Gunnar Lang

Lessons of the Financial Crisis for the Attractiveness of European Financial Centers

This paper analyses fundamental location factors for the financial industry by investigating the economic significance of market participants’ assessments of location factors and country-specific characteristics over time. A unique data set allows studying the locational attractiveness of financial centers before, during, and after the recent financial crisis. The results reveal that especially dense networks in cluster concentration and governmental support strongly determine a location’s attractiveness for financial institutions, whereas a specialized pool of labor alone without concentration and the level of taxation seem not to be relevant. Financial centers with a strong home market benefit during times of crisis in contrast to offshore centers and vice versa. Overall, financial centers’ attractiveness varies over time, while the decisive location factors stay the same. The findings are not hinged by differences in market participants’ socio-economic backgrounds. Investment fund companies seem to value the attractiveness of a financial center much more than banks, insurance companies, and corporates do.

What is the wind behind the sails to go abroad? Empirical evidence from the mutual fund industry

Specific industry factors determining cross-border business set-up in the European mutual fund industry are analyzed to contribute to the understanding of production specificities in the financial industry. The findings indicate that the decision on where to domicile a fund is not primarily driven by traditional cost factors, such as registration charges and labor costs. Network conditions with respect to the knowledge-based production process of mutual funds and the interaction with regulating authorities such as the approval process embedded in the legal framework and the quality of the workforce in a dense specialized cluster matter most. Differences in such network conditions may allow fund companies to set up more innovative and complex funds in a shorter period of time in one country than in other countries. The findings highlight also that the practitioners agree on such network determinants as being most important.

Do We Need a Separate Banking System? An Assessment

Motivated by the current discussion on different separate banking systems, we provide an overview of the different systems, question them and outline their effect on systemic stability and the German banking sector. The results show that the various separate banking systems only play a minor role in reducing and limiting systemic risk. They only marginally contribute to solving conflicts of interest and can even be detrimental to banking business diversification. A separate banking system could, however, facilitate banking supervision by reducing the banking system’s complexity. Furthermore, credible threats to not support investment banks with federal resources in times of crisis could lead to a more adequate incentives structure of suppliers of equity and outside capital. More efficient measures to further reduce systemic risk in the financial sector should, however, use different levers, such as additional minimum regulatory capital requirements.

Attractiveness of European Financial Centers

The rise and fall of financial centers and the factors determining their attractiveness for financial activity has long been the subject of marked interest. Financial institutions and concomitant cross-border activities are sought after by governments because they create high-paying jobs, increased personal income, wealth, and tax revenues. The impact of the banking sector on the economy creates further benefits via several transmission channels (e.g., Rajan and Zingales, 1998; Aghion et al., 2005 and 2009). As a result, there has been enduring competition among financial centers as countries continually work to enhance the attractiveness of their home markets.

Macro Attractiveness and Micro Decisions in the Mutual Fund Industry

General Introduction.- Theoretical Background.- Attractiveness of European Financial Centers.- Evidence from Domiciliation Decisions in the Mutual Fund Industry.- Impact of the Domiciliation Decision on Fund Fees.- General Conclusion.- Appendix.

Chinese Pension Fund Investment Efficiency - Evidence from CNCSSF Stock Holdings

China’s pension system is facing a large gap of more than one trillion RMB. The investment efficiency of the social security fund therefore receives widespread attention in academic circles. We collected data of stocks held by the Chinese National Council for Social Security Fund (CNCSSF) from 2004 to 2012 to research the stocks’ investment efficiency, distinguishing between direct investment by the CNCSSF and entrusted investment by fund companies. The results indicate that both components of the Chinese Social Security Fund investment have efficiency drawbacks. Direct investment by the CNCSSF does not obtain excess returns, while entrusted investment reaches an annual excess return of 4.32 percent because more private information is available to fund companies than to the CNCSSF during asset allocation. Further analyses of this paper find, however, that the Chinese Social Security Fund has a significant market-stabilizing effect, which is almost three times stronger than the market-stabilizing effect of entrusted investment. In general, entrusted investment performs better than direct investment with regard to investment efficiency, while direct investment performs better in terms of market stabilization.