Expected Returns and Idiosyncratic Risk: Industry-Level Evidence from Russia

We explore a relation between expected returns and idiosyncratic risk in Russia. Investors in the Russian stock market cannot fully diversify their portfolios due to transaction costs, information gathering and processing costs, and shortcomings in investor protection. This implies that investors demand a premium for idiosyncratic risk. We estimate the price of idiosyncratic risk using MIDAS regressions and a cross section of Russian industry portfolios. We find that idiosyncratic risk is economically significant and commands a negative (positive) premium, on average, of 10.0% (8.0) per year before (after) the global financial crisis in 2008. The results remain unaffected after controlling for global pricing factors and return reversal.     

EE-IO modeling of the environmental impacts of Finnish imports using different data sources

The environmental impacts of Finnish imports were modeled using alternative emission datasets. The first dataset was based on domestic technology assumptions from the Finnish environmentally extended input-output (EE-IO) model. In the second dataset, emissions of the largest volumes of imported goods were substituted for EIOLCA (USA) data and in the third option for data from Ecoinvent and the Danish LCA Food Database. Comparative results show that the environmental impacts of imports based on domestic emission intensities are mostly lower than the alternative approaches. Considering the high level of Finnish environmental protection we concluded that the impacts of imports are underestimated using domestic emission intensities. Additionally, we concluded that hybrid IO modeling will increase the accuracy of IO modeling by using process-based data for the most relevant material flows until a multi-regional IO model for Finland has been developed.     

The Forms and Limits of Insurance Solidarity

What makes insurance special among risk technologies is the particular way in which it links solidarity and technical rationality. On one hand, within insurance practices ‘risk’ is always defined in technical terms. It is related to monetary measurement of value and to statistical probability calculated for a limited population. On the other hand, and at the same time, insurance has an inherent connection to solidarity. When taking out an insurance, one participates in the risk pool within which each member is reciprocally responsible for others’ risks. The combination of technical controllability and solidarity has made insurance a successful tool for governing welfare societies during the twentieth century. From the point of view of business ethics, it is interesting that, as we argue in this article, the connection between insurance and solidarity is not limited to social welfare assemblages, but is evident in relation to private insurance as well. At the same time, however, it is important to understand that insurance does not advance all forms of solidarity. Hence, this theoretical article analyzes the specific conceptions of solidarity that the different forms of insurance practice produce. Particular emphasis is put on the distinction between ‘chance solidarity’ and ‘subsidizing solidarity’. The main questions of the article are: What kinds of conceptions of solidarity are built in the insurance technology? And how are the limits of solidarity defined and justified in different forms of insurance?