Search results
1 – 10 of 26Considering the relationship between the central bank balance sheet and unconventional monetary policy after the 2008 financial crisis, it is crucial to see how the unconventional…
Abstract
Purpose
Considering the relationship between the central bank balance sheet and unconventional monetary policy after the 2008 financial crisis, it is crucial to see how the unconventional monetary policy, given near-zero interest rates, affects future stock market performance. This paper analyzes the impact of the Fed's balance sheet size on stock market performance.
Design/methodology/approach
To analyze the Fed's balance sheet size's long-term stock market implications, this paper uses the asset pricing framework of market return predictability such as Ordinary least squares (OLS) and Generalized method of moments (GMM) analysis.
Findings
Findings in this paper suggest that the Fed's balance sheet size, deflated by asset market wealth, presents evidence of return predictability during 1926–2015 that is robust against standard controls. These results can be explained through the redistribution of risk and the wealth channels of monetary policy transmission. The changing balance sheet size of a central bank (1) affects systemic risk, yields and expectations and (2) signals the future direction of monetary policy and thus economic outlook.
Research limitations/implications
The main implication of these findings is that policymakers should avoid a severe imbalance between a central bank's balance sheet size and assets market wealth.
Originality/value
The empirical evidence in this paper documents a century-old relation between the Fed's balance sheet size and US stock market return using the Fed's balance sheet data for the last 100 years and stock market returns from the Center for research in security prices (CRSP) database.
Details
Keywords
This paper investigates how outcomes-based performance management (PM) regimes operate in the partnerships known as social impact bonds (SIBs), which bring together partners from…
Abstract
Purpose
This paper investigates how outcomes-based performance management (PM) regimes operate in the partnerships known as social impact bonds (SIBs), which bring together partners from the public, private and third sectors. The findings are analysed in the light of the different cultural world views of the partners.
Design/methodology/approach
Published evaluations of 25 UK SIBs were analysed by a qualitative multiple case study approach. This study of secondary sources permitted the analysis of a wide range of SIB partnerships from near contemporary accounts.
Findings
Outcomes frameworks led to rigorous PM regimes that brought the cultural differences between partners into focus. While partnerships benefitted from the variety of viewpoints and expertise, the differences in outlook simultaneously led to strains and tensions. In order to mitigate such tensions, some stakeholders conformed to the outlooks of others.
Practical implications
The need to achieve a predefined set of payable outcomes embeds a “linear” view of intervention and effect on the SIB partners and a performance regime in which some partners dominate. In designing accountability systems for partnerships such as SIBs, commissioners should consider how the performance regime will affect the interests of all stakeholders.
Originality/value
This study adds to the cultural theory literature which has rarely considered three-way partnerships embodying hierarchical, individualist and egalitarian world views and how performance regimes operate in such partnerships. Three-way partnerships are thought to be rare and short-lived, but this empirical study shows that they can be successful albeit over a predefined lifespan.
Details