Foreign direct investment under weak rule of law : theory and evidence from China

This paper develops a self-enforcing contract model to show that better economic fundamentals can help when there is weak rule of law -- but with order -- to attract foreign direct investment, whereas lowering taxes does not necessarily help. Using a cross-region Chinese dataset, the analysis finds evidence consistent with the theoretical analysis. Regional variations in tax rates and the perceived quality of formal contracting institutions are not correlated with regional inflows of foreign direct investment, but leadership characteristics are. Most conventional economic factors have the predicted effects on foreign direct investment. The finding that foreign direct investment is lower in locations where domestic private firms have better access to finance and where the air quality is poor is new to the literature.Debt Markets,Emerging Markets,Investment and Investment Climate,Bankruptcy and Resolution of Financial Distress,Access to Finance

Is the "Leverage Effect" a Leverage Effect?

The "leverage effect" refers to the well-established relationship between stock returns and both implied and realized volatility: volatility increases when the stock price falls. A standard explanation ties the phenomenon to the effect a change in market valuation of a firm's equity has on the degree of leverage in its capital structure, with an increase in leverage producing an increase in stock volatility. We use both returns and directly measured leverage to examine this hypothetical explanation for the "leverage effect" as it applies to the individual stocks in the S&P100 (OEX) index, and to the index itself. We find a strong "leverage effect" associated with falling stock prices, but also numerous anomalies that call into question leverage changes as the explanation. These include the facts that the effect is much weaker or nonexistent when positive stock returns reduce leverage; it is too small with measured leverage for individual firms, but much too large for OEX implied volatilities; the volatility change associated with a given change in leverage seems to die out over a few months; and there is no apparent effect on volatility when leverage changes because of a change in outstanding debt or shares, only when stock prices change. In short, our evidence suggests that the "leverage effect" is really a "down market effect" that may have little direct connection to firm leverage

Is the "Leverage Effect" a Leverage Effect?

The "leverage effect" refers to the well-established relationship between stock returns and both implied and realized volatility: volatility increases when the stock price falls. A standard explanation ties the phenomenon to the effect a change in market valuation of a firm's equity has on the degree of leverage in its capital structure, with an increase in leverage producing an increase in stock volatility. We use both returns and directly measured leverage to examine this hypothetical explanation for the "leverage effect" as it applies to the individual stocks in the S&P100 (OEX) index, and to the index itself. We find a strong "leverage effect" associated with falling stock prices, but also numerous anomalies that call into question leverage changes as the explanation. These include the facts that the effect is much weaker or nonexistent when positive stock returns reduce leverage; it is too small with measured leverage for individual firms, but much too large for OEX implied volatilities; the volatility change associated with a given change in leverage seems to die out over a few months; and there is no apparent effect on volatility when leverage changes because of a change in outstanding debt or shares, only when stock prices change. In short, our evidence suggests that the "leverage effect" is really a "down market effect" that may have little direct connection to firm leverage

Size effect, book-to-market effect, and survival

Abstract Previous studies find that small stocks have higher average returns than large stocks, and the difference between the returns can not be accounted for by the systematic risk, i. In my analysis of Compustat and CRSP data from 1976 to 1995, and simulation experiments based on the data, I find the size effect can be largely explained by data truncation that is caused by survival. Small stocks' returns are more volatile, and small stocks are more likely to go bankrupt and less likely to meet the stock exchanges' minimum capitalization requirements for listing. As a result, they are more likely to drop out of the sample. Including small stocks that do well and excluding those that do poorly, ex post, gives rise to higher returns for small-size portfolios. I conclude that the size effect is largely a spurious statistical inference resulting from survival bias, not an asset pricing 'anomaly'

Is the "Leverage Effect" a Leverage Effect?

The "leverage effect" refers to the well-established relationship between stock returns and both implied and realized volatility: volatility increases when the stock price falls. A standard explanation ties the phenomenon to the effect a change in market valuation of a firm's equity has on the degree of leverage in its capital structure, with an increase in leverage producing an increase in stock volatility. We use both returns and directly measured leverage to examine this hypothetical explanation for the "leverage effect" as it applies to the individual stocks in the S&P100 (OEX) index, and to the index itself. We find a strong "leverage effect" associated with falling stock prices, but also numerous anomalies that call into question leverage changes as the explanation. These include the facts that the effect is much weaker or nonexistent when positive stock returns reduce leverage; it is too small with measured leverage for individual firms, but much too large for OEX implied volatilities; the volatility change associated with a given change in leverage seems to die out over a few months; and there is no apparent effect on volatility when leverage changes because of a change in outstanding debt or shares, only when stock prices change. In short, our evidence suggests that the "leverage effect" is really a "down market effect" that may have little direct connection to firm leverage

Is the "Leverage Effect" a Leverage Effect?

The "leverage effect" refers to the well-established relationship between stock returns and both implied and realized volatility: volatility increases when the stock price falls. A standard explanation ties the phenomenon to the effect a change in market valuation of a firm's equity has on the degree of leverage in its capital structure, with an increase in leverage producing an increase in stock volatility. We use both returns and directly measured leverage to examine this hypothetical explanation for the "leverage effect" as it applies to the individual stocks in the S&P100 (OEX) index, and to the index itself. We find a strong "leverage effect" associated with falling stock prices, but also numerous anomalies that call into question leverage changes as the explanation. These include the facts that the effect is much weaker or nonexistent when positive stock returns reduce leverage; it is too small with measured leverage for individual firms, but much too large for OEX implied volatilities; the volatility change associated with a given change in leverage seems to die out over a few months; and there is no apparent effect on volatility when leverage changes because of a change in outstanding debt or shares, only when stock prices change. In short, our evidence suggests that the "leverage effect" is really a "down market effect" that may have little direct connection to firm leverage

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for acute pulmonary embolism after postoperative craniocerebral trauma: a case report

IntroductionMassive pulmonary embolism (PE) is a life-threatening complication of major surgery with a mortality rate of up to 50%. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is primarily used for respiratory and circulatory support. Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) is used to stabilize patients with acute massive PE. Acute brain injury, vascular disease, and immunosuppression are contraindications to ECMO, as stated in the 2021 Extracorporeal Life Support Organization guidelines.Case summaryWe report a case of a patient with craniocerebral trauma whose postoperative course was complicated by massive PE and subsequent cardiac arrest that required urgent VA-ECMO, followed by anticoagulation with heparin. The patient showed hemodynamic improvement and was discharged 68 days after hospitalization.DiscussionECMO has gradually been accepted for patients with craniocerebral injuries. The safety and effectiveness of ECMO in patients with craniocerebral injury, along with the optimal duration of ECMO and anticoagulation strategies, require further study

The Role of Work-family Conflict Self Efficacy, Spouse and Supervisor Support in Predicting Work-family Enrichment

This research was aimed at examining the role of work-family conflict self efficacy, spouse and supervisor support in predicting work-family enrichment.. Participant were male and female workers (499 Indonesian and 228 Chinese), married and having at least 1 child in family under 21 years old. Measureement used were the work-family enrichment scale, the work-family conflict self-efficacy scale, support and supervisor support scales. All measurements were translated into Indonesian and Chinese languages. Work-family conflict self efficacy, spouse support and supervisor support are predictors for work-family enrichment in Indonesia and China. However, the dynamic in each country is different

The Differences of Work-family Enrichment across Gender, Job Level and Culture

This research was aimed at examining the differences of Work Family Enrichment across gender (female and male), job level (manager and staff), and culture (Indonesia and China). Participants are male and female workers (499 Indonesian and 228 Chinese), married and having at least 1 child in family under 21 years old. Measurement used were the work family enrichment scale, which was translated into Indonesian and China languages.. Results showed that there are differences of Work Family Enrichment across gender and culture. No impact for job level.