Three Essays in Empirical Asset Pricing

The financial crisis of 2007-2008 led to extraordinary government intervention in firms and markets. The scope and depth of government action rivaled that of the Great Depression. Many traded markets experienced dramatic declines in liquidity leading to the existence of conditions normally assumed to be promptly removed via the actions of profit seeking arbitrageurs. These extreme events motivate the three essays in this work. The first essay seeks and fails to find evidence of investor behavior consistent with the broad 'Too Big To Fail' policies enacted during the crisis by government agents. Only in limited circumstances, where government guarantees such as deposit insurance or U.S. Treasury lending lines already existed, did investors impart a premium to the debt security prices of firms under stress. The second essay introduces the Inflation Indexed Swap Basis (IIS Basis) in examining the large differences between cash and derivative markets based upon future U.S. inflation as measured by the Consumer Price Index (CPI). It reports the consistent positive value of this measure as well as the very large positive values it reached in the fourth quarter of 2008 after Lehman Brothers went bankrupt. It concludes that the IIS Basis continues to exist due to limitations in market liquidity and hedging alternatives. The third essay explores the methodology of performing debt based event studies utilizing credit default swaps (CDS). It provides practical implementation advice to researchers to address limited source data and/or small target firm sample size.

Water quality trading: credit stacking and ancillary benefits

Ecosystems can provide many services. Wetlands, for example, can help mitigate water pollution from point sources as well as non-point sources, serve as habitat for wildlife, sequester carbon and serve as a place for recreation. Studies have found that these services can have substantial value to society. The sale of ecosystem credits has been found to be a possible way to finance construction investments in wetlands and easements to farmers to take their land out of production. At the same time, selling one ecosystem service credit may not always be enough to justify the investment. Traditionally market participants have only been allowed to sell a single credit from one piece of land, but recently there have been discussions about the possibility of selling more than one credit from a piece of land because it potentially could lead to more efficient ecosystem service provision. Selling multiple credits is sometimes referred to as credit stacking. This paper is an empirical study of the potential for credit stacking applied to the services provided by wetlands in the Upper Mississippi River Basin, specifically nitrogen, phosphorus and wildlife credits. In the setting of our study where costs are discrete rather than continuous we found that wetlands are a cost-effective way to reduce the nitrogen loads from wastewater treatment plants and that stacking nitrogen, phosphorus and wildlife credits may improve social welfare while leading to a higher level of ecosystem services. However, for credit stacking to be welfare improving we found that there needs to be a substantial demand for the credit that covers the majority of the investment in wetlands, while the credit aggregator has a choice between what ecosystem projects to undertake. If the credit that covers the majority of investment is sold first and is the sole basis of the investment decision and the objective is to improve welfare, a sequential implementation of ecosystem credits is not recommended; it would not lead to an increase in the total amount of ecosystem services provided though it would increase profit for the credit producer.