Knowledge that Transforms

Miners of proof-of-work networks like Bitcoin tend to gravitate towards regions with cheap energy. We analyze risks associated with this geographical centralization by exploiting a local electricity supply shock. Compared to a control group consisting of an energy-efficient proof-of-stake cryptocurrency, the blockchain’s capacity for processing transactions decreases while transaction fees increase substantially. The increased settlement latency on the blockchain also reduces secondary market quality as seen in higher exchange rate volatility, lower liquidity, and larger price differences between exchanges. Overall, our results suggest that geographical centralization poses short-lived but potentially severe system-wide risks to proof-of-work networks.

This study examines why firms’ access to finance differs across countries and assesses the extent to which democracy and financial liberalisation account for these variations. Using political economy and liberalisation theories as a foundation, we analyse a comprehensive dataset of over 110,000 firms across 112 economies between 2006 and 2021. Although previous research identifies firm-level and macroeconomic sources of financial frictions, evidence on the institutional drivers of cross-country financial access remains limited. Our findings show that democracy and financial liberalisation, when considered independently, are associated with reduced access to finance. However, when both conditions coexist, they ease financing barriers and enhance access to finance. These results remain consistent across multiple robustness tests, including alternative model specifications, endogeneity corrections, and various measures of institutional quality and financial openness. Overall, the study highlights that neither democracy nor liberalisation alone is sufficient to enhance access to credit. Instead, simultaneous institutional strengthening and financial market access are necessary to ease financing barriers. This has important policy implications, particularly for emerging and developing economies seeking to expand firm-level access to capital and stimulate economic growth.

Wealth Management Products (WMPs) have become a major source of bank funding over the past decade. Using a unique WMP transactions dataset from China covering 99,893 transactions during 2010-2020, this study examines whether greater reliance on WMPs as a type of funding innovation increases bank systemic risk. We find that higher WMP dependence significantly elevates systemic risk, with the effects concentrated among smaller banks. Exploiting the 2018 Asset Management Regulation as an exogenous shock, we establish causality using a difference-in-differences approach. Our channel analysis shows that maturity mismatch amplifies WMP-related systemic risk, while higher WMP yields further increase fragility through funding cost pressures. Overall, these results call for a regulatory approach that moves beyond aggregate balance-sheet metrics and instead targets funding composition, maturity structure, and pricing behaviour-dimensions in which WMPs materially increase systemic vulnerability.

• Home equity erosion causally reduces household mobility even without negative equity. • The Tax Reform Act 1986’s mortgage-only tax shield identifies higher mortgage demand. • Exclusive mortgage deduction inflated mortgage by $7,600, squeezing equity by 8.2%. • The equity erosion reduced homeowner mobility by 3.8%. • Renter mobility remained unchanged, validating the mortgage-specific variation.