Privatization and globalization: An empirical analysis

Boubakri, Narjess; Cosset, Jean‐Claude; Debab, Nassima; Valéry, Pascale

doi:10.1016/j.jbankfin.2012.12.014

Cited by 26 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Second, our findings on the asset-pricing implications of local IPOs and delistings are new to the literature and join the recent contributions by Braun andLarrain (2009), Colaco et al (2009) and Hsu et al (2010) whereby IPOs are investigated as an integrated phenomenon that interacts with the surrounding economic environment rather than as a stand-alone corporate event. Our results for delistings introduce this same integrated perspective into the ongoing public-to-private transactions debate (e.g., Renneboog and Simons, 2005;Renneboog et al, 2007;Baran and King, 2010;Achleitner et al, 2013;Boubakri et al, 2013;Fidrmuc et al, 2013;Croci and Del Giudice, 2014). In fact, IPOs and delistings emerge as local substitutes: The delistings of local firms would free space and extant local resources, thus increasing the success of local IPOs and vice versa.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 58%

Local IPOs, local delistings, and the firm location premium

Baschieri

Carosi

Mengoli

2015

Journal of Banking & Finance

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tBorrowing a measure from ecology, we introduce a spatial dispersion index to quantify the firm traits related to firm geographic location and investigate firm exposure to local home bias and local investor risk tolerance as determinants of corporate market value. Consistent with the investor preference for local stocks, we find listed firms benefit from a location premium that increases with firm isolation and local investor wealth. IPOs and delistings are found to affect the market value of neighboring listed firms: isolated firms decrease in value when they cluster due to local IPOs while clustered firms increase in value as they become more isolated due to local delistings. Local firm clustering and risk tolerance also affect IPO underpricing. Empirical findings depict a framework where IPOs and delistings are locally jointly determined.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 58%

Local IPOs, local delistings, and the firm location premium

Baschieri

Carosi

Mengoli

2015

Journal of Banking & Finance

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Following Boubakri, Cosset, Debab, and Valéry (2013), we first conduct causality tests in both directions. The bivariate heterogeneous panel causality test of Dumitrescu and Hurlin (2012) is utilized.…”

Section: The Basic Discoverymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The dynamic GMM estimators provided earlier already settle endogeneity bias and reverse causality running from income inequality to globalization. This approach has been widely used to handle the problems of joint endogeneity (Dreher & Gaston, 2008;Bergh & Nilsson, 2010;Becerra, Cavallo, & Scartascini, 2012;Boubakri et al, 2013).…”

Section: The Basic Discoverymentioning

confidence: 99%

Income Inequality, Globalization, and Country Risk: A Cross-Country Analysis

Lee

Lien

2019

Technological and Economic Development of Economy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Guided by the assessments of globalization in its broader sense, this paper explores the impact of globalization in terms of a salient aspect of economic, social and political on income inequality for a more comprehensive dataset of 121 countries from 1984 to 2014. We also investigate whether the correlations between globalization and inequality vary with economic, financial, and political country risk indicators. Our empirical results reveal that globalization deteriorates income distribution, but economic and financial stability can mitigate the adverse effect. In addition, lowerincome or non-OECD countries generally have higher inequality caused by globalization. Knowledge of these relationships can help the government to formulate more specific policies aiming at improving the income distribution.

show abstract

“…The causes of globalisation during this period are related to various economic and political developments, such as the dissolution of the Soviet Union 1 (Deacon, 2000;Lockwood, 2000), and the strengthening of the liberal economic approach supporting a 'free market' policy. Other factors include the reduction or removal of trade barriers and regulation processes blocking foreign investment and the flow of capital, merchandise, and services between countries (Milorad, 2005;Simmons & Elkins, 2004;Titus, 2013), and the rise of privatisation across the world (Boubakri, Cosset, Debab, & Valéry, 2013;Mudambi, 2003). But probably the main factor that encouraged and stimulated globalisation processes was the development of information and communication technology (ICT) industries, which expanded the scope of trade between the various countries in general and boosted the speed of interaction between human inhabitants of the earth in particular (Arora & Gambardella, 2005;Sagi, Carayannis, Dasgupta, & Thomas, 2004).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

How globalisation impacted Israel and India differently in the 1990s

Cohen

2019

Economic Affairs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In both Israel and India the globalisation process of the 1990s led to the development of advanced domestic industry. This article sketches the socioeconomic impact of this development in the two countries. The analysis suggests that the unique comparative advantage of each of these countries underlies the differences in the form of development and its social impact.Where the relative advantage consisted of innovativeness (Israel), globalisation led to development of an advanced industry focusing on research and development centres and local start-up companies. In contrast, where the relative advantage consisted of low labour costs (India), globalisation resulted in the development of an advanced industrial sector focusing on manufacturing and service centres.

show abstract

Privatization and globalization: An empirical analysis

Cited by 26 publications

References 47 publications

Local IPOs, local delistings, and the firm location premium

Local IPOs, local delistings, and the firm location premium

Income Inequality, Globalization, and Country Risk: A Cross-Country Analysis

How globalisation impacted Israel and India differently in the 1990s

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About