IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/tuiedp/80.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

On the use of event studies to evaluate economic policy decisions: A note of caution

Author

Listed:
  • Haji Ali Beigi, Maryam
  • Budzinski, Oliver

Abstract

Event studies represent an increasingly popular method to evaluate (future) welfare effects of economic policy decisions. The basic idea is to hire the stock market as a referee, i.e. that stock market reactions to the announcement of policy decision are interpreted to contain superior information about the (future) welfare effects of these decisions. This paper investigates the degree of reliability of event studies as a policy programs evaluation method by critically reflecting upon two underlying assumptions. Since both the information superiority and efficiency of financial markets and, in particular, the conclusion from abnormal returns to (future) economic welfare effects consist of considerable interpretation problems, we issue a note of caution: scientists and policymakers should be very reluctant to rely on stock market reactions as a referee on economic policy decisions. Event studies cannot replace thorough theory-driven economic analysis.

Suggested Citation

  • Haji Ali Beigi, Maryam & Budzinski, Oliver, 2012. "On the use of event studies to evaluate economic policy decisions: A note of caution," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 80, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:tuiedp:80
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/68238/1/73372969X.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shleifer, Andrei & Summers, Lawrence H, 1990. "The Noise Trader Approach to Finance," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 4(2), pages 19-33, Spring.
    2. Dnes, Antony W. & Kodwani, Devendra G. & Seaton, Jonathan S. & Wood, Douglas, 1998. "The Regulation of the United Kingdom Electricity Industry: An Event Study of Price-Capping Measures," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 207-225, May.
    3. Kutan, Ali M. & Muradoglu, Gulnur & Sudjana, Brasukra G., 2012. "IMF programs, financial and real sector performance, and the Asian crisis," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 164-182.
    4. Robert J. Shiller, 2003. "From Efficient Markets Theory to Behavioral Finance," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 17(1), pages 83-104, Winter.
    5. Duso, Tomaso & Gugler, Klaus & Yurtoglu, Burcin B., 2011. "How effective is European merger control?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 55(7), pages 980-1006.
    6. Budzinski, Oliver, 2012. "Empirische Ex-Post Evaluation von wettbewerbspolitischen Entscheidungen: Methodische Anmerkungen," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 69, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.
    7. Moser, Christoph & Rose, Andrew K., 2014. "Who benefits from regional trade agreements? The view from the stock market," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 31-47.
    8. Charles J. Corrado, 2011. "Event studies: A methodology review," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 51(1), pages 207-234, March.
    9. Hopkins, Yvette S. & Connor, John M., 1992. "A Re-Examination Of Event Studies Applied To Challenged Horizontal Mergers," Working Papers 116105, Regional Research Project NE-165 Private Strategies, Public Policies, and Food System Performance.
    10. Damien Neven & Hans Zenger, 2008. "Ex Post Evaluation of Enforcement: A Principal-Agent Perspective," De Economist, Springer, vol. 156(4), pages 477-490, December.
    11. Michael Cichello & Douglas Lamdin, 2006. "Event Studies and the Analysis of Antitrust," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(2), pages 229-245.
    12. Kara M Reynolds, 2008. "Anticipated vs Realized Benefits: Can Event Studies be used to Predict the Impact of New Regulations," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 34(3), pages 310-324.
    13. Tatsuyoshi Miyakoshi & Yoshihiko Tsukuda & Junji Shimada, 2007. "The Effects of IMF Supported-Program on the Asian Crisis," Discussion Papers in Economics and Business 07-24, Osaka University, Graduate School of Economics.
    14. Budzinski, Oliver, 2012. "Impact evaluation of merger control decisions," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 75, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.
    15. Kara M. Reynolds, 2005. "Anticipated versus Realized Benefits: Can Event Studies Be Used To Predict the Impact of New Regulations?," International Trade 0512005, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Oliver Budzinski, 2011. "Impact Evaluation of Merger Decisions," Working Papers 112/11, University of Southern Denmark, Department of Sociology, Environmental and Business Economics.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Budzinski, Oliver, 2012. "Impact evaluation of merger control decisions," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 75, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Budzinski, Oliver, 2012. "Impact evaluation of merger control decisions," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 75, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.
    2. Manoj Anand & Jagandeep Singh, 2018. "Impact of Automobile Regulations on Shareholders’ Wealth: Indian Empirical Evidence," Metamorphosis: A Journal of Management Research, , vol. 17(1), pages 28-40, June.
    3. Bekiros, Stelios D., 2010. "Heterogeneous trading strategies with adaptive fuzzy Actor-Critic reinforcement learning: A behavioral approach," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 1153-1170, June.
    4. Balcilar, Mehmet & Demirer, Rıza & Hammoudeh, Shawkat, 2013. "Investor herds and regime-switching: Evidence from Gulf Arab stock markets," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 295-321.
    5. Roland Rothenstein, 2018. "Quantification of market efficiency based on informational-entropy," Papers 1812.02371, arXiv.org.
    6. Steve Janner & Daniel Schmidt, 2015. "Are economically significant bond returns explained by corporate news? An examination of the German corporate bond market," Financial Markets and Portfolio Management, Springer;Swiss Society for Financial Market Research, vol. 29(3), pages 271-298, August.
    7. Huanhuan Zheng & Haiqiang Chen, 2019. "Price informativeness and adaptive trading," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 29(4), pages 1315-1342, September.
    8. Henryk Gurgul & Milena Suliga & Tomasz Wojtowicz, 2012. "Responses of the Warsaw Stock Exchange to the U.S. macroeconomic data announcements," Managerial Economics, AGH University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 12, pages 41-59.
    9. Brunetti, Celso & Büyükşahin, Bahattin & Harris, Jeffrey H., 2016. "Speculators, Prices, and Market Volatility," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 51(5), pages 1545-1574, October.
    10. Davies, Ronald B. & Studnicka, Zuzanna, 2018. "The heterogeneous impact of Brexit: Early indications from the FTSE," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 1-17.
    11. Menkhoff, Lukas & Nikiforow, Marina, 2009. "Professionals' endorsement of behavioral finance: Does it impact their perception of markets and themselves?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 318-329, August.
    12. Oliver Budzinski, 2011. "Impact Evaluation of Merger Decisions," Working Papers 112/11, University of Southern Denmark, Department of Sociology, Environmental and Business Economics.
    13. Demirer, Rıza & Kutan, Ali M. & Zhang, Huacheng, 2014. "Do ADR investors herd?: Evidence from advanced and emerging markets," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 138-148.
    14. Jia, Boxiang & Shen, Dehua & Zhang, Wei, 2022. "Extreme sentiment and herding: Evidence from the cryptocurrency market," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    15. Stöhr, Annika & Budzinski, Oliver, 2019. "Ex-post Analyse der Ministererlaubnis-Fälle - Gemeinwohl durch Wettbewerbsbeschränkungen?," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 124, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.
    16. Bekiros, Stelios D., 2015. "Heuristic learning in intraday trading under uncertainty," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 34-49.
    17. Crowley, Meredith A. & Meng, Ning & Song, Huasheng, 2019. "Policy shocks and stock market returns: Evidence from Chinese solar panels," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 148-169.
    18. Razvan Stefanescu & Ramona Dumitriu, 2016. "Contrarian and Momentum Profits during Periods of High Trading Volume preceded by Stock Prices Shocks," Risk in Contemporary Economy, "Dunarea de Jos" University of Galati, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, pages 378-384.
    19. Alcalde, Nuria & Powell, Ronan, 2022. "Government intervention in European mergers and acquisitions," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).
    20. Kukacka, Jiri & Barunik, Jozef, 2013. "Behavioural breaks in the heterogeneous agent model: The impact of herding, overconfidence, and market sentiment," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 392(23), pages 5920-5938.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    event studies; abnormal returns; economic policy evaluation; regional free trade agreements; merger control decisions; IMF supported programs;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • G14 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Information and Market Efficiency; Event Studies; Insider Trading
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • H00 - Public Economics - - General - - - General
    • L40 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - General
    • L50 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy - - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:tuiedp:80. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ivtuide.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.