scholarly journals Hedging of Claims with Physical Delivery under Convex Transaction Costs

2010 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 158-178 ◽  
Author(s):  
Teemu Pennanen ◽  
Irina Penner
Keyword(s):  
Transaction Costs ◽  
Convex Transaction Costs

scholarly journals Cross-listed Securities and Multiple Exchange Memberships: Demand Differentiability and Equilibrium Existence

2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marta Faias ◽  
Jaime Luque
Keyword(s):  
General Equilibrium ◽  
Transaction Costs ◽  
Differentiable Function ◽  
Single Market ◽  
Previous Literature ◽  
Equilibrium Existence ◽  
Multiple Exchange ◽  
Individual Demand ◽  
Convex Transaction Costs

AbstractThe previous literature on general equilibrium has assumed that all traders belong to a single market. However, traders often participate in more than one exchange to diversify their portfolios. Moreover, there is evidence that the security listings of exchanges overlap. Our model captures these facts: there are multiple exchanges, the same security is listed in different exchanges, and traders can belong to more than one exchange. We show that, in the presence of convex transaction costs, there exists an equilibrium, and that individual demand is a continuously differentiable function in prices.

From transaction costs to transaction value: Overcoming the frictional paradigm

2020 ◽  
pp. 51-81
Author(s):  
D. P. Frolov
Keyword(s):  
Transaction Costs ◽  
Transaction Cost ◽  
Path Dependence ◽  
Transaction Cost Economics ◽  
Cost Minimization ◽  
Low Cost ◽  
Coase Theorem ◽  
Transactional Analysis ◽  
Transaction Sector ◽  
Transaction Value

The transaction cost economics has accumulated a mass of dogmatic concepts and assertions that have acquired high stability under the influence of path dependence. These include the dogma about transaction costs as frictions, the dogma about the unproductiveness of transactions as a generator of losses, “Stigler—Coase” theorem and the logic of transaction cost minimization, and also the dogma about the priority of institutions providing low-cost transactions. The listed dogmas underlie the prevailing tradition of transactional analysis the frictional paradigm — which, in turn, is the foundation of neo-institutional theory. Therefore, the community of new institutionalists implicitly blocks attempts of a serious revision of this dogmatics. The purpose of the article is to substantiate a post-institutional (alternative to the dominant neo-institutional discourse) value-oriented perspective for the development of transactional studies based on rethinking and combining forgotten theoretical alternatives. Those are Commons’s theory of transactions, Wallis—North’s theory of transaction sector, theory of transaction benefits (T. Sandler, N. Komesar, T. Eggertsson) and Zajac—Olsen’s theory of transaction value. The article provides arguments and examples in favor of broader explanatory possibilities of value-oriented transactional analysis.

Non-Public Monetary Systems in information Economy

2013 ◽  
pp. 151-159
Author(s):  
O. Krasilnikov ◽  
E. Krasilnikova
Keyword(s):  
Transaction Costs ◽  
Information Economy ◽  
Internet Technologies ◽  
Monetary Systems ◽  
Public Money ◽  
Economic Institution

The article discusses the development of non-public monetary systems (NPMS), defined as a specific economic institution. It presents their comparison with public money systems depending on the size of transaction costs. The authors come to the conclusion that in conditions of the information economy on the basis of Internet-technologies NPMS receive a new impetus to their development and can make serious competition in regard to public monetary systems.

Transactions in science in comparative perspective

2018 ◽  
pp. 52-69
Author(s):  
A. N. Oleinik
Keyword(s):  
Transaction Costs ◽  
Academic Freedom ◽  
North American ◽  
Institutional Environment ◽  
Scientific Productivity ◽  
Institutional Environments ◽  
Academic Administrator ◽  
The North ◽  
American Case ◽  
Transactional Approach

The article develops a transactional approach to studying science. Two concepts play a particularly important role: the institutional environment of science and scientific transaction. As an example, the North-American and Russian institutional environments of science are compared. It is shown that structures of scientific transactions (between peers, between the scholar and the academic administrator, between the professor and the student), transaction costs and the scope of academic freedom differ in these two cases. Transaction costs are non-zero in both cases, however. At the same time, it is hypothesized that a greater scope of academic freedom in the North American case may be a factor contributing to a higher scientific productivity.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document