An analysis of bundle pricing in horizontal and vertical markets: The case of the U.S. cottonseed market

The U.S. cottonseed market has seen the rapid development and adoption of seeds with differing bundles of genetically modified (GM) traits. It has also seen an increase in vertical integration by biotechnology firms. In this article, we investigate the price impacts associated with structural changes in the U.S. cottonseed market from 2002 to 2007. We develop a structural model to examine the substitution/complementarity relationships among cottonseeds sold with different genetic trait bundles and under different vertical arrangements. We examine the price impacts emanating from product differentiation, market concentration, and market size. The econometric investigation finds evidence of subadditive bundle pricing in patented biotech traits. While higher own‐market concentrations are found to be associated with higher prices, we also uncover evidence of cross‐product complementarity effects that lead to lower prices. Simulations are used to evaluate net price effects, illustrating the usefulness of the approach in the analysis of changing market structures.     

Does Trade Credit Substitute Bank Credit? Evidence from Firm‐level Data

The paper examines micro data on Italian manufacturing firms' inventory behaviour to test the Meltzer (1960) hypothesis according to which firms substitute bank credit with trade credit (TC) during money tightening. We find that inventory investment of Italian manufacturing firms is constrained by their availability of TC and that this effect more than doubles during monetary restrictions. As for the magnitude of the substitution effect, however, we find that it is not sizeable. This is in line with the micro theories of TC and the evidence on actual firm practices, according to which credit terms display modest variations over time .     

Optimal Workfare with Voluntary and Involuntary Unemployment*

This paper addresses the welfare implications of introducing workfare into unemployment benefit policy. We consider a population composed of employed and unemployed workers and of individuals who do not seek employment. Job search behavior is unobservable, which means that voluntarily unemployed individuals can claim unemployment insurance (UI) benefits intended for unemployed workers. As a consequence, pecuniary benefit schemes underinsure workers against unemployment. We show that requiring unproductive activities (workfare) in exchange for UI benefits may generate a Pareto improvement by facilitating better unemployment insurance for workers, and we characterize the situations where this is the case.     

Worker Absenteeism in Search Equilibrium*

In this paper we introduce a general equilibrium model of search unemployment that incorporates absence from work as a distinct labor force state. Absenteeism is driven by random shocks to the value of leisure that are private information to the workers. Firms maximize profits while recognizing that the compensation package may affect the queue of job applicants and the absence rate. The analysis provides results concerning the effects of social insurance benefits and other determinants of workers' and firms' behavior. The normative analysis identifies externalities associated with firm‐provided sick pay and examines the welfare implications of alternative policies.     

Optimal unemployment insurance with heterogeneous agents

The framework of a general equilibrium heterogeneous agent model is used to study the optimal design of an unemployment insurance (UI) scheme and preferences for unemployment policy reforms. In a first step, the optimal defined benefit and defined replacement ratio UI systems are obtained in simulations. Then, the question whether switching to such an optimal system from the status quo would be approved by a majority of the population is explored. Finally, the transitional dynamics following a policy change are analysed. Accounting for this transition has an important influence on the support for a policy change.     

Fast accurate binomial pricing

We discuss here an alternative interpretation of the familiar binomial lattice approach to option pricing, illustrating it with reference to pricing of barrier options, one- and two-sided, with fixed, moving or partial barriers, and also the pricing of American put options. It has often been observed that if one tries to price a barrier option using a binomial lattice, then one can find slow convergence to the true price unless care is taken over the placing of the grid points in the lattice; see, for example, the work of Boyle & Lau [2]. The placing of grid points is critical whether one uses a dynamic programming approach, or a Monte Carlo approach, and this can make it difficult to compute hedge ratios, for example. The problems arise from translating a crossing of the barrier for the continuous diffusion process into an event for the binomial approximation. In this article, we show that it is not necessary to make clever choices of the grid positioning, and by interpreting the nature of the binomial approximation appropriately, we are able to derive very quick and accurate pricings of barrier options. The interpretation we give here is applicable much more widely, and helps to smooth out the ‘odd-even’ ripples in the option price as a function of time-to-go which are a common feature of binomial lattice pricing.     

Controlling portfolio skewness and kurtosis without directly optimizing third and fourth moments

In spite of their importance, third or higher moments of portfolio returns are often neglected in portfolio construction problems due to the computational difficulties associated with them. In this paper, we propose a new robust mean–variance approach that can control portfolio skewness and kurtosis without imposing higher moment terms. The key idea is that, if the uncertainty sets are properly constructed, robust portfolios based on the worst-case approach within the mean–variance setting favor skewness and penalize kurtosis.     

Solving the price puzzle with an alternative indicator of monetary policy

We identify the effects of monetary policy shocks on macroeconomic variables in VARs using the Divisia M4 measure of money as the policy indicator variable. We obtain theoretically sensible responses—whether or not a commodity price index is included. Thus, we eliminate the well-known empirical puzzles from the VAR by a novel choice in a policy variable, rather than the usual attachment of an ad hoc variable.     

Dynamics of monetary policy spillover: The role of exchange rate regimes

In a time-varying framework, our study investigates the role of exchange rate regimes in explaining monetary policy spillover across a set of AEs and EMEs. We also investigate the channels contributing to the dynamism in the degree of such spillover. We find that the flexible exchange rate regime in the AEs insulates them against the spillover to a relatively larger extent as compared to the managed float regime in the EMEs. We also find that the spillover is strongly time-varying, being influenced by macroeconomic conditions in the centre economy. Risk-taking, portfolio rebalancing, and signaling channels are found to be significant in explaining the rise in spillover in the EMEs, but not in the AEs. The rise in the connectedness of interest rates in the AEs occurred only during the global financial crisis (2008–12), owing to their higher policy coordination with the US. This should not be misconstrued as monetary policy spillover.     

Irving Fisher and Price‐Level Targeting in Austria: Was Silver the Answer?

The question of price level versus inflation targeting remains controversial. Disagreement concerns not so much the desirability of price stability but rather the means of achieving it. Irving Fisher argued for a commodity dollar standard where the purchasing power of money was fixed by indexing it to a basket of commodities. We show that movements in the price of silver closely track the movements in overall prices during the classical gold standard era. The one‐to‐one relationship between paper and silver bonds suggests that a simple “silver rule” could have sufficed to fix the purchasing power of money.