2 resultados para Enabling and Disabling Factors
em Scottish Institute for Research in Economics (SIRE) (SIRE), United Kingdom
Resumo:
Existing empirical evidence suggests that the Uncovered Interest Rate Parity (UIRP) condition may not hold due to an exchange risk premium. For a panel data set of eleven emerging European economies we decompose this exchange risk premium into an idiosyncratic (country-specific) elements and a common factor using a principal components approach. We present evidence of a stationary idiosyncratic component and nonstationary common factor. This result leads to the conclusion of a nonstationary risk premium for these countries and a violation of the UIRP in the long-run, which is in contrast to previous studies often documenting a stationary premium in developed countries. Furthermore, we report that the variation in the premium is largely attributable to a common factor influenced by economic developments in the United States.
Resumo:
In line with global changes, the UK regulatory regime for audit and corporate governance has changed significantly since the Enron scandal, with an increased role for audit committees and independent inspection of audit firms. UK listed company chief financial officers (CFOs), audit committee chairs (ACCs) and audit partners (APs) were surveyed in 2007 to obtain views on the impact of 36 economic and regulatory factors on audit quality. 498 usable responses were received, representing a response rate of 36%. All groups rated various audit committee interactions with auditors among the factors most enhancing audit quality. Exploratory factor analysis reduces the 36 factors to nine uncorrelated dimensions. In order of extraction, these are: economic risk; audit committee activities; risk of regulatory action; audit firm ethics; economic independence of auditor; audit partner rotation; risk of client loss; audit firm size; and, lastly, International Standards on Auditing (ISAs) and audit inspection. In addition to the activities of the audit committee, risk factors for the auditor (both economic and certain regulatory risks) are believed to most enhance audit quality. However, ISAs and the audit inspection regime, aspects of the ‘standards-surveillance compliance’ regulatory system, are viewed as less effective. Respondents commented that aspects of the changed regime are largely process and compliance driven, with high costs for limited benefits, supporting psychological bias regulation theory that claims there is overconfidence that a useful regulatory intervention exists.