Search results

The level of regulation of disclosure and corporate governance on the national and supranational level has increased substantially in the last decade. With that in mind, and in the light of the demand for evidence-based financial reporting and disclosure regulation (Buijink, 2006; Gassen and Günther, 2014; Leuz and Wysocki, 2016), this dissertation aims at investigating economic consequences of such regulation. In particular, this dissertation attempts to provide empirical evidence that helps regulators to assess intended and unintended economic consequences of regulating disclosure and corporate governance. The dissertation comprises three studies that relate to the economic evaluation of intended and unintended consequences of specific regulatory measures in the field of the regulation of disclosure and corporate governance. The first study investigates the market perception of the regulation of corporate. The study aims to infer whether investors perceive the regulation of executive compensation contracts as value enhancing. The second study aims to investigate whether investors value the bonding to the extensive disclosure requirements in the EU-regulated market or whether investors welcome being able to opt out of the EU-regulated market due to an unfavorable cost-benefit tradeoff. The third study of this thesis examines determinants and consequences of firms' downlisting decisions to infer whether costs of disclosure, namely IFRS compliance and enforcement, drive firms away from the EU-regulated market. Overall, main findings from this thesis emphasize that in the German continental European setting (1) regulation of disclosure and corporate governance does not increase, or may even decrease, shareholder welfare and that (2) regulation potentially drives firms away from high levels of disclosure. Consequently, evidence indicates that regulation fails to meet objectives intended by regulators. In the first study, unlike intended by regulators, regulation of executive compensation contracts decreased shareholder welfare. This finding indicates that private compensation contracts absent regulation were sufficient from a shareholder perspective. Also unlike argued by regulators (Deutscher Bundestag, 2015), evidence on investor perceptions of reduced requirements for leaving the EU-regulated market indicates that, in some cases, investors welcome reduced securities markets regulation (second study). By contrast, increased regulation of opt out requirements does not seem to matter from an investor perspective. Therefore, the regulatory measure likely misses the objective of increased investor protection as it does not increase shareholder wealth. Moreover, regulation of disclosure and enforcement can also lead to unintended consequences (third study). Findings indicate that costs of IFRS compliance and enforcement seem to have driven firms away from the EU-regulated market, and thus the IFRS mandate and the enforcement mechanism.

Mit dem umstrittenen Urteil des Bundesgerichtshofs im Frosta-Fall kam es im Oktober 2013 zu einer drastischen Änderung der Regeln für ein Delisting. Die bis dahin durch höchstrichterliche Rechtsprechung vorgeschriebene Zustimmung durch die Hauptversammlung sowie der Entschädigungsanspruch von Minderheitsaktionären entfielen. Die vorliegende Studie findet für den Zeitraum von der Urteilsverkündung bis Ende Mai 2015, dass Aktionäre durch vollständige Delistings signifikante Vermögensverluste erleiden. Die kumulierte abnormale Aktienrendite im Zeitraum von drei Handelstagen um die Delisting-Ankündigung beträgt im Durchschnitt -6%. Die Kursreaktion ist überwiegend negativ. Nach einem Downlisting läßt sich kein signifikanter Kursrückgang feststellen, jedoch beobachten wir einen Rückgang der Aktienliquidität. Die Ergebnisse lassen ein Tätigwerden des Gesetzgebers zum Schutz von Minderheitsaktionären jedenfalls für vollständige Delistings geboten erscheinen. ; With the controversial decision in the "Frosta" case, Germany's Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof) has made significant changes to the rules that apply to corporate delistings from German stock exchanges. The mandatory approval of the delisting by shareholders and the minority shareholders' claim for indemnity have been abolished. This study examines the consequences of the new ruling for shareholders for the period from the court decision in October 2013 to May 2015. The cumulative abnormal stock return in the three days around the announcement of a delisting amounts to -6%. For the vast majority of all delisting announcements, the stock price reaction is found to be negative. We do not observe significant price declines after downlistings. We do observe, however, a deterioration of liquidity in these cases. The results call upon the legislator to take action in order to protect minority shareholders, at least in the case of complete delistings.

In the United States, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service uses the concepts of resilience, redundancy, and representation—often known as the "3Rs"—to guide implementation of the Endangered Species Act, which requires the U.S. government to designate imperiled species as threatened or endangered, and take action to recover them. The Service has done little, however, to relate the 3Rs to the statutory requirements of the Act. Here we focus on interpreting the concept of representation given core tenets of science and conservation policy. We show that the Service's current interpretation, which focuses on a narrow set of characteristics intrinsic to species that facilitate future adaptation, falls far short of a reasonable interpretation from the scientific literature and other policy, and has significant consequences for the conservation of threatened and endangered species, including those found in other countries. To illustrate the shortcomings in practice, we discuss the cases of the Lower 48 gray wolf (Canis lupus) delisting, the proposed Red-cockadedWoodpecker (Picoides borealis) downlisting, and the possible downlisting of the Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis). We then propose an alternative interpretation of representation that accommodates the Service's narrow interpretation and broadens it to include the importance of intraspecific variation for its own sake as well as extrinsic characteristics such as a species' role in ecological communities. We argue that this interpretation better reflects the intent of the Endangered Species Act, the best available science, and policy needs for conserving imperiled wildlife, all of which recognize the importance not only of preventing global extinction but also of preventing ecological extinction and extirpation across significant portions of a species' range.

In the United States, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service uses the concepts of resilience, redundancy, and representation—often known as the "3Rs"—to guide implementation of the Endangered Species Act, which requires the U.S. government to designate imperiled species as threatened or endangered, and take action to recover them. The Service has done little, however, to relate the 3Rs to the statutory requirements of the Act. Here we focus on interpreting the concept of representation given core tenets of science and conservation policy. We show that the Service's current interpretation, which focuses on a narrow set of characteristics intrinsic to species that facilitate future adaptation, falls far short of a reasonable interpretation from the scientific literature and other policy, and has significant consequences for the conservation of threatened and endangered species, including those found in other countries. To illustrate the shortcomings in practice, we discuss the cases of the Lower 48 gray wolf (Canis lupus) delisting, the proposed Red-cockadedWoodpecker (Picoides borealis) downlisting, and the possible downlisting of the Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis). We then propose an alternative interpretation of representation that accommodates the Service's narrow interpretation and broadens it to include the importance of intraspecific variation for its own sake as well as extrinsic characteristics such as a species' role in ecological communities. We argue that this interpretation better reflects the intent of the Endangered Species Act, the best available science, and policy needs for conserving imperiled wildlife, all of which recognize the importance not only of preventing global extinction but also of preventing ecological extinction and extirpation across significant portions of a species' range.

The Sonoran topminnow (Poeciliopsis occidentalis) was once widespread and abundant in southern Arizona (Hubbs and Miller 1941), but was listed as endangered in 1967 (U.S. Dept. Interior 1986). Two reasons are generally given for the topminnow's decline (Minckley and Deacon 1968, Schoenherr 1974, Minckley et al. 1977, Meffe et al. 1983): 1) habitat modification and loss, and 2) predation from exotic fishes, especially mosquitofish (Gambusia affinis). In the United States, the Sonoran topminnow includes two subspecies (Minckley 1973): the Yaqui topminnow (P. o. sonoriensis) native to the Yaqui River drainage, and the Gila topminnow (P. o. occidentalis) native to the southern part of the Colorado River drainage. Although both subspecies also occur in Mexico (Meffe et al. 1983), Mexican populations are not considered here. This report summarizes the status of Gila topminnow in the United States in 1987 -- six years after intensive recovery actions began. Biological, social, and political consequences of downlisting this subspecies to threatened status are also discussed in view of 1987 results. ; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Arizona Game and Fish Department, U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Bureau of Land Management ; Integrative Biology

© 2018 Elsevier Ltd Ecosystem services (the benefits to humans from ecosystems) are estimated globally at $125 trillion/year [1, 2]. Similar assessments at national and regional scales show how these services support our lives [3]. All valuations recognize the role of biodiversity, which continues to decrease around the world in maintaining these services [4, 5]. The giant panda epitomizes the flagship species [6]. Its unrivalled public appeal translates into support for conservation funding and policy, including a tax on foreign visitors to support its conservation [7]. The Chinese government has established a panda reserve system, which today numbers 67 reserves [8, 9]. The biodiversity of these reserves is among the highest in the temperate world [10], covering many of China's endemic species [11]. The panda is thus also an umbrella species [12]—protecting panda habitat also protects other species. Despite the benefits derived from pandas, some journalists have suggested that it would be best to let the panda go extinct. With the recent downlisting of the panda from Endangered to Vulnerable, it is clear that society's investment has started to pay off in terms of panda population recovery [13, 14]. Here, we estimate the value of ecosystem services of the panda and its reserves at between US$2.6 and US$6.9 billion/year in 2010. Protecting the panda as an umbrella species and the habitat that supports it yields roughly 10–27 times the cost of maintaining the current reserves, potentially further motivating expansion of the reserves and other investments in natural capital in China. Wei et al. estimate that the value of ecosystem services of the giant panda and its nature reserves was US$2.6–US$6.9 billion/year in 2010. Protecting the panda and its habitat yields roughly 10–27 times the cost of maintaining the current reserves, potentially motivating expansion of the reserves and other investments in natural capital in China.