Search results

Several studies have observed that stocks tend to drop by an amount that is less than the dividend on the ex-dividend day, the so-called ex-dividend day anomaly. However, there still remains a lack of consensus for a single explanation of this anomaly. Different from other studies, this dissertation attempts to answer the primary research question: how can investors make trading profits from the ex-dividend day anomaly and how much can they earn? With this goal, I examine the economic motivations of equity investors through four main hypotheses identified in the anomaly's literature: the tax differential hypothesis, the short-term trading hypothesis, the tick size hypothesis, and the leverage hypothesis.

While the U.S. ex-dividend anomaly is well studied, I examine a long data window (1975–2010) of Thailand data. The unique structure of the Thai stock market allows me to assess all four main hypotheses proposed in the literature simultaneously. Although I extract the sample data from two data sources, I demonstrate that the combined data are consistently sampled. I further construct three trading strategies – “daily return,” “lag one daily return,” and “weekly return” – to alleviate the potential effect of irregular data observation.

I find that the ex-dividend day anomaly exists in Thailand, is governed by the tax differential, and is driven by short-term trading activities. That is, investors trade heavily around the ex-dividend day to reap the benefits of the tax differential. I find mixed results for the predictions of the tick size hypothesis and results that are inconsistent with the predictions of the leverage hypothesis.

I conclude that, on the Stock Exchange of Thailand, juristic and foreign investors can profitably buy stocks cum-dividend and sell them ex-dividend while local investors should engage in short sale transactions. On average, investors who employ the daily return strategy have earned significant abnormal return up to 0.15% (45.66% annualized rate) and up to 0.17% (50.99% annualized rate) for the lag one daily return strategy. Investors can also make a trading profit by conducting the weekly return strategy and earn up to 0.59% (35.67% annualized rate), on average.

This paper aims to present a simple behavioural explanation of the prohibition of speculation in Islamic finance.

This paper proposes a theoretical model that describes how investors from low income strata of the society may be prone to make sub-optimal decisions when they compare their outcome from a speculative trading activity to that of the counterparty to the trade and perceive inequity to exist.

When individuals from low income strata of the society compare their current situation with the average income of the society, they perceive themselves to be in a loss. This creates a loss frame within which they then evaluate all future outcomes. When such individuals invest in speculative trading activities and incur a loss, they compare their outcome from the trade to that of the counterparty to the trade. As speculative trades are a zero sum game, the counterparty makes an equivalent gain from the trade. Thus, the comparison leads to a perception of inequity. This perception of inequity is aggravated by the loss frame within which the investor is operating. The aggravated inequity aversion may then motivate the investor to make further sub-optimal decisions like repeated speculative trading activities. The Islamic prohibition on speculative trading activities may serve to protect low income investors from entering into such cycles of sub-optimal decisions.

This paper offers a unique explanation of why day trading and short selling may be prohibited in Islamic capital markets.

The primary purpose of this paper is to take an in-depth look at the question of whether liberalizing trade in agriculture can generate dynamic productivity gains comparable to those in the manufacturing sector.

In contrast to the manufacturing sector that has generated firm/plant-level trade data, there is a lack of farm-level trade data that are needed for empirical measurement of dynamic productivity gains. Therefore, the authors use thought experiments to analyze the sequence of events that would occur when trade is liberalized for agriculture; delineate the expected behaviors of the actors involved in the trade and draw inferences about whether there would be dynamic productivity gains from agricultural trade.

The central finding is that there would be little dynamic gain from agricultural trade at the farm level due to the limited role of producers in shaping their international competitiveness. Yet, agricultural trade may generate dynamic gains if states or input supply corporations respond to the freer trade environment by making more investments for research and development (R&D). Further, when intraindustry prevails, there can be productivity gains at the industry level due to the transfer of resources from less to more efficient farm producers.

The findings of the paper are expected to present insights into value for researchers working in the area of agricultural trade; for agricultural trade policymakers in developing countries and for trade negotiators engaged in reforming or designing World Trade Organization (WTO)’s trade rules for agriculture.

Purpose − Instances of refusal to trade stand in contrast to the theorems on the gains from trade. Two paradigms, second-best and political economy, have been used to explain refusal to trade. Murray Kemp (1962) provided a foundation for the political economy paradigm when he noted that, in the absence of lump-sum redistribution, the theorems on the gains from trade are “true but irrelevant”. This chapter takes Murray Kemp's observation as a point of departure for a consideration of the relation between individual and group gains from trade. Paradigms in explaining refusal to trade are distinguished.

Methodology/Approach − This chapter examines ideas underlying explanations for refusal to participate in international trade.

Findings − Two different approaches are identified in modeling and explaining why the gains from trade are compromised by refusal of governments to allow free trade. The second-best approach suggests a justification for refusal to trade while the political economy approach with public-choice foundations proposes an explanation.

Practical implications − Ideology expressed in how governments are viewed can influence economic analysis.

The purpose of this study is to discuss the progress and challenges of South Asia in trade liberalization and facilitation, and to quantitatively demonstrate the potential benefits of trade facilitation in South Asia.

The quantitative study simulates the trade gains to the region based on the gravity model estimation for 101 world countries.

The gains to the region are estimated to be $31 billion in 2007 and $26 billion in 2010 if South Asia and the “rest of the world” raised levels of trade facilitation halfway to the world average. Of those trade gains, about 80 per cent (in 2007) and 67 per cent (in 2010) of the total gains to South Asia will be generated from South Asia's own efforts.

Thus this study demonstrates the importance of trade facilitation as an instrument for expansion of trade both within South Asia and with the rest of the world, as well as policy recommendations regarding the priority area for reform.

Purpose − The principal aim of this chapter is to present a comprehensive and critical review of Murray Kemp's contributions to the discipline of international trade and welfare economics.

Methodology/Approach − This chapter employs the critical literature review approach, including archival analysis and face-to-face interviews.

Findings − It is shown that Kemp has been a key player in the modernization of trade theory. In particular, he has extended the theorems of gains from trade in many different directions and under the most general conditions.

Practical implications − In surveying Kemp's research contributions this chapter provides a useful overview of the development of the normative theory of trade. It also examines a number of methodological issues that may prove to be useful to economic theorists.

Purpose – This chapter aims to examine trade patterns and gains from trade in a two-country general equilibrium model of increasing returns and oligopoly.

Approach – A general equilibrium model of increasing returns and oligopoly.

Findings – The determination of patterns of specialization and trade and gains from trade highly depends on the interaction between the degree of increasing returns and market power as well as the cross-country difference in factor endowments.

Originality – Unlike the existing literature, we endogenize the determination of specialization by using an allocation curve approach by Ethier (1982). To our knowledge, there is no comparable study that incorporates Ethier's (1982) approach to oligopolistic models of international trade.

Among various distinctive formulations that have been developed simultaneously in East Asia as of 2009, this paper selected three major paths, ASEAN+3, ASEAN+6 and APEC, to quantitatively examine the economic impacts of Asian regionalization with the CGE model. This paper confirmed previous findings such as the magnitude of economic impact being proportional to the size of membership and the existence of trade diversion effect within all trade blocs. The subsequent KORUS and Korea-EU FTA imposition upon the built CGE base models further verified the effects of hub-and-spoke-ism in East Asia. Jointly, the simulation results implied that the economic impacts of a trade arrangement heavily depend on the subject economy’s reliance on trade with the participating states. It was also found that the impacts were directly proportional to the accrued trade balance of the subject spoke country with both the hub state and the hub-destination. This could have been exaggerated as the scope of this study was limited to East Asia where KORUS FTA was found to be more influential than Korea-EU FTA due to its exceptionally high reliance on the US. On the course of this research to verify the aforementioned findings, however, both GTAP 6 and 7 were adopted, and hence, the economic impacts of China’s accession to the WTO in the global trade system were also empirically proven.

This article offers an economic analysis of the main policy issues surrounding the proposed preferential trade area (PTA) between Japan, China, and South Korea. This initial assessment is done within the normative framework of customs union theory. Already, intra-regional trade between the three countries constitutes a high proportion of their total trade and is, in fact, cited as one of the main reasons for the PTA. As a consequence, trade creation following the PTA may not result in much new trade. However, it is expected that the PTA would lead to a vigorous growth of intra-industry trade, particularly in manufactured goods and components. Possibilities of trade diversion are real, but not insurmountable if the resulting preference structure is designed with a view to minimize disruption of trade with the rest-of-the-world.