Three essays on trade and investment

From H. G. Johnson's work (Review of Economic Studies, 1953–54) on tariff retaliation, the questions of whether a country can win a “tariff war” and how or even the broader question of what will affect a country's strategic position in setting bilateral tariff have been tackled in various situations. Although it is widely accepted that a country will have strategic advantages in winning the tariff war if its relative monopoly power is sufficiently large, it is unclear what are the forces behind such power formation. The goal of this research is to provide a unified framework and discuss various forces such as relative country size, absolute advantages and relative advantages simultaneously. In a two-country continuum-of-commodity neoclassical trade model, it is shown that sufficiently large relative country size is a sufficient condition for a country to choose a non-cooperative tariff Nash equilibrium over free trade. It is also shown that technology disparities such as absolute advantage, rate of technology disparity and the distribution of the technology disparity all contribute to a country's strategic position and interact with country size. ^ Leverage effect is usually used to explain the phenomenon of asymmetric volatility in equity returns. However, leverage itself can only account for parts of the asymmetry. In this research, it is shown that stock return volatility is related to firms’ financial status. Financially constrained firms tend to be more sensitive to the return changes. Financial constraint factor explains why some firms tend to be more volatile than others. I found that the financial constraint factor explains the stock return volatility independent of other factors such as firm size, industry affiliation and leverage. Firms’ industry affiliations are shown to be very weak in differentiating volatility. Firm size is proven to be a good factor in distinguishing the different levels of volatility and volatility-return sensitivity. Leverage hypothesis is also partly corroborated and the situation where leverage effect is not applicable is discussed. Finally, I examined the macroeconomic policy's effects on overall market volatility. ^

Incorporating variable peak -to -daily ratios in the equilibrium traffic assignment procedure of the Florida Standard Urban Transportation Modeling Structure (FSUTMS)

The standard highway assignment model in the Florida Standard Urban Transportation Modeling Structure (FSUTMS) is based on the equilibrium traffic assignment method. This method involves running several iterations of all-or-nothing capacity-restraint assignment with an adjustment of travel time to reflect delays encountered in the associated iteration. The iterative link time adjustment process is accomplished through the Bureau of Public Roads (BPR) volume-delay equation. Since FSUTMS' traffic assignment procedure outputs daily volumes, and the input capacities are given in hourly volumes, it is necessary to convert the hourly capacities to their daily equivalents when computing the volume-to-capacity ratios used in the BPR function. The conversion is accomplished by dividing the hourly capacity by a factor called the peak-to-daily ratio, or referred to as CONFAC in FSUTMS. The ratio is computed as the highest hourly volume of a day divided by the corresponding total daily volume. ^ While several studies have indicated that CONFAC is a decreasing function of the level of congestion, a constant value is used for each facility type in the current version of FSUTMS. This ignores the different congestion level associated with each roadway and is believed to be one of the culprits of traffic assignment errors. Traffic counts data from across the state of Florida were used to calibrate CONFACs as a function of a congestion measure using the weighted least squares method. The calibrated functions were then implemented in FSUTMS through a procedure that takes advantage of the iterative nature of FSUTMS' equilibrium assignment method. ^ The assignment results based on constant and variable CONFACs were then compared against the ground counts for three selected networks. It was found that the accuracy from the two assignments was not significantly different, that the hypothesized improvement in assignment results from the variable CONFAC model was not empirically evident. It was recognized that many other factors beyond the scope and control of this study could contribute to this finding. It was recommended that further studies focus on the use of the variable CONFAC model with recalibrated parameters for the BPR function and/or with other forms of volume-delay functions. ^