No abstract

PurposeThe authors examine whether the uncertainty avoidance culture and the stringency of government response play a role in shaping the stock market's response to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The authors find that investors' response to the pandemic will not only depend on their instinct of uncertainty aversion but also on their expectation about the effectiveness of the government measures. The uncertainty avoidance culture amplifies the irrational actions of investors. However, harsh government responses will weaken this effect. Harsh government responses also send a negative signal to the market about the extent of the pandemic and the economic damage caused by anti-COVID measures. Governments need to be balanced in imposing anti-COVID measurements to preserve market confidence.Design/methodology/approachIn this article, the authors investigate whether the stock market volatility of emerging countries is simultaneously driven by two factors: the uncertainty-aversion culture of investors in a country and the stringency of the government's response to the pandemic. The authors conduct an empirical study on a sample of 20 emerging countries during the period from January 2020 to March 2021.FindingsThe authors find that the national-level uncertainty aversion amplifies the irrational actions of investors during the period of crisis. However, harsh government responses will weaken this effect. The authors’ findings show evidence that investors' response to the pandemic will not only depend on their instinct of uncertainty aversion but also on their expectation about the effectiveness of the government measures. Although harsh government responses can stabilize the investors' sentiment in countries with high levels of uncertainty aversion, they also send a negative signal to the market about the extent of the pandemic as well as the economic damage caused by anti-COVID measures.Originality/valueFirst, the study’s results complement evidence from existing studies on the effect of uncertainty avoidance culture in determining stock market responses to COVID-19. Second, an important difference from previous studies, this paper adds to the behavioral finance literature by showing that investors' investment decisions in the face of economic uncertainty are not driven solely by their cultural values but also by their expectation about the effectiveness of the government policy. During a crisis, when the market has neither rational information nor adequate experience to forecast the future, the government must play an important role in stabilizing investors' sentiment and reactions.

We examine whether board representation of bondholders can be an effective market discipline mechanism to reduce bank risk, using a unique dataset combining information on bondholders and boards of directors of European listed banks. Our results show that the influence of bondholder representatives on the bank board significantly reduces bank risk without impacting profitability. The beneficial effect of this market discipline mechanism is stronger when bondholder representatives have regulatory experience, current or long relationships with their affiliated bondholders, and for more complex banks. In contrast, the reducing impact on bank risk is smaller for banks with lower capitalization levels.

No abstract

No abstract