Changes in the Ownership and Governance of Securities Exchanges: Causes and Consequences

Over the past five years we have witnessed substantial changes in the ownership and governance structures of securities exchanges, particularly in Europe. Recent surveys indicate that a substantial majority of the world’s exchanges would like to “demutualize” in the coming years. The concept of demutualization remains a hazy one, however, along multiple dimensions: the factors that distinguish a demutualized from a mutualized exchange, the factors that motivate demutualization, and the implications of demutualization for the way in which exchanges are regulated. In seeking to clarify the meaning of demutualization, we hope as well to clarify the sources of conflict between the role of an exchange as a commercial enterprise acting in the interests of its owners and its role as a quasi-regulatory body. Government regulators around the world have expressed concern about the effect of exchange ownership and governance reforms on the ability of exchanges to meet the self-regulatory obligations devolved to them. Mutuality and self-regulation in the public interest are typically seen as going hand-in-hand. As we discuss in some detail, it is this misapprehension that lies at the heart of many concerns directed at demutualization. Regulatory failures are inevitable any time self-regulatory obligations imposed on an exchange conflict with the commercial interests of the exchange’s owners. Such commercial interests are no less powerful for a mutualized exchange than for a demutualized one.

Integración de mercados financieros regionales: aprender de la experiencia europea

(Disponible en idioma inglés únicamente) El llamado modelo europeo de integración de mercados ha venido evolucionando a lo largo de muchas décadas. En particular, el plan original de integrar económicamente a Europa por la vía de un programa progresivo de harmonización de legislaciones nacionales, especialmente en el campo de los mercados financieros, ha cedido a una alternativa radical basada en el reconocimiento mutuo de los estados miembros de la legislación y la normativa nacional en vigor. Dado que ese cambio se puso en marcha más que nada por motivos pragmáticos, el enfoque de reconocimiento mutuo ha adquirido desde entonces una dimensión ideológica y estratégica en las negociaciones políticas que le confiere aún más importancia al estudio de sus repercusiones en el terreno.

Growth determinants of start-ups in Eastern Germany: a comparison between innovative and non-innovative firms

This empirical analysis deals with the determinants of growth and the explanation of variations in the growth between innovative and non-innovative start-ups. Based on theoretical models explaining the growth of firms, hypotheses on potential determinants are formulated. The regression results indicate strong correlations between the growth rate on the one side and firmspecific, founder-specific as well as external factors on the other side. These factors influence the growth rates of innovative and non-innovative young firms in different ways. It becomes obvious that large and mature firms have smaller growth rates than small and young innovative as well as non-innovative firms. Moreover, other firm-specific characteristics like legal form and formal links to other firms from Western industrialised countries have an impact on the development of start-ups. With respect to founder-specific characteristics, positive effects can be derived from the human capital of the founder(s). This holds especially for technological disciplines whereas business knowledge plays a minor role. In addition to firm and founder characteristics, locationspecific factors controlling for agglomeration effects and the industry structure in the Eastern German counties have an impact on growth. Comparing annual growth rates of start-ups, innovative start-ups grow on average faster than non-innovative start-ups. --New Technology-based Firms,Employment Growth,Determinants of Growth

Optimal FIFO grouping in public transit networks

This technical report is about grouping vehicles (so-called trips) in public transport into routes (or, as they are more commonly known: lines) so that two vehicles of a route do not overtake each other. We say that such a set of routes satisfies the FIFO property. An interesting question is: Given a set of trips, find a minimal FIFO grouping into routes. This question is especially interesting for route planning algorithms since a better route grouping leads to a better runtime. This contribution is structured as follows: First, all necessary details are formalised and defined, and then the algorithmic complexity of this problem is explained and proven