Working Paper
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Working Paper (51) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (51)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (51)
Keywords
- Europäische Union (51) (remove)
The corporate governance systems in Europe differ markedly. Economists tend to use stylized models and distinguish between the Anglo-American, the German and the Latinist model.1 In this view, for instance, the Austrian, Dutch, German, and Swiss systems are said to be variations of one model. For lawyers the picture is of course, much more detailed as particular rules may vary even where common principles prevail. Many comparative studies on these differences have been undertaken meanwhile.2 I do not want to add another study but to treat a different question. Are there as a consequence of growing internationalization, globalization of markets and technological change, also tendencies of convergence of our corporate governance systems? My answer will be in two parts. As corporate governance systems are traditionally mainly shaped by legislation, the first part will analyze the influence of the economic and technological change on the rule-setting process itself. How does this process react to the fundamental environmental change? That includes a short analysis of the solution of centralized harmonizing of company law within the EU as well as the question of whether EU-wide competition between national corporate law legislators can be observed or be expected in the future. The second part will then turn to the national level. It deals with actual tendencies of convergence or, more correctly, of approach by the German corporate governance system to the Anglo-American one.
The purpose of the paper is to survey and discuss inflation targeting in the context of monetary policy rules. The paper provides a general conceptual discussion of monetary policy rules, attempts to clarify the essential characteristics of inflation targeting, compares inflation targeting to the other monetary policy rules, and draws some conclusions for the monetary policy of the European system of Central Banks.
No one seems to be neutral about the effects of EMU on the German economy. Roughly speaking, there are two camps: those who see the euro as the advent of a newly open, large, and efficient regime which will lead to improvements in European and in particular in German competitiveness; those who see the euro as a weakening of the German commitment to price stability. From a broader macroeconomic perspective, however, it is clear that EMU is unlikely to cause directly any meaningful change either for the better in Standort Deutschland or for the worse in the German price stability. There is ample evidence that changes in monetary regimes (so long as non leaving hyperinflation) induce little changes in real economic structures such as labor or financial markets. Regional asymmetries of the sorts in the EU do not tend to translate into monetary differences. Most importantly, there is no good reason to believe that the ECB will behave any differently than the Bundesbank.
This paper reviews the factors that will determine the shape of financial markets under EMU. It argues that financial markets will not be unified by the introduction of the euro. National central banks have a vested interest in preserving local idiosyncracies (e.g. the Wechsels in Germany) and they might be allowed to do so by promoting the use of so-called tier two assets under the common monetary policy. Moreover, a host of national regulations (prudential and fiscal) will make assets expressed in euro imperfect substitutes across borders. Prudential control will also continue to be handled differently from country to country. In the long run these national idiosyncracies cannot survive competitive pressures in the euro area. The year 1999 will thus see the beginning of a process of unification of financial markets that will be irresistible in the long run, but might still take some time to complete.
Einer einheitlichen europäischen Börsenaufsicht ist auf der jetzigen Entwicklungsstufe der Märkte, des Börsenrechts und des EGV eine klare Absage zu erteilen. Es gilt vielmehr, die dargestellten Probleme des europäischen Kapitalmarkt- und Börsenrechts auf Basis der Mitgliedstaaten bzw. der EU abzustellen und so an der Schaffung eines integrierten Kapitalmarktes mitzuwirken. Das Recht muß sich immer nach den tatsächlichen Begebenheiten richten und kann dieses im Regelfall daher nur zeitverzögert erfassen. Die Entwicklung der europäischen Börsen und geregelten Märkte ist aber nicht abzusehen. Ob nun den Computerbörsen allein die Zukunft gehört, ob Präsenzbörsen eine Daseinsberechtigung haben werden, oder nach welchem System der Börsenhandel organisiert werden soll, muß sich nach den zukünftigen Bedürfnissen des Marktes richten. Das Aufsichtsrecht hat dabei die Aufgabe, auf möglichst wettbewerbsneutrale Weise einen anleger- und funktionsschützenden Rahmen zu stellen. Der flexible Rahmen der europarechtlichen Vorgaben ermöglicht dies den Mitgliedstaaten. Börsenkooperationen, denen im Börsenhandel die Zukunft gehört, beginnen gerade erst ihren Handel zu organisieren. Die folgenden Jahre werden daher zeigen, welche Anforderungen sich für die nationalen Aufsichtsbehörden und die europarechtlichen Vorgaben stellen.
Finanzdienstleister unterliegen infolge zunehmender Deregulierung und Globalisierung und des damit verbundenen Auftretens ausländischer Anbieter einem starken Wettbewerbsdruck. Dieser wird sich durch den Wegfall der Wechselkursrisiken nach Einführung des Euro noch verstärken. Für Finanzdienstleister wird es zunehmend überlebensnotwendig, auf einen kostengünstigen Vertrieb ihrer Produkte zu achten. Unternehmen mit Direktvertrieb, namentlich die nur über Telefon, Fax, E-Mail und Internet erreichbaren Direktbanken, Direktversicherungen und Discount-Broker, erfreuen sich gerade wegen ihrer geringen Vertriebskosten wachsender Beliebtheit. Ein neuer EU-Richtlinienvorschlag für den Fernabsatz von Finanzdienstleistungen (Finanz-RLV)könnte den bestehenden Rechtsrahmen entscheidend verändern. Die betroffenen Kreise sollten sich folglich schon vor Erlaß und Umsetzung der Richtlinie in das mitgliedstaatliche Recht mit dem möglichen neuen Rechtsrahmen beschäftigen.
Major differences between national financial systems might make a common monetary policy difficult. As within Europe, Germany and the United Kingdom differ most with respect to their financial systems, the present paper addresses its topic under the assumption that the United Kingdom is already a part of EMU. Employing a comprehensive concept of a financial system, the author shows that there are indeed profound differences between the national financial systems of Germany and the United Kingdom. But he argues that these differences are not likely to create great problems for a common monetary policy. In the context of the present paper, one important difference between the two financial systems refers to the structure of the respective financial sector and, as a consequence, to the strength with which a given monetary policy impulse set by the central bank is passed on to the financial sector. The other important difference refers to the typical relationship between the banks and the business sector in each country which determines to what extent the financial sectors and especially the banks pass on pressure exerted on them by a monetary policy authority to their clients in their national business sector. In Germany, the central bank has a stronger influence on the financial sector than in England, while, for systemic reasons, German banks tend to soften monetary policy pressures on their customers more than British banks do. As far as the transmission of a restrictive monetary policy of the ECB to the real economy is concerned, these two differences tend to offset each other. This is good news for the advocates of a monetary union as it eases the task of the ECB when it comes to determining the strength of its monetary policy measures.
Aus dem weiten Spektrum ökonomisch relevanter Fragen, die die europäische Integration und das Gesellschaftsrecht verbinden, soll hier diejenige herausgegriffen werden, ob sich die nationalen Corporate-Governance-Systeme in den großen europäischen Volkswirtschaften Deutschlands, Frankreichs und Großbritanniens unter dem Einfluß der europäischen Integration bereits aneinander angeglichen haben und ob es demnächst zu einer solchen Angleichung kommen wird. Unser Thema deckt nur einen Teil des Gesellschaftsrechts ab und geht zugleich hinsichtlich der angesprochenen rechtlichen Materie über das Gesellschaftsrecht hinaus, denn die Corporate Governance fügt sich nicht einfach in herkömmliche juristische Klassifikationen ein. Unser Vorhaben unterscheidet sich aber vor allem dadurch von einer juristischen Behandlung des Themas, daß primär ökonomische Mechanismen und Zusammenhänge angesprochen werden. Ökonomen betrachten die Corporate Governance im weiteren Kontext des Finanzsystems, denn das Corporate-Governance-System ist ein Teil des Finanzsystems eines Landes. Die Fragen, wie unterschiedlich die nationalen Systeme der Corporate Governance waren, ehe zu Beginn der 80er Jahre der Prozeß der Angleichung in Europa einsetzte, wie unterschiedlich sie heute noch sind, wie sehr sie sich somit bereits angeglichen haben und wie ein möglicher Angleichungsprozeß weitergehen könnte, sind deshalb ein Teil der weiteren Frage nach der Angleichung der Finanzsysteme in Europa. In diesem Beitrag konzentrieren wir uns aber nur auf Entwicklungen der 90er Jahre.
All-over in Europe, unemployment became a growing problem from the mid 1980s to the mid 1990s. Nevertheless, the effects on the economical situation of the unemployed and the whole population are quite different in European countries. In this paper we first give a brief overview over the development of unemployment rates in eight member states of the European Union and over the different reactions to provide the social protection of the unemployed. Therefore we look at the social security expenditures, the level of income replacement for the unemployed and recent social policy reforms concerning them. In the second section of the paper, we examine the development of income distribution and poverty taking different poverty lines into consideration. There is no general pattern neither for the relationship of inequality among the unemployed to the whole economically active population nor for the development from the 80s to the 90s. But one can say that in countries with increasing income inequality also poverty is rising (especially in the UK) and that where inequality among the unemployed is less pronounced the proportions of the poor went down from the mid 80s to the mid 90s (France and Ireland). In nearly all countries the risk of being poor is ernormously high for the unemployed, Denmark is the only exception.