Equity pricing in the mining sector: evidence from NYSE and LSE

The study examines the Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM) for the mining sector using weekly stock returns from 27 companies traded on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) or on the London Stock Exchange (LSE) for the period of December 2008 to December 2010. The results support the use of the CAPM for the allocation of risk to companies. Most companies involved in precious metals (particularly gold), which have a beta value less than unity (Table 1), have been actuated as shelter values during the financial crisis. Values of R2 do not shown very explanatory power of fitted models (R2 < 70 %). Estimated coefficients beta are not sufficient to determine the expected returns on securities but the results of the tests conducted on sample data for the period analysed do not appear to clearly reject the CAPM

International For-Profit Investments in Microfinance Institutions Equity

Purpose: The purpose of this document is to review the funding options for Microfinance Institutions (MFIs), define the size of the holdings of international investors in MFI equity and in particular the MFIs listed in stock exchanges, analyze the characteristics of these subset of the financial world and study the stock exchange evolution of some listed MFIs amid the financial crisis. Design/methodology/approach: Since academic literature on listed MFI equity is virtually inexistent, most of the information has been obtained from the World Bank, annual accounts of the listed MFIs, stock exchanges and from equity research documents. Findings and Originality/value: Microfinance Institutions share several common characteristics that make them a resilient business and the few MFIs that are listed in stock exchanges seem to have performed better in the financial crisis. Microfinance can be considered as one of the new frontiers of the expansion of the global banking industry. Practical implications: Presently, international for-profit investors have very few ways of investing in microfinance equity. Most of the equity of the MFI equity is funded locally or thanks to the local public sector. The stock exchange listing of the MFIs should drive MFIs towards a more professional management, more transparency and better governance. Social implications: Microfinance Institutions provide credit to microenterprises in poor countries that have no other alternative sources of external capital to expand its activity. If global investors could easily invest in the listed equity of the MFIs these institutions would expand its lending books and would improve its governance, part of the population living in poor areas or with lower income could ameliorate its standard of living. Originality/value: The number of Microfinance Institutions that are professionally run like commercial banks is still scarce and even more scarce are the MFI listed in public stock exchanges. Therefore the published literature on the characteristics and performance of the listed equity of the Microfinance Institutions is extremely reduced. But microfinance assets are rapidly growing and MFIs will need to list their equity in stock exchanges to sustain this expansion.

Exploring users inter-temporal preferences for measuring transport social equity effects

There exist different ways for defining a welfare function. Traditionally, welfare economic theory foundation is based on the Net Present Value (NPV) calculation where the time dependent preferences of considered agents are taken into account. However, the time preferences, remains a controversial subject. Currently, the traditional approach employs a unique discount rate for various agents. Nevertheless, this way of discounting appears inconsistent with sustainable development. New research work suggests that the discount rate may not be a homogeneous value. The discount rates may change following the individual’s preferences. A significant body of evidence suggests that people do not behave following a constant discount rate. In fact, UK Government has quickly recognized the power of the arguments for time-varying rates, as it has done in its official guidance to Ministries on the appraisal of investments and policies. Other authors deal with not just time preference but with uncertainty about future income (precautionary saving). In a situation in which economic growth rates are similar across time periods, the rationale for declining social optimal discount rates is driven by the preferences of the individuals in the economy, rather than expectations of growth. However, these approaches have been mainly focused on long-term policies where intergenerational risks may appear. The traditional cost-benefit analysis (CBA) uses a unique discount rate derived from market interest rates or investment rates of return for discounting the costs and benefits of all social agents included in the CBA. However, recent literature showed that a more adequate measure of social benefit is possible by using different discount rates including inter-temporal preferences rate of users, private investment discount rate and intertemporal preferences rate of government. Actually, the costs of opportunity may differ amongst individuals, firms, governments, or society in general, as do the returns on savings. In general, the firms or operators require an investment rate linked to the current return on savings, while the discount rate of consumers-users depends on their time preferences with respect of the current and the future consumption, as well as society can take into account the intergenerational well-being, adopting a lower discount rate for today’s generation. Time discount rate of social actors (users, operators, government and society) places a lower value in a future gain, but the uncertainty about future income strongly determines the individual preferences. These time and uncertainty depends on preferences and should be integrated into a transport policy formulation that may have significant social impacts. The discount rate of a user cannot be the same than the operator’s discount rate. The preferences of both are different. In addition, another school of thought suggests that people, such as a social group, may have different attitudes towards future costs and benefits. Particularly, the users have different discount rates related to their income. Some research work tried to modify user discount rates using a compensating weight which represents the inverse of household income level. The inter-temporal preferences are a proxy of the willingness to pay during the time. Its consideration is important in order to make acceptable or not a policy or investment