Search

Küresel ısınma ve iklim değişiminin en temel sebebi olan hava kirliliği son yıllarda çok önemli hale gelmiştir. Özellikle pandemi dönemlerinde tüm dünyada ortaya çıkan hava kalitesindeki olumlu sonuçlar hava kalitesinin izlenmesini daha önemli hale getirmiştir. Bu açıdan bakıldığında; en önemli noktasal kaynak olarak endüstriyel tesislerin atmosfere saldıkları kirleticilerden dolayı sürekli izlenmeleri gerekir. Ülkemizde yasal mevzuata uygun olarak kurulmuş birçok Sürekli Emisyon Ölçüm Sistemi (SEÖS) bulunmaktadır. Sürekli Emisyon Ölçüm Sistemlerinde ölçümlerin güvenilirliğini teyit etmek amaçlı kullanılan en önemli unsur ölçüm belirsizlikleridir. Sürekli Emisyon Ölçüm Sitemleri ile ölçülecek her emisyon parametresi için ölçüm sonuçlarının güvenirliliğine etki edecek her şart belirsizlik olarak tanımlanmıştır. Ölçüm sonuçlarına güvensizlik olarak etki edecek her parametrenin tek tek belirlenmesi, belirlenen parametrelerin hesaplanma veya kabul yöntemlerinin geliştirilmesi ve belirsizlik parametrelerinin etkilerinin hesaplanarak ölçüm sonuçlarının üzerindeki etkisinin ortadan kaldırılması, sonuçların güven düzeyinin maksimum seviyelere çekilmesinde oldukça önemlidir. Proseslerde emisyonların izlenmesi aşamasında Standart Gazın Belirsizliği, Deneysel Tekrarlanabilirlik Belirsizliği, Girişim Yapan Gazların Belirsizliği, Ölçüm Yapılan Ortamın Sıcaklığı, Kişiden Kaynaklanan Belirsizlikler, Ortamın Basıncından Gelen Belirsizlikler, Cihazdan Kaynaklanan Belirsizlikler vb. hususlar ölçümler ile elde edilen sonuçlara etki ederek ölçüm güvenirliliğini manipüle edebilmektedir. Bu çalışmaların ana amacı Sürekli Emisyon Ölçüm Sistemleri ile yapılan ölçümlerde belirsizliklerin daha doğru belirlenmesi, belirsizliklerin değerlendirilmesinde proseslerin, cihazların, kullanılan referans gazların, kişisel şartlardan kaynaklanan durumların doğru analiz edilmesi ve analizlerin değerlendirilmesi aşamasında bakış açısının nasıl olması gerektiğini belirtmek ve karşılaşılabilecek sorunlara çözüm önerileri getirmektedir. Air pollution, which is the main cause of global warming and climate change, has become very important in recent years. Especially during the pandemic periods, the positive results in air quality all over the world have made the monitoring of air quality more important. When viewed from this angle; As the most important point source, industrial facilities must be constantly monitored because of the pollutants they release into the atmosphere. In our country, there are many Continuous Emission Measurement Systems (CEMS) in accordance with the legal regulations. In CEMS, the most important element to confirm the reliability of the measurements is the measurement uncertainty. For each emission parameter to be measured with Continuous Emission Measurement Systems, any condition that will affect the reliability of the measurement results is defined as uncertainty. It is very important to determine each parameter that will affect the measurement results as insecurity one by one, to develop the calculation methods of the determined parameters, and to calculate the effects of the uncertainty parameters and to eliminate the effect on the measurement results and to maximize the confidence level of the results. During the monitoring of emissions in processes, Uncertainty of Standard Gas, Uncertainty of Experimental Repeatability, Uncertainty of Interfering Gases, Temperature of the Measurement Environment, Uncertainties Due to Person, Uncertainties Caused by Ambient Pressure, Uncertainties Due to Device etc. considerations can manipulate the measurement reliability by affecting the results obtained with the measurements. The main purpose of these studies is to determine the uncertainties more accurately in the measurements made with Continuous Emission Measurement Systems, to analyze the processes, devices, reference gases used, personal conditions correctly in the evaluation of uncertainties, to specify how the point of view should be during the evaluation of the analysis and to offer solutions to the problems that may be encountered.

This paper provides new evidence on dividend policy by studying optional stock dividends, a mechanism that allows firms to cut cash payouts without a negative market reaction. We find that highly leveraged firms with limited cash holdings and large institutional ownership are more likely to offer optional stock dividends to their hareholders. These firms are the most committed to paying dividends, and optional stock dividends provide them with an opportunity for a stealth cut in dividends during economic downturns. Shareholders overwhelmingly approve optional stock dividends at general meetings with the majority favoring stock dividends over cash dividends. Further, in contrast to dividend cuts, shareholders do not view optional stock dividends as bad news. Our results support the monitoring explanation of optional stock dividends and show that shareholders value a firm’s ability and willingness to pay dividends, even if the final cash payout is reduced.

We evaluate the abnormal returns of issuing and non-issuing banks around the announcement of Seasoned Equity Offerings (SEOs) and explore how the market reaction is influenced by aggregate systemic conditions and by the systemic risk contribution and exposure of banks. While we find evidence of negative abnormal returns for issuers, non-issuing banks benefit from positive abnormal returns around the SEO announcement. We show that these positive returns are not entirely explained by the competition channel, which has been well documented for non-financial firms. In contrast, we demonstrate that they also depend on a so far undocumented system-stabilizing channel. Furthermore, under certain circumstances, the system-stabilizing channel contributes to mitigating the negative reaction to SEO announcements for the issuing banks.

This paper investigates the increase in underwriting fees for UK SEOs since the beginning of the financial crisis in mid-2007. We develop and test a number of hypotheses related to the role of institutional shareholders and underwriters involved in the issuing process. We find that the rise in fees is related to the strengthening of the relative negotiating position of a specific underwriter in comparison to a specific issuer and to the growing influence of institutional shareholders with short-term investment horizons. Our evidence suggests that there may be reasonable grounds for considering potential conflicts of interest due to the dual role of institutional shareholders as investors and sub-underwriters. On the other hand, the ownership size of large shareholders and the reputation of underwriters have a moderating effect on fees, while the nationality of the institutional shareholders, the concentration of the investment bank industry and the experience of corporate issuers are not related to underwriting fees.

This study uses market-to-book ratio decomposition to examine whether firms that issue equity through initial public offerings or seasoned equity offerings exploit mispricing because of investor enthusiasm or to finance growth opportunities. We find strong evidence that, on average, firms do not issue mispriced stocks to exploit investors but, rather, to finance their investment opportunities in the form of real assets, inventory, and capital expenses. Firms that issue overvalued stocks with the view to increase their cash holdings experience poor long-run performance. Overall, our results show that stock mispricing drives equity offerings through IPOs and SEOs. Nonetheless, high transparency and balanced regulation in the marketplace deter issuing firms from investing their proceeds in non-value-creating activities. This evidence is robust to alternative measures of valuation and long-run performance.

Debt overhang and moral hazard related to risk-shifting opportunities predict that low capitalized banks have a lower likelihood to issue equity. In contrast to this view, for an international sample of bank Seasoned Equity Offerings (SEOs), we show that the likelihood of issuing an SEO is generally higher in low capitalized banks. We provide a series of tests exploring the variation of capital regulation, systemic conditions and market discipline to understand the driving forces behind this result. We find that market mechanisms rather than capital regulation are the primary, key driver of the decision to issue by low capitalized banks.

Empirical studies examining the financing decisions of the firm focus exclusively on publicly held firms, not family-controlled firms despite their economic importance. This study investigates the external financing behavior of family-controlled firms, using a comprehensive sample of 777 large European firms during the period 1998 to 2008. We document that, unlike nonfamily-controlled firms, the external financing decisions of family-controlled firms are influenced by control incentives and information asymmetry considerations. We find that family firms have a strong preference for debt financing, a noncontrol diluting security, while they are more reluctant to raise capital through equity offerings in comparison to nonfamily firms. We also find that credit markets, view family firms as more risk-averse and that family firms invest more in low-risk (fixed-asset capital expenditures (CAPEX)), than in high-risk investments (R&D expenditures) confirming their non-risk seeking behavior.

Entrepreneurial high-technology start-up firms usually need equity in order to finance their research, product development, and in particular growth opportunities due to new ideas and innovation. In an advanced stage they often require even larger financial resources and may raise equity by going public (IPO) and, if successful, by a seasoned equity offering (SEO) later on. If these are the typical financing stages then it is surprising when firms that just went public start paying dividends or even repurchase shares. For a sample of 245 IPOs in Germany that either issued additional equity or initiated a share repurchase program, we analyze the valuation effects and the factors that explain the magnitude of these returns. For repurchasing firms we find significantly positive announcement returns (9.23%) but no abnormal stock price performance thereafter. For seasoned equity offerings we find a long term negative per-formance for the year prior to the announcement (11.55%) which continues in the subsequent year (30.20%). For the 30 day period before the SEO, we observe, however, a strong outper-formance (7.63%) suggesting that management was able to time the market. In various probit models we provide strong evidence that the decision to engage in repurchase activities is ex-plained by free cash flow problems rather than by undervaluation signaling. Our finding for repurchase decisions, however, is in contrast to the explanation of the announcement effects. For SEOs we conclude that IPOs return to the equity market to finance further growth oppor-tunities. This is consistent with our evidence for the cross-sectional regressions and the probit analysis. Overall, the cash position and the cash flows from operations turn out to be pivotal for the decision to engage either in repurchasing shares or in issuing additional equity.

We examine the long run operating and stock price performance of UK open offer firms in the context of the earnings management hypothesis. We find that in the pre-offer period offer firms report significant improvements in their operating performance unrelated to cash flow performance. Results on return performance show that offer firms outperform various benchmarks in the pre-offer year but underperform up to four years after the offer. Regression results show that pre-offer discretionary current accruals predict the long-run post-offer return underperformance but do not predict the short-run reaction to SEO announcements. Our findings are more consistent with the earnings management hypothesis than with either the timing hypothesis or the managerial response hypothesis and suggest that investors do not take full account of the information available at the time of open offers.

Publicado também na BAR. Brazilian Administration Review, Curitiba, PR., v. 2, n. 2, p. 1-15, 2005. O trabalho relata um estudo de evento para investigar a reação do mercado antes, durante e após os anúncios de emissões de empresas brasileiras, entre 1992 e 2003. Após mensurar os retornos anormais por mínimos quadrados, utilizou-se modelos ARCH e GARCH para 70% da amostra. Os resultados são consistentes com a literatura internacional. Alguns resultados empíricos antecedentes evidenciaram retornos anormais anteriores ao anúncio, interpretados como indícios de informação privilegiada. Tal evidência também aparece no presente estudo, onde se encontrou um retorno anormal cumulativo médio de -0,01 a três dias antes do anúncio. Com relação à data do anúncio, a literatura existente é virtualmente unânime em relatar retornos anormais negativos, significando que emissões de ações transmitem informações pessimistas ao mercado. O presente estudo confirma tais achados com um retorno anormal cumulativo médio de-0.03 nos três primeiros dias após os anúncios. A literatura empírica também acumulou evidências de retornos anormais negativos no longo prazo após as emissões de ações, o que também foi confirmado na presente pesquisa, com um retorno anormal cumulativo médio de -0,28, um ano após os anúncios. Os resultados também mostram que a estimação dos retornos anormais por ARCH e GARCH é superior àquela realizada por mínimos quadrados. We have carried out an event study to investigate stock returns associated with the announcement of equity issues by Brazilian firms between 1992 and 2003 in order to determine market reaction before, during, and after the issue announcement. After measuring abnormal returns by OLS, we used ARCH and GARCH models over 70% of the sample. Our results are remarkably consistent with most of the international empirical literature. Some previous empirical findings have turned up abnormal returns before the announcement date, interpreted as signs of insider information. This evidence also appears in our study as we found an average cumulative abnormal return of -0.01 three weeks before the announcement. With respect to the announcement date, the evidence reported in the literature is virtually unanimous in showing negative abnormal returns, meaning that stock issues convey pessimistic information to the market. Our study confirms these findings with an average -0.03 cumulative abnormal return on the first three days following the announcement. Finally, the empirical literature has also collected evidence of long-term negative abnormal returns after the issues, which we also confirm, with an abnormal return of -0.28 after one year following the announcement. The results also show that ARCH/GARCH estimation of abnormal returns is superior to OLS estimation.