[This article develops a multiperiod rational expectations model of stock trading in which investors have differential information concerning the underlying value of the stock. Investors trade competitively in the stock market based on their private information and the information revealed by the market-clearing prices, as well as other public news. We examine how trading volume is related to the information flow in the market and how investors' trading reveals their private information.]

This article develops a multiperiod rational expectations model of stock trading in which investors have differential information concerning the underlying value of the stock. Investors trade competitively in the stock market based on their private information and the information revealed by the market-clearing prices, as well as other public news. We examine how trading volume is related to the information flow in the market and how investors' trading reveals their private information.

This article estimates the effect of environmental regulation on firm productivity using a spatial regression discontinuity design implicit in China's water quality monitoring system. Because water quality readings are important for political evaluations and the monitoring stations only capture emissions from their upstream regions, local government officials are incentivized to enforce tighter environmental standards on firms immediately upstream of a monitoring station, rather than those immediately downstream. Exploiting this discontinuity in regulation stringency with novel firm-level geocoded emission and production data sets, we find that immediate upstream polluters face a more than 24% reduction in total factor productivity (TFP), and a more than 57% reduction in chemical oxygen demand emissions, as compared with their immediate downstream counterparts. We find that the discontinuity in TFP does not exist in nonpolluting industries, only emerged after the government explicitly linked political promotion to water quality readings, and was predominantly driven by prefectural cities with career-driven leaders. Linking the TFP estimate with the emission estimate, a back-of-the-envelope calculation indicates that China's water regulation efforts between 2000 and 2007 were associated with an economic cost of more than 800 billion Chinese yuan.

We examine relationship between common institutional ownership and corporate social responsibility (CSR). We find that common institutional ownership is negatively associated with the level of CSR, which supports an anti-competitive view. We conduct a propensity score matching (PSM) analysis and a difference-in-differences (DiD) analysis based on a quasi-natural experiment of financial institution mergers. The results alleviate concerns about endogeneity. Using the DiD setting, we find further support for the anti-competitive view, and can rule out alternative explanations. Additional analyses on investor characteristics show that our results come mainly from common owners with long-term investment horizons or lower social inclination. Moreover, we find that the anti-competitive effect is more pronounced for mature firms, and for firms in industries with lower labor intensity and lower customer sensitivity.

Using machine learning and many predictors, we find strong bond return predictability, with an out-of-sample R-squared of 4.48% and an annualized Sharpe ratio of 3.27. ML models identify important predictors for aggregate predictors (bond market returns, TERM and HML factors, GDP growth) and bond characteristics (downside risk, short-term reversal, return skewness, and credit spreads). Predictability varies over time, being stronger during periods of high investor risk aversion, slow economic growth, and strong cross-sectional factor explanatory power. Our results highlight the benefits of leveraging both cross-sectional and time-series predictors to forecast corporate bond returns while considering public and private bonds.

Using the high-power setting of newly privatized firms from 64 countries, we examine the relationship between ownership type and firm-level capital allocations as captured by the sensitivity of investment expenditure to investment opportunities. Consistent with our predictions that government and foreign institutional owners are associated with different levels of information asymmetry and agency problems, we find strong and robust evidence that government (foreign) ownership weakens (strengthens) investment-Q sensitivity, thereby increasing investment inefficiency (efficiency). Moreover, we find that the relation between foreign ownership and investment efficiency is stronger when governments relinquish control and country-level governance institutions are weaker. Overall, our findings highlight the important role of ownership type in determining firms' investment behavior and efficiency.

We assess the link between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and government ownership using a unique sample of privatized firms (PFs) from 41 countries over the 2002 to 2014 period. We find that PFs have, on average, better CSR intensity than other publicly listed firms. Further tests show a nonlinear relation between residual state ownership and CSR intensity that depends on the trade-off between political objectives of the government and profit maximization objectives of private owners. In addition, country-level institutions affect the state ownership–CSR intensity relation, and PFs benefit from higher valuation and lower equity financing costs through improved CSR.

This paper examines whether corporate social responsibility (CSR) aligns with shareholder interests or stems from agency conflicts. To explore this, we utilize the staggered adoption of state-level Corporate Opportunity Waiver (COW) laws, which potentially weaken the fiduciary duty of loyalty among directors and officers, thereby exacerbating agency conflicts. Through a difference-in-differences analysis, we find that CSR activities significantly decrease following the enactment of COW laws. This decline is more pronounced in firms with weaker corporate governance, greater external opportunities for directors and officers, less incentivized CEOs, and those operating in less competitive industries. Additionally, our results show that the positive effect of CSR on financial performance is diminished by the adoption of COW laws. These findings support the value-enhancing perspective of CSR and highlight the importance of fiduciary duty of loyalty in promoting CSR.

This paper investigates the dynamics of cross-listing and corporate social responsibility (CSR). Using a sample of 10,815 firm-year observations from 54 countries over the period 2002–2011, we find that cross-listed firms have better CSR performance than non–cross-listed domestic firms. This result is robust to endogeneity and different types of cross-listing. We also find that CSR increases (decreases) significantly after cross-listing in (delisting from) U.S. markets. The positive impact of cross-listing on CSR performance is stronger for firms from countries with weaker institutions, lower country-level sustainability, and higher liability of foreignness, and for firms operating in industries with high litigation risk. Finally, we find that cross-listed firms with better CSR performance exhibit higher valuations.

We investigate the impact of family control on corporate social responsibility (CSR) performance. Using newly collected data on the ultimate ownership structure of publicly traded firms in nine East Asian economies, we find that family-controlled firms exhibit lower CSR performance, consistent with the expropriation hypothesis of family control. The negative relationship between family control and CSR is robust to alternative measures of family control, different components of CSR, as well as to endogeneity tests, subsample tests, and alternative estimation methods. We further find that CSR underperformance concentrates in family firms with greater agency problems and in countries with weaker institutions. Moreover, the underperformance of East Asian family firms holds when controlling for the effects of other large shareholders and when comparing with family firms from other countries. These findings contribute to understanding the determinants of CSR and highlight the importance of corporate governance and the institutional environment in improving CSR performance of family-controlled firms.