One of the arguments often advanced for implementing a stronger insolvency and bankruptcy framework is that it enhances credit discipline among firms. Using a large crosscountry firm-level dataset, we empirically test whether a stronger insolvency regime reduces firms' likelihood of defaulting on their debt. In particular, we examine whether it reduces default risk during increased economic uncertainty and various external shocks. Our results confirm that a stronger insolvency regime moderates the adverse effects of economic shocks on firms' default risk. The effects are more pronounced for firms in the top half of the size distribution. We also explore channels through which improved creditor rights influence firms' default risk, including dependence on external finance, corporate leverage, and managerial ethics. Our main results are robust to an alternative measure of default risk, inclusion of currency and sovereign debt crisis episodes, and alternative estimations.

We demonstrate the existence of an empirical linkage between nominal financial networks and the underlying economic fundamentals, across countries. We construct the nominal return correlation networks from daily data to encapsulate sector-level dynamics and infer the relative importance of the sectors in the nominal network through measures of centrality and clustering algorithms. Eigenvector centrality robustly identifies the backbone of the minimum spanning tree defined on the return networks as well as the primary cluster in the multidimensional scaling map. We show that the sectors that are relatively large in size, defined with three metrics, viz., market capitalization, revenue and number of employees, constitute the core of the return networks, whereas the periphery is mostly populated by relatively smaller sectors. Therefore, sector-level nominal return dynamics are anchored to the real size effect, which ultimately shapes the optimal portfolios for risk management. Our results are reasonably robust across 27 countries of varying degrees of prosperity and across periods of market turbulence (2008–09) as well as periods of relative calmness (2012–13 and 2015–16).

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Research Question/IssueInformation processing, agency, and resource dependence perspectives provide diverging predictions regarding the relationship between board interlocks and firm performance, which are rooted in different perspectives on the roles of boards of directors. This study argues that these various approaches are reconcilable when considering the nature of board committees to which the interlocked directors are assigned.Research Findings/InsightsWe test our hypotheses on a sample of 5133 firm‐year observations in India. Our analyses support our hypotheses. The results show that interlocks between audit committees, whose primary function relates to providing financial oversight and ensuring compliance, are negatively related to firm performance. In contrast, interlocks between nomination and remuneration committees of Indian firms, which provide them with access to resources such as human capital and information on appropriate incentive structures, are positively related to performance.Theoretical/Academic ImplicationsOur study clarifies the relationship between board committee interlocks and firm performance by taking a multi‐theoretical perspective. Our analysis suggests that information processing, agency, and resource dependence theories complement one another in explaining the effect of interlocks on firm performance.Practitioner/Policy ImplicationsOur results show that it is not board interlocks per se that are detrimental to firm performance; in fact, appointing well‐connected directors with experience in serving on other boards might be beneficial for firms. However, firms should not assign specific monitoring‐intensive tasks such as auditing to directors who also serve on other firms' audit committees. Our findings suggest that these directors should have greater independence and focus.

No abstract

This paper examines the influence of global risk on the holding of gold by central banks based on annual data for 100 countries during 1990-2015. We use a dynamic panel generalized method of moments (GMM) model to estimate this effect, controlling for a variety of domestic factors. Consistent with portfolio diversification and perception of gold as a safe asset, we find that the gold holdings of central banks increase in response to higher global risk. This effect is larger for high-income countries than for developing countries. Moreover, greater capital account openness is associated with a stronger response of central banks' gold holding to global risk, while a higher ratio of overall reserves to imports is associated with a weaker response. We also find evidence that the sensitivity depends on whether the currency regime followed is fixed or floating, with higher responsiveness in the case of fixed rate regimes. The baseline results are robust to alternate estimation methods, exclusion of crisis years, active and passive management of gold reserves and additional controls. These findings suggest that central banks adjust their gold holdings in response to changes in global risk conditions, with the magnitude of response depending on reserve management capacity and country-specific vulnerabilities.