The Law and Economics of Hedge Fund Regulation: A Comparison between the U.S. and the EU

This doctoral dissertation seeks to assess and address the potential contribution of the hedge fund industry to financial instability. In so doing, the dissertation investigates three main questions. What are the contributions of hedge funds to financial instability? What is the optimal regulatory strategy to address the potential contribution of hedge funds to financial instability? And do new regulations in the U.S. and the EU address the contribution of hedge funds to financial instability? With respect to financial stability concerns, it is argued that despite their benefits, hedge funds can contribute to financial instability. Hedge funds’ size and leverage, their interconnectedness with Large Complex Financial Institutions (LCFIs), and the likelihood of herding behavior in the industry can potentially undermine financial stability. Nonetheless, the data on hedge funds’ size and leverage suggest that these features are far from being systemically important. In contrast, the empirical evidence on the interconnectedness of hedge funds with LCFIs and their herding behavior is mixed. Based on these findings, the thesis focuses on one particular aspect of hedge fund regulation: direct vs. indirect regulation. In this respect, a major contribution of the thesis to the literature consists in the explicit discussion of the relationships between hedge funds and other market participants. Specifically, the thesis locates the domain of the indirect regulation in the inter-linkages between hedge funds and prime brokers. Accordingly, the thesis argues that the indirect regulation is likely to address the contribution of hedge funds to systemic risk without compromising their benefits to financial markets. The thesis further conducts a comparative study of the regulatory responses to the potential contribution of hedge funds to financial instability through studying the EU Directive on Alternative Investment Fund Managers (AIFMD) and the hedge fund-related provisions of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010.

Leonardo Ricci in the United States (1952-1972). A twenty-year American transfer as a turning experience in teaching and design.

The research solved the historiographic lacuna about Leonardo Ricci’s work in the United States focusing on the span 1952-1972 as a fundamental period for the architect's research, which moved from the project for the community space to macrostructures. The considered period is comprised between Ricci’s first travel to the United States and the date of his resignation from the University of Florida, one year before his resignation from the deanship of the faculty of architecture of Florence (1973). The research retraced philologically the stages of Ricci’s activity in the U.S.A. unveiling the premises and results of his American transfer, and to what extent it marked a turning period for his work as educator and designer and for the wider historiographic contest of the Sixties. The American transfer helped him grounding his belief in avoiding a priori morphological results in favor of what he called the “form-act” design method. Ricci’s research in the U.S.A. is described in his books Anonymous (XX century) and City of the Earth (unpublished). In them and in Ricci’s projects one common thread is traceable: the application of the “form-act” as the best tool to conceive urban design, a discipline established in the United States during Ricci’s first stay at M.I.T., in which he encountered the balance point between architecture and urban planning, between the architect’s sign and his being anonymous, between the collective and the individual dimension. With the notions of “anonymous architecture” and “form-act”, Urban Design and “open work” are the key words to understand Ricci’s work in the United States and in Italy. Urban design’s main goal to design the city as a collective work of art was the solution of that dychothomous research that enlivened Ricci’s work and one possible answer to that tension useful for him to seek the truth of architecture.

Sea-Level climate variability in the Mediterranean Sea

Sea-level variability is characterized by multiple interacting factors described in the Fourth Assessment Report (Bindoff et al., 2007) of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that act over wide spectra of temporal and spatial scales. In Church et al. (2010) sea-level variability and changes are defined as manifestations of climate variability and change. The European Environmental Agency (EEA) defines sea level as one of most important indicators for monitoring climate change, as it integrates the response of different components of the Earths system and is also affected by anthropogenic contributions (EEA, 2011). The balance between the different sea-level contributions represents an important source of uncertainty, involving stochastic processes that are very difficult to describe and understand in detail, to the point that they are defined as an enigma in Munk (2002). Sea-level rate estimates are affected by all these uncertainties, in particular if we look at possible responses to sea-level contributions to future climate. At the regional scale, lateral fluxes also contribute to sea-level variability, adding complexity to sea-level dynamics. The research strategy adopted in this work to approach such an interesting and challenging topic has been to develop an objective methodology to study sea-level variability at different temporal and spatial scales, applicable in each part of the Mediterranean basin in particular, and in the global ocean in general, using all the best calibrated sources of data (for the Mediterranean): in-situ, remote-sensig and numerical models data. The global objective of this work was to achieve a deep understanding of all of the components of the sea-level signal contributing to sea-level variability, tendency and trend and to quantify them.