Transaction costs in an illiquid order‐driven market

Transaction costs in many international equity markets are much larger than those in the USA. This raises questions such as what trade size these reported trading costs relate to and whether investors can reduce trading costs by timing their trades. We show, using data from the order‐driven New Zealand market, that transaction costs are frequently lower for larger trades, particularly in small stocks, and investors are able to reduce costs by timing their transactions. While investors who require immediate execution incur transaction costs that are much higher than reported average costs, patient investors can trade at much better rates.     

Regulatory design and technical efficiency: public transport in France

The provision of local public transport in France involves private and public firms and the use of incentive contracts to regulate them. We study the effect of these institutional features on the sector’s efficiency using a long panel data of firms, with a two-stage estimation procedure. First, we use nonparametric data envelopment analysis techniques to estimate input usage efficiency, following a conditional approach that controls for differences in the environments in which the firms operate. Second, we estimate semiparametric censored regressions, using fixed effects to control for unobserved sources of heterogeneity. Our results point to a differential effect of private and mixed public-private companies. In particular, having the performance of public operators as the benchmark, efficiency is relatively higher for private firms, but lower when the service is delegated to a mixed public-private firm. In the latter case, the effects diverge by contract type: when the contract is of the cost reimbursement type, performance is lower than the public firm benchmark, while for other contract types, there are no statistically significant differences.     

Impacts of increased bioenergy demand on global food markets: an AgMIP economic model intercomparison

Integrated Assessment studies have shown that meeting ambitious greenhouse gas mitigation targets will require substantial amounts of bioenergy as part of the future energy mix. In the course of the Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project (AgMIP), five global agro‐economic models were used to analyze a future scenario with global demand for ligno‐cellulosic bioenergy rising to about 100 ExaJoule in 2050. From this exercise a tentative conclusion can be drawn that ambitious climate change mitigation need not drive up global food prices much, if the extra land required for bioenergy production is accessible or if the feedstock, for example, from forests, does not directly compete for agricultural land. Agricultural price effects across models by the year 2050 from high bioenergy demand in an ambitious mitigation scenario appear to be much smaller (+5% average across models) than from direct climate impacts on crop yields in a high‐emission scenario (+25% average across models). However, potential future scarcities of water and nutrients, policy‐induced restrictions on agricultural land expansion, as well as potential welfare losses have not been specifically looked at in this exercise.     

Accounting for intermediates: Production sharing and trade in value added

We combine input–output and bilateral trade data to compute the value added content of bilateral trade. The ratio of value added to gross exports (VAX ratio) is a measure of the intensity of production sharing. Across countries, export composition drives VAX ratios, with exporters of Manufactures having lower ratios. Across sectors, the VAX ratio for Manufactures is low relative to Services, primarily because Services are used as an intermediate to produce manufacturing exports. Across bilateral partners, VAX ratios vary widely and contain information on both bilateral and triangular production chains. We document specifically that bilateral production linkages, not variation in the composition of exports, drive variation in bilateral VAX ratios. Finally, bilateral imbalances measured in value added differ from gross trade imbalances. Most prominently, the U.S.–China imbalance in 2004 is 30–40% smaller when measured in value added.