The thesis examines the interactions between the micro and macro levels by considering the effects of information at the micro level on the dynamics of aggregated investments. Another contribution examines the extent to which stress at the level of government refinancing and bank stress contributed to the rise in both the level and the heterogeneity of the refinancing costs of non-financial companies in the euro area during the European debt crisis and how they influenced the monetary transmission mechanism. The 3rd research paper analyzes how investments at company level are influenced by interactions between the company and the euro area as a whole.

The bank recovery and resolution directive (BRRD) regulates the bail-in hierarchy to resolve distressed banks without burdening tax payers. We exploit the staggered implementation of the BRRD across 15 European Union (EU) member states to identify banks’ capital cost and capital structure responses. In a first stage, we show that average capital costs of banks increased. WACC hikes are lowest in the core countries of the European Monetary Union (EMU) compared to formerly stressed EMU and non-EMU countries. This pattern is driven by changes in the relative WACC weight of equity in response to the BRRD, which indicates enhanced financial system resilience. In a second stage, we document asymmetric transmission patterns of banks’ capital cost changes on to corporates’ borrowing terms. Only EMU banks located in core countries that exhibit higher WACC are those that also increase firms’ borrowing cost and contract credit supply. Hence, the BRRD had unintended consequences for selected segments of the real economy.

Am 31.01.2020 ist das Vereinigte Königreich Großbritannien und Nordirland (Großbritannien) aus der Europäischen Union (EU) ausgetreten. Das Land ist bisher als Handelspartner der nordrhein-westfälischen Wirtschaft von erheblicher Bedeutung gewesen: 2015, im Jahr vor dem britischen Volksentscheid zugunsten eines Austritts, war es mit einem Anteil von 7,7% der drittwichtigste Absatzmarkt für Warenexporte aus Nordrhein-Westfalen, und immerhin 4,6% aller Warenimporte stammten aus Großbritannien. In der vorliegenden Studie werden die Konsequenzen des Brexit für das Land Nordrhein-Westfalen erörtert. Der Fokus liegt dabei auf der kurzen bis mittleren Frist, denn das zentrale Instrument der Analyse, die Input-Output-Rechnung, nutzt Informationen über gegenwärtige Wirtschaftsstrukturen, die sich an die nach dem Austritt Großbritanniens neuen Rahmenbedingungen im Lauf der Zeit anpassen werden. Die Perspektiven für die wirtschaftlichen Beziehungen zwischen Großbritannien und der EU, wie sie sich im Frühjahr 2020 darstellen, werden am Anfang der Studie (Abschnitt 2) skizziert. Daran schließt sich ein Überblick der Literatur zu den wirtschaftlichen Folgen des Brexit für Europa, für Deutschland und für einzelne Regionen an (Abschnitt 3). Das zentrale Kapitel der Studie (Abschnitt 4) beleuchtet die Effekte des Brexit auf die Wirtschaft Nordrhein-Westfalens. Dabei geht es vor allem um den Güterhandel, die Produktion und die Beschäftigung, aber auch um Effekte auf Investitionen und Arbeitsproduktivität. Um auch wichtige indirekte Effekte über Vorleistungsbeziehungen zu erfassen, kommt die Input-Output-Analyse zum Einsatz. Nach einer kurzen Darstellung der Wirtschaftsstruktur Nordrhein-Westfalens und der Handelsverflechtungen zwischen Großbritannien, Deutschland und der EU werden die kurz- bis mittelfristigen Effekte des Brexit auf den Güterhandel, die Produktion und die Beschäftigung in Deutschland und in neun nordrhein-westfälischen Regionen simuliert. An die so erzielten Ergebnisse schließen sich qualitative Überlegungen zu den Effekten auf Investitionstätigkeit und Produktivitätsentwicklung an. In Abschnitt 5 wird diskutiert, ob sich mit dem Brexit nicht auch Chancen für die Wirtschaft Nordrhein-Westfalens bieten. Zu diesem Zweck wird untersucht, in welchen Branchen sowohl Großbritannien als auch Nordrhein-Westfalen bisher innerhalb der EU komparative Vorteile gehabt haben, und ob der Austritt Großbritanniens dort Marktanteilsgewinne der heimischen Wirtschaft ermöglichen könnte. In Abschnitt 6 wird der Frage nachgegangen, welche Instrumente und Maßnahmen von der Politik genutzt werden könnten, um einen fairen und regelbasierten Wettbewerb auf Basis des bisherigen ‚level-playing-field‘ zwischen nordrhein-westfälischen und britischen Unternehmen zu gewährleisten. In einem abschließenden Abschnitt 7 werden die wichtigsten Ergebnisse der Studie zusammengefasst.

Between 2010 and 2012, the European Central Bank absorbed €218 billion worth of government securities from five EMU countries under the Securities Markets Programme (SMP). Detailed security holdings data at the bank level affirms an effective lending stimulus due to the SMP. Exposed banks contract household lending, but increase commercial lending substantially. Holding non-SMP securities from stressed EMU countries amplifies the commercial lending response. The SMP also improved liquidity buffers and profitability without compromising credit quality.

The paper analyzes how actual monetary policy changed following the official adoption of inflation targeting in the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Poland and how it affected the volatilities of important macroeconomic variables in the years thereafter. To disentangle the effects of the policy shift from exogenous changes in the volatilities of these variables, a Markov-switching dynamic stochastic general equilibrium model is estimated that allows for regime switches in the policy parameters and the volatilities of shocks hitting the economies. Whereas estimation results reveal periods of high and low volatility for all three economies, the presence of different policy regimes is supported by the underlying data for the Czech Republic and Poland, only. In both economies, monetary policy switched from weak and unsystematic to strong and systematic responses to inflation dynamics. Simulation results suggest that the policy shifts of both central banks successfully reduced inflation volatility in the following years. The observed reduction in output volatility, on the other hand, is attributed more to a reduction in the size of external shocks.

Economies of scale can explain compensation differentials over time, across firms of different size, different hierarchy-levels, and different industries. Consequently, the most talented individuals tend to match with the largest firms in industries where marginal returns to their talent are greatest. We explore a new dimension of this size-pay nexus by showing that marginal returns also differ across activities within firms and industries. Using hand-collected data on managers in European banks well below the level of executive directors, we find that the size-pay nexus is strongest for investment banking business units and for banks with a market-based business model. Thus, managerial compensation is most sensitive to size increases for activities that can easily be scaled up.

This paper documents that "zombie" lending by undercapitalized banks distorts competition and impedes corporate innovation. This misallocation of capital prevents both the exit of zombie and entry of healthy firms in affected industries adversely impacting output and competition. Worse, capital misallocation depresses patent applications, particularly in high technology- and R&D-intensive sectors, and industries with neck- and-neck competition. We strengthen our results using an IV approach to address reverse causality and innovation survey data from the European Commission. Overall, our results are consistent with externalities imposed on healthy firms through the misallocation of capital.

We survey 149 leading academic researchers on bank capital regulation. The median (average) respondent prefers a 10% (15%) minimum non-risk-weighted equity-to-assets ratio, which is considerably higher than the current requirement. North Americans prefer a significantly higher equity-to-assets ratio than Europeans. We find substantial support for the new forms of regulation introduced in Basel III, such as liquidity requirements. Views are most dispersed regarding the use of hybrid assets and bail-inable debt in capital regulation. 70% of experts would support an additional market-based capital requirement. When investigating factors driving capital requirement preferences, we find that the typical expert believes a five percentage points increase in capital requirements would “probably decrease” both the likelihood and social cost of a crisis with “minimal to no change” to loan volumes and economic activity. The best predictor of capital requirement preference is how strongly an expert believes that higher capital requirements would increase the cost of bank lending.

Differences in national bank regulation and supervision hamper the process; political factors play a minor role, write Simon Grothe, Michael Koetter, Thomas Krause, and Lena Tonzer