Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Working Paper (1484)
- Part of Periodical (562)
- Article (186)
- Report (141)
- Book (98)
- Doctoral Thesis (70)
- Contribution to a Periodical (44)
- Conference Proceeding (21)
- Part of a Book (13)
- Periodical (12)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (2659)
Keywords
- Deutschland (98)
- Financial Institutions (90)
- ECB (65)
- Capital Markets Union (64)
- Financial Markets (59)
- Banking Union (50)
- Banking Regulation (49)
- Household Finance (45)
- Banking Supervision (40)
- Macro Finance (40)
Institute
- Wirtschaftswissenschaften (2659) (remove)
Aus hundertseitigen, oftmals verstaubten Büchern zieht er mittels computerlinguistischer Methoden hochspannende Datensätze: Prof. Dr. Alexander Hillert koordiniert als Professor für Finance und Data Science das SAFE-Forschungsdatenzentrum. Jungen Forscherinnen und Forschern eine fundierte Methoden- und Datenkompetenz zu vermitteln, ist ihm ein großes Anliegen.
Contemporary information systems make widespread use of artificial intelligence (AI). While AI offers various benefits, it can also be subject to systematic errors, whereby people from certain groups (defined by gender, age, or other sensitive attributes) experience disparate outcomes. In many AI applications, disparate outcomes confront businesses and organizations with legal and reputational risks. To address these, technologies for so-called “AI fairness” have been developed, by which AI is adapted such that mathematical constraints for fairness are fulfilled. However, the financial costs of AI fairness are unclear. Therefore, the authors develop AI fairness for a real-world use case from e-commerce, where coupons are allocated according to clickstream sessions. In their setting, the authors find that AI fairness successfully manages to adhere to fairness requirements, while reducing the overall prediction performance only slightly. However, they find that AI fairness also results in an increase in financial cost. Thus, in this way the paper’s findings contribute to designing information systems on the basis of AI fairness.
Strict environmental regulation may deter foreign direct investment (FDI). The paper develops the hypothesis that regulation predominantly discourages FDI that is conducted as Greenfield investment rather than mergers and acquisitions (M&A). The hypothesis is tested with German firm-level FDI data. Empirically, stricter regulation reduces new Greenfield projects in polluting industries, but indeed has a much smaller impact on the number of M&As. This significant difference is compatible with the fact that existing operations often benefit from grandfathering rules, which provide softer regulation for pre-exisiting plants, and with the expectation that for M&As part of the regulation is capitalized in the purchase price. The heterogeneous effects help explaining mixed results in previous studies that have neglected the mode of entry.
We investigate whether the bank crisis management framework of the European banking union can effectively bar the detrimental influence of national interests in cross-border bank failures. We find that both the internal governance structure and decision making procedure of the Single Resolution Board (SRB) and the interplay between the SRB and national resolution authorities in the implementation of supranationally devised resolution schemes provide inroads that allow opposing national interests to obstruct supranational resolution. We also show that the Single Resolution Fund (SRG), even after the ratification of the reform of the European Stability Mechanism (ESM) and the introduction of the SRF backstop facility, is inapt to overcome these frictions. We propose a full supranationalization of resolution decision making. This would allow European authorities in charge of bank crisis management to operate autonomously and achieve socially optimal outcomes beyond national borders.
There have been numerous attempts to reform the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) after the Great Recession, however the reform success varies greatly among sub-fields. Additionally, the political science research community has engaged a diverse set of theory- driven explanations, causal mechanisms, and variables to explain respective reform success. This article takes stock of reform policies in the EMU from two angles. First, it outlines distinct theoretical approaches that seek to explain success and failure of reform proposals and second, it surveys how they explain policy output and policy outcome in four policy subfields: financial stabilization, economic governance, financial solidarity, and cooperative dissolution. Finally, the article develops a set of explanatory factors from the existing literature that will be used for a Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA).