced and less statistically significant. Health Care sector, followed by Shopping Centers and Retail are the most policy-sensitive sectors.

In their “2023–2024 Top Ten Issues Affecting Real Estate” “political unrest and global economic health” is ranked 1 issue by the Counselors of Real Estate. Our results report that economic policy uncertainty and geopolitical risk are priced for the different Nareit sectors. They suggest implications for investors, insurers, bankers, policymakers and other stakeholders. The geopolitical risk index (GPR) stands as a relevant and significant risk factor for REITs returns.

Based on parsimonious robust asset pricing models, the results shed a new light on the relative importance of geopolitical risk and economic policy uncertainty in the real estate sector, with a special focus on the different U.S. REITs sectors. They suggest possible implications for investors, insurers, bankers, policymakers and other stakeholders in a context marked by higher uncertainty shocks and geopolitical risks.