Suchergebnisse

AbstractThis paper focuses on intra‐industry trade (IIT) between Central, Eastern and South‐Eastern European (CESEE) countries and the EU‐15. It assesses the determinants of intra‐industry trade by combining a detailed product‐level (HS‐6) trade‐flow database with country‐level structural, monetary and institutional variables. Estimates are obtained with System‐GMM and dynamic fractional response models. Our results suggest that structural factors driving IIT differ in the region, notably perceptions of corruption and the distance in the stock of physical capital from the EU‐15. On the other hand, nominal variables such as the competitiveness of corporate taxation and the flexibility of exchange rate regimes contribute to the increase in intra‐industry trade in the whole region.

We perform a network analysis of the centrally cleared interest rate derivatives market in the European Union, by looking at counterparty relations within both direct (house) clearing and client clearing. Since the majority of the gross notional is transferred within central counterparties and their clearing members, client clearing is often neglected in the literature, despite its significance in terms of net exposures. We find that the client clearing structure is very strongly interconnected and contains on the order of 90% of the counterparty relations in the interest rate derivatives market. Moreover, it is more diverse in terms of geography and sectors of the financial market the counterparties are associated with. Client clearing is also significantly more volatile in time than direct clearing. These findings underline the importance of analysing the structure and stability of both direct and client clearing of the interest rate derivatives market in Europe, to improve understanding of this important market and potential contagion mechanisms within it.

The rapid increase in intra-industry trade (IIT) between the EU15 and Central, Eastern and South-Eastern European (CESEE) countries after the collapse of the Soviet Union indicates a structural change in the nature of trade in CESEE and a new process of transition and real convergence to the EU. Using a product-level trade flows database and employing linear and non-linear panel data specifications, this paper assesses the determinants of intra-industry trade between the EU15 as the main trading block and CESEE, which are further divided into the 'new' EU member states (NMS) and the EU candidate countries and potential candidates (CCPC). The analysis highlights the importance of intra-industry trade in terms of achieving real convergence. The paper finds that there exist some common factors driving IIT across the sample, such as the corporate tax rate, the flexibility of exchange rate regimes and the quality of political institutions. However, the determinants of IIT between NMS and EU15 countries deviate considerably from those between CCPC and EU15 countries.

As the current financial crisis has shown, macroeconomic imbalances such as persistent current account and trade deficits, can seriously undermine a country's resilience to economic shocks. Maintaining and enhancing external competitiveness has thus become of increasing concern, particularly to European Union (EU) candidate countries whose economic growth models have been challenged in recent years. Drawing on previous studies, this paper assesses developments in the external competitiveness of EU candidate countries between 1999 and 2011. Taking a broad approach to the issue of competitiveness, the paper considers various indicators of both short and long-term competitiveness, including those related to domestic prices and costs, export performance, and institutional and structural issues. In the context of EU integration, comparisons are drawn with developments in the EU12. We find that, during the pre-crisis period, all candidate countries experienced robust export market growth, but also suffered losses in price and cost competitiveness. In terms of export characteristics, progress has been heterogeneous and also fairly slow when compared with the EU12. All candidate countries have increased their number of export products and trading partners, but only a few have been able to export more complex products. As regards structural issues such as corruption and bureaucratic efficiency, all countries have performed quite poorly with the exception of Iceland.

This ESRB Occasional Paper complements the publication of indicators on central counterparties (CCPs) in the ESRB's Risk Dashboard as part of its monitoring framework. It provides a methodological background to the development of the individual measures and discusses different aspects that should be considered when designing a monitoring framework for CCPs. The paper also highlights a number of areas in which more granular data are required in order, for example, to monitor the interconnectedness of CCPs within the broader financial system.CCPs play a key role in financial markets, as they reduce counterparty credit risk. This role is now heightened following post-crisis reforms of the over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives markets. Since CCPs may be viewed as systemically important institutions, it is crucial to ensure that they are regulated and monitored effectively. The ESRB has, therefore, sought to strengthen the framework used to analyse developments at CCPs in the EU from a macroprudential perspective.Each monitoring framework relies on the availability of suitable data. It is therefore positive that CCPs publish data on a quarterly basis under the CPMI-IOSCO public quantitative disclosure framework. These data provide a rich source of information covering several aspects of CCPs' functioning and are the basis of the indicators the ESRB has developed to analyse developments in central clearing in the EU.The indicators are designed to provide a macroprudential view over time of CCPs' resources, liquidity and collateral policies, margin and haircut requirements, interoperability arrangements as well as market structure and concentration at CCP level. The indicators cover all CCPs that are authorised within the EU, although the values of individual measures across CCPs should be analysed and interpreted with caution, bearing in mind that there are significant differences between individual CCPs' business models, membership structures and products cleared.