New Dimensions of Country Risk in the Context of the Current Crisis: A Case Study for Romania and Greece
The attractiveness of a state regarding foreign investors, multinational banks and creditors, is closely related to country risk assessment. Most of the financial and economic rating agencies such as Standard & Poor's, Fitch, Moody's, etc., are in a position to analyze, more or less subjectively, more or less reliable, country risk developments. Rating systems that appear as important tools in decision-support are taken, in many cases non-critically, by the decision makers and used as such. The process of globalization has multiplied the country risk acceptance and successive crises with recurrence, often without advance, stressed that the assessment processes has significant shortcomings. Countries such as Greece and Romania, currently facing similar economic and social problems, are in a delicate situation. Although unlike Greece, Romania has not yet adopted the euro, a number of similarities between the two countries allow a simultaneous analysis. Recently, representatives of Standard and Poor’s announced that the declaration of support came from the European Union to Athens is a conducive factor for Greece, but this remains exposed to considerable risks; in December 2009, the Agency amend Greece in BBB + rating with negative outlook. For Romania, the passage of the attribute “negative” to “stable” is closely related to assessors of reforms agreed with IMF. Currently valued at BB +, Romania is below the recommended level for investment. In this context, the main aim of this article is to find the answer to a series of questions: Are these ratings really fair? What are the relevant variables in the analysis of states like Greece and Romania? What are the problem areas and how they can be treated? What country risk approach is appropriate for these countries?
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Konstantinos J. Liapis, 2010. "The Residual Value Models: A Framework for Business Administration," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(1), pages 83-102.
- Valeriya Dinger & Jurgen von Hagen, 2009. "How small are the banking sectors in central and Eastern European countries really?," Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 17(2), pages 96-118, May.
- Eleftherios Thalassinos & Theodoros Kyriazidis & John Thalassinos, 2006. "The Greek Capital Market: Caught in Between Poor Corporate Governance and Market Inefficiency," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(1-2), pages 3-24.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ers:journl:v:xiii:y:2010:i:3:p:225-236. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Eleni Giannakopoulou)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.