Implications for Decision Theory, Enforcement, Financial Stability and Systemic Risk

  • Michael I. C. Nwogugu


Some of the problems inherent in the structure of Financial Indices, ETFs and Index Funds were discussed in earlier chapters in this book—and the large size of the Global Index Products Market amplifies these problems. Another dimension is that the Social Welfare problems of Indexing can have wide-ranging negative “Multiplier Effects” (on households, companies and government agencies) and which have not been addressed by index sponsors, fund sponsors or regulators. This chapter: (i) discusses the implications of ETFs, Indices and Index Funds for enforcement, Sustainability, Inequality and financial stability; (ii) discusses “path-dependence” and “Lock-ins” and proposes new models of government intervention; and (iii) proposes new sustainability measures that are designed to reduce the wide-ranging adverse effects of Indices, Index Funds and ETFs (such as Destructive Urbanization, Inequality, Pollution and Climate Change, harmful Arbitrage, and Costly Technological Change).


Decision theory Enforcement Inequality Sustainability Path dependence Social welfare Nonlinear financial instability Nonlinear systemic risk Government interventions Capital re-allocation 


  1. Abu-Alkheil, A., Khan, W., et al. (2017). Dynamic co-integration and portfolio diversification of Islamic and conventional indices: Global evidence. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 66, 212–224.Google Scholar
  2. Acemoglu, D. (2009). Endogenous technological change. In Introduction to modern economic growth (pp. 411–533). Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0-691-13292-1.Google Scholar
  3. Ahmad, W., Mishra, A., & Daly, K. (2018). Financial connectedness of BRICS and global sovereign bond markets. Emerging Markets Review, in press.Google Scholar
  4. Al-Khazali, O., & Mirzaei, A. (2017). Stock market anomalies, market efficiency and the adaptive market hypothesis: Evidence from Islamic stock indices. Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, 51, 190–208.Google Scholar
  5. Aldridge, I. (2014). High-frequency runs and flash crash predictability. Journal of Portfolio Management, 40(3), 113–123.Google Scholar
  6. Aldridge, A. (2016). ETFs, high-frequency trading, and flash crashes. Journal of Portfolio Management, 43(1), 17–28.Google Scholar
  7. Aliyu, A., & Amadu, L. (2017). Urbanization, cities, and health: The challenges to Nigeria – A review. Annals of African Medicine, 16(4), 149–158.Google Scholar
  8. Aloui, C., Hkiri, H., Lau, M., & Yarovaya, L. (2017). Information transmission across stock indices and stock index futures: International evidence using wavelet framework. Research in International Business and Finance, 44(C), 411–421.Google Scholar
  9. Angel, J., Broms, T., & Gastineau, G. (2016). ETF transaction costs are often higher than Investors realize. Journal of Portfolio Management, 42(3), 65–75.Google Scholar
  10. Antimiani, A., Costantini, V., Martini, C., Salvatici, L., & Tommasino, M. C. (2013). Assessing alternative solutions to carbon leakage. Energy Economics, 36, 299–311.Google Scholar
  11. Arnoldi, J. (2016). Computer algorithms, market manipulation and the institutionalization of high frequency trading. Theory, Culture & Society, 33(1), 29–52.Google Scholar
  12. Athma, P., & Kumar, R. K. (2011). ETF vis-à-vis index funds: An evaluation. Asia Pacific Journal of Research in Business Management, 2(1), 188–205.Google Scholar
  13. Azrieli, Y., & Shmaya, E. (2013). Lipschitz games. Mathematics of Operations Research, 38, 350–357.Google Scholar
  14. Bahmani-Oskooee, M., & Saha, S. (2016). Asymmetry cointegration between the value of the dollar and sectoral stock indices in the U.S. International Review of Economics & Finance, 46, 78–86.Google Scholar
  15. Balkenborg, D., & Vermeulen, D. (2016). Where strategic and evolutionary stability depart—A study of minimal diversity games. Mathematics of Operations Research, 41(1), 278–292.Google Scholar
  16. Bampinas, G., Konstantinou, P., & Panagiotidis, T. (2017). Inequality, demographics and the housing wealth effect: Panel quantile regression evidence for the US. Finance Research Letters, 23, 19–22.Google Scholar
  17. Barnhart, S. W., & Rosenstein, S. (2010). Exchange-traded fund introductions and closed-end fund discounts and volume. Financial Review, 45(4), 973–994.Google Scholar
  18. Baumann, M., Baumann, H., & Herz, B. (2016). Exchange-traded funds and financial stability (Working paper). University of Bayreuth.Google Scholar
  19. Ben-David, I., Franzoni, F., & Moussawi, R. (2014). Do ETFs increase volatility? (Working paper).Google Scholar
  20. Bernard, C., & Ghossoub, M. (2010). Static portfolio choice under cumulative prospect theory. Mathematics and Financial Economics, 2, 77–306.Google Scholar
  21. Berthe, A., & Elie, L. (2015). Mechanisms explaining the impact of economic inequality on environmental deterioration. Ecological Economics, 116, 191–200.Google Scholar
  22. Bhattacharya, A., & O’Hara, M. (2016). Can ETFs increase market fragility? Effect of information linkages in ETF markets (Working paper). Cornell University.Google Scholar
  23. Broecke, S., Quintini, G., & Vandeweyer, M. (2017). Explaining international differences in wage inequality: Skills matter. Economics of Education Review, 60, 112–124.Google Scholar
  24. Broman, M. (2016). Liquidity, style investing, and excess co-movement of exchange-traded fund returns. Journal of Financial Markets, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  25. Bove, V., & Elia, L. (2017). Migration, diversity and economic growth. World Development, 89, 227–239.Google Scholar
  26. Bowman, B, Enion, R., et al. (2011). Rules of the game: Examining market manipulation, gaming and enforcement in California’s cap-and-trade program (Working paper). UCLA School of Law.Google Scholar
  27. Boyson, N., Stahel, C., & Stulz, R. (2010). Hedge fund contagion and liquidity shocks. Journal of Finance, 55(5), 1789–1816.Google Scholar
  28. Brisson, J. (2014). Outstanding design flaws in California’s cap-and-trade program. Latham & Watkins, LLP.Google Scholar
  29. Carmona, G., & Podczeck, K. (2012). Ex-post stability of Bayes–Nash equilibria of large games. Games and Economic Behavior, 74, 418–430.Google Scholar
  30. Chacko, G., Das, S., & Fan, R. (2016). An index-based measure of liquidity. Journal of Banking & Finance, 68, 162–178.Google Scholar
  31. Charles, A., Darné, O., & Kim, J. (2017). Adaptive markets hypothesis for Islamic stock indices: Evidence from Dow Jones size and sector-indices. International Economics, 151, 100–112.Google Scholar
  32. Chen, D., & Li, T. (2014). Financial crises, Asian stock indices, and current accounts: An Asian-U.S. comparative study. Journal of Asian Economics, 34, 66–78.Google Scholar
  33. Chi, Z. (2011). Effects of statistical dependence on multiple testing under a hidden Markov model. The Annals of Statistics, 39(1), 439–473.Google Scholar
  34. Chiu, J., & Tsai, K. (2017). Government interventions and equity liquidity in the sub-prime crisis period: Evidence from the ETF market. International Review of Economics & Finance, 47, 128–142.Google Scholar
  35. Curcio, R. J., Anderson, R. I., Guirguis, H., & Boney, V. (2012). Have leveraged and traditional ETFs impacted the volatility of real estate stock prices? Applied Financial Economics, 22(9), 709–722.Google Scholar
  36. Da, Z., & Shive, S. (2016, March). Exchange traded funds and asset return correlations (Working paper). University of Notre Dame, Indiana.Google Scholar
  37. Danielsson, J., Zigrand, J., & Taylor, A. (2005). Highwaymen or heroes: Should hedge funds be regulated? A survey. Journal of Financial Stability, 1(4), 522–543.Google Scholar
  38. Dannhauser, C. (2017). The impact of innovation: Evidence from corporate bond exchange-traded funds (ETFs). Journal of Financial Economics, 125(3), 537–560.Google Scholar
  39. Davies, G., & Satchell, S. (2004). Continuous cumulative prospect theory and individual asset allocation (Cambridge working paper in economics #467). Cambridge: Cambridge University.Google Scholar
  40. Deb, J., & Kalai, E. (2015). Stability in large Bayesian games with heterogeneous players. Journal of Economic Theory, 157, 1041–1055.Google Scholar
  41. Deev, O., & Linnertová, D. (2014). The determinants of ETFs short selling activity. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 109, 669–673.Google Scholar
  42. DeMichelis, S., & Germano, F. (2000). On the indices of zeros of Nash fields. Journal of Economic Theory, 94(2), 192–217.Google Scholar
  43. Di Masi, G., & Stettner, L. (2005). Ergodicity of hidden Markov models. Mathematics of Control, Signals, and Systems, 17, 269–296.Google Scholar
  44. Diamond, S., & Kuan, J. (2018). Are the stock markets “rigged”? An empirical analysis of regulatory change. International Review of Law and Economics, 55, 33–40.Google Scholar
  45. Donders, P., Jara, M., & Wagner, R. (2017). How sensitive is corporate debt to swings in commodity prices? Journal of Financial Stability, in press.Google Scholar
  46. Easterly, W. (2002). The elusive quest for growth. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  47. Edelman, B., & Geradin, D. (2016, April). Efficiencies and regulatory shortcuts: How should we regulate companies like Airbnb and Uber? Stanford Technology Law Review, 19, 293–313.Google Scholar
  48. Elbahnasawy, N., Ellis, M., & Adom, A. (2016). Political instability and the informal economy. World Development, 85, 31–42.Google Scholar
  49. Ferreira, P., Dionísio, A., et al. (2018). Non-linear dependencies in African stock markets: Was subprime crisis an important factor? Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and Its Applications, 505, 680–687.Google Scholar
  50. Financial Stability Board. (2011). Potential financial stability issues arising from recent trends in Exchange-Traded Funds (ETFs). Financial Stability Board note, Financial Stability Board.Google Scholar
  51. Franzoni, F., & Gianetti, M. (2017). Financial conglomerate affiliated hedge funds: Risk taking behavior and liquidity provision.
  52. Frijters, P., Johnston, D., et al. (2015). A lifecycle perspective of stock market performance and wellbeing. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 112, 237–250.Google Scholar
  53. Frondel, M., Schmidt, C., & Vance, C. (2012). Emissions trading: Impact on electricity prices and energy-intensive industries. Intereconomics, 47(2), 104–111.Google Scholar
  54. Furceri, D., Loungani, P., & Zdzienicka, A. (2018). The effects of monetary policy shocks on inequality. Journal of International Money and Finance, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  55. Gajardo, G., & Kristjanpoller, W. (2017). Asymmetric multifractal cross-correlations and time varying features between Latin-American stock market indices and crude oil market. Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, 104, 121–128.Google Scholar
  56. Garbaravicius, T., & Dierick, F. (2005, August). Hedge funds and their implications for financial stability (European Central Bank (ECB) occasional paper no. 34). Available at SSRN:
  57. Gil-Alana, L., Cunado, J., & Gracia, F. (2013). Salient features of dependence in daily US stock market indices. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and Its Applications, 392(15), 3198–3212.Google Scholar
  58. Gintis, A. (2005). Behavioral game theory and contemporary economic theory. Analyse & Kritik – Journal of Philosophy & Social Theory, (1), 27.Google Scholar
  59. Glosten, L., Nallareddy, S., & Zou, Y. (2015). ETF trading and informational efficiency of underlying securities (Working paper). Columbia University.
  60. Goswami, B., Ambika, G., Marwan, N., & Kurths, J. (2012). On interrelations of recurrences and connectivity trends between stock indices. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and Its Applications, 391(18), 4364–4376.Google Scholar
  61. Goulder, L., & Stavins, R. (2011). Interactions between state and federal climate change policies. In The design and implementation of US climate policy (pp. 109–121). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  62. Grinberg, Y., & Perkins, T. (2015). State sequence analysis in hidden Markov models.
  63. Grubb, M., Sha, F., Spencer, T., Hughes, N., Zhang, Z., & Agnolucci, P. (2015). A review of Chinese CO2 emission projections to 2030: The role of economic structure and policy. Climate Policy, 15(1), S7–S39.Google Scholar
  64. Halvarsson, D., Korpi, M., & Wennberg, K. (2018). Entrepreneurship and income inequality. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 145, 275–293.Google Scholar
  65. Hare, D. (2016). What accounts for the decline in labor force participation among married women in urban China, 1991–2011? China Economic Review, 38, 251–266.Google Scholar
  66. Hartmann, D., Guevara, M., et al. (2017). Linking economic complexity, institutions and income inequality. World Development, 93, 75–93.Google Scholar
  67. He, X., & Zhou, X. (2011). Portfolio choice under cumulative prospect theory: An analytical treatment. Management Science, 57(2), 315–331.Google Scholar
  68. Helm, D. (2009). EU climate-change policy—A critique. In D. Helm & C. Hepburn (Eds.), The economics and politics of climate change. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  69. Helpman, E. (2004). The mystery of economic growth. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  70. Hilliard, J. (2014). Premiums and discounts in ETFs: An analysis of the arbitrage mechanism in domestic and international funds. Global Finance Journal, 25(2), 90–107.Google Scholar
  71. Hinterman, B. (2016). Emissions trading and market manipulation. In S. Weishar (Ed.), Research handbook on emissions trading (Research handbooks in climate law series, Chapter 5). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  72. Hurlin, C., Iseli, G., Pérignon, C., & Yeung, S. (2014). The counterparty risk exposure of ETF investors (Working paper).Google Scholar
  73. International Monetary Fund. (2011, April). Global financial stability report. International Monetary Fund, USA.
  74. International Monetary Fund. (2015, April). The asset management industry and financial stability (Working paper). Washington, DC: IMF.Google Scholar
  75. Interpol. (2013, June). Guide to carbon trading crime. International Criminal Police Organisation.
  76. Investment Company Institute. (2011). Potential financial stability issues arising from recent trends in ETFs.
  77. Israeli, D., Lee, C., & Sridharan, S.A. (2016). Is there a dark side to exchange traded funds (ETFs)? An information perspective (Working paper). Stanford University.Google Scholar
  78. Ivanov, I., & Lenkey, S. (2014). Are concerns about leveraged ETFs overblown? Finance and economics discussion series; Divisions of Research & Statistics and Monetary Affairs, Federal Reserve Board, Washington, DC.
  79. Kay, A. (2005). A critique of the use of path dependency in policy studies. Public Administration, 83(3), 553–571.Google Scholar
  80. Kerr, S., & Duscha, V. (2014). Going to the source: Using an upstream point of regulation for energy in a national Chinese emissions trading system. Energy & Environment, 25(3–4), 593–612.Google Scholar
  81. Keylock, C. (2018). Gradual multifractal reconstruction of time-series: Formulation of the method and an application to the coupling between stock market indices and their Hölder exponents. Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena, 368, 1–9.Google Scholar
  82. King, T. (2018). Index investors and the return of stewardship accounting. Research in Accounting Regulation, in press.Google Scholar
  83. King, M., & Maier, P. (2009, March 10). Hedge funds and financial stability: Regulating prime brokers will mitigate systemic risks. Journal of Financial Stability, 5, 283–297.Google Scholar
  84. Koopman, C., et al. (2015). The sharing economy and consumer protection regulation: The case for policy change. Journal of Business Entrepreneurship & Law, 8, 529–539.Google Scholar
  85. Kosev, M., & Williams, T. (2011). Exchange-traded funds. Reserve Bank of Australia Bulletin, Reserve Bank of Australia.Google Scholar
  86. Kostovetsky, L. (2003). Index mutual funds and exchange-traded funds. Journal of Portfolio Management, 29(4), 80–92.Google Scholar
  87. KPMG & Alternative Investment Management Association (AIMA). (2015). The value of the hedge fund industry to investors, markets, and the broader economy.
  88. Krause, T., Ehsani, S., & Lien, D. (2014). Exchange-traded funds, liquidity and volatility. Applied Financial Economics, 24, 1617–1630.Google Scholar
  89. Kristoufek, L. (2010). On spurious anti-persistence in the US stock indices. Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, 43(1–12), 68–78.Google Scholar
  90. Kuosa, T., & Kuosa T. (2007, December). A few extensions to path-dependence and emergence in complex social systems. Emergence: Complexity and Organization.
  91. Lathouwers, E. (2016). When memory pays: Discord in hidden Markov models (Working paper).Google Scholar
  92. Le Gland, F., & Mevel, L. (2000). Exponential forgetting and geometric ergodicity in hidden Markov models. Mathematical Control Signals Systems, 13, 63–93.Google Scholar
  93. Lechman, E., & Marszk, A. (2015). ICT technologies and financial innovations: The case of exchange traded funds in Brazil, Japan, Mexico, South Korea and the United States. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 99, 355–376.Google Scholar
  94. Ledgerwood, S., & Carpenter, P. (2012). A framework for the analysis of market manipulation. Review of Law & Economics, 8(1), 253–295.Google Scholar
  95. Levy, H., & Levy, M. (2004). Prospect theory and mean-variance analysis. Review of Financial Studies, 17(4), 1015–1041.Google Scholar
  96. Lin, C. C., & Chiang, M. H. (2005). Volatility effect of ETFs on the constituents of the underlying Taiwan 50 index. Applied Financial Economics, 15, 1315–1322.Google Scholar
  97. Lobão, J., & Pereira, C. (2017). Psychological barriers in stock market indices: Evidence from four southern European countries. Cuadernos de Economía, 40(114), 268–278.Google Scholar
  98. Margolis, S., & Liebowitz, S. (2010). “Path-dependence-4”: Evidence for third-degree path dependence.
  99. Marshall, B., Nguyen, N., & Visaltanachoti, N. (2013). ETF arbitrage: Intraday evidence. Journal of Banking & Finance, 37, 3486–3498.Google Scholar
  100. Marszk, A., & Lechman, E. (2018). Tracing financial innovation diffusion and substitution trajectories. Recent evidence on exchange-traded funds in Japan and South Korea. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, in press.Google Scholar
  101. Martinelli, L., & Urosevic, B. (2006). Static mean-variance analysis with uncertain time horizon. Management Science, 52(6), 955–964.Google Scholar
  102. Meszaros, J. (2018). Inequality and unionization within the United States. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  103. Miller, S., & Neanidis, K. (2015). Demographic transition and economic welfare: The role of in-cash and in-kind transfers. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 58, 84–92.Google Scholar
  104. Monjon, S., & Quirion, P. (2011). A border adjustment for the EU ETS: Reconciling WTO rules and capacity to tackle carbon leakage. Climate Policy, 11(5), 1212–1225.Google Scholar
  105. Mühleisen, M. (2018). The long and short of the digital revolution – Smart policies can alleviate the short-term pain of technological disruption and pave the way for long-term gain. Finance & Development, 55(2), 28–31.Google Scholar
  106. Muinelo-Gallo, L., & Roca-Sagalés, O. (2013). Joint determinants of fiscal policy, income inequality and economic growth. Economic Modeling, 30, 814–824.Google Scholar
  107. Nagayev, R., Disli, D., et al. (2016). On the dynamic links between commodities and Islamic equity. Energy Economics, 58, 125–140.Google Scholar
  108. Naresh, G., Vasudevan, G., Mahalakshmi, S., & Thiyagarajan, S. (2017). Spillover effect of US dollar on the stock indices of BRICS. Research in International Business and Finance, 44(C), 359–368.Google Scholar
  109. Nguyen, Q. (2017). “Mind the Gap?” Rising income inequality and individual trade policy preferences. European Journal of Political Economy, 50, 92–105.Google Scholar
  110. Niosi, G. (2011). Complexity and path dependence in biotechnology innovation systems. Industrial & Corporate Change, 20(6), 1795–1826.Google Scholar
  111. Nisan, N., & Ronen, A. (2001). Algorithmic mechanism design. Games and Economic Behavior, 35(1–2), 166–196.Google Scholar
  112. Nordhaus, W. (1969a). Invention, growth and welfare: A theoretical treatment of technological change. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  113. Nordhaus, W. (1969b, May). An economic theory of technological change. The American Economic Review, Papers and Proceedings (Vol. 59).Google Scholar
  114. Nordhaus, W. (1974). Markets and appropriable resources. In M. Macrakis (Ed.), Energy, demand, conservation, and institutional problems. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  115. Nordhaus, W. (1977). Economic growth and climate: The case of carbon dioxide. The American Economic Review, 67(1), 341–346.Google Scholar
  116. Nordhaus, W. (1980). The energy crisis and macroeconomic policy. The Energy Journal, 1(1).Google Scholar
  117. Nordhaus, W. (1981). Tax-based incomes policies: A better mousetrap? In M. Clandon & R. Cornwall (Eds.), An incomes policy for the United States: New approaches. Boston: Martinus Mijhoff.Google Scholar
  118. Nordhaus, W. (1994). Managing the global commons: The economics of climate change. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  119. Nordhaus, W. (1995). Integrative assessment of mitigation, impacts, and adaptation to climate change. Energy Policy, 23(4/5), 251–479.Google Scholar
  120. Nordhaus, W. (Ed.). (1998a). Economic and policy issues in climate change. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future Press.Google Scholar
  121. Nordhaus, W. (1998b). New estimates of the economic impacts of climate change. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  122. Nordhaus, W. (2002). Productivity growth and the new economy. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 33(2), 211–265.Google Scholar
  123. Nordhaus, W. (2005). The sources of the productivity rebound and the manufacturing employment puzzle (NBER working papers 11354). National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.Google Scholar
  124. Nordhaus, W. (2006a). Geography and macroeconomics: New data and new findings. Proceedings National Academy of Sciences (US), 103(10), 3510–3517.Google Scholar
  125. Nordhaus, W. (2006b). After Kyoto: Alternative mechanisms to control global warming. The American Economic Review, 96, 31–34.Google Scholar
  126. Nordhaus, W. (2006c). The “stern review” on the economics of climate change (NBER working papers 12741). National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.Google Scholar
  127. Nordhaus, W. (2007a). To tax or not to tax: Alternative approaches to slowing global warming. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 1(1), 26–44.Google Scholar
  128. Nordhaus, W. (2007b). Critical assumptions in the stern review on climate change. Science, 317(5835), 201–202.Google Scholar
  129. Nordhaus, W. (2007c). Alternative measures of output in global economic-environmental models: Purchasing power parity or market exchange rates? Energy Economics, 29(3), 375–389.Google Scholar
  130. Nordhaus, W. (2009). The perils of the learning model for modeling endogenous technological change (Cowles Foundation discussion papers), Cowles Foundation, Yale University. Also presented at the National Academy of Sciences Workshop on Mitigation, April 2010.Google Scholar
  131. Nordhaus, W. (2013). Integrated economic and climate modeling. In Handbook of computable general equilibrium modeling. Philadelphia: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  132. Nordhaus, W. (2014). The perils of the learning model for modeling endogenous technological change. The Energy Journal, 35(1).Google Scholar
  133. Nordhaus, W. (2015). Are we approaching an economic singularity? Information technology and the future of economic growth (NBER working papers 21547). National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.Google Scholar
  134. Nordhaus, W. (2016). Projections and uncertainties about climate change in an era of minimal climate policies (NBER working papers 22933). National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.Google Scholar
  135. Nordhaus, W., & Boyer, J. (1999). Requiem for Kyoto: An economic analysis of the Kyoto protocol. The Energy Journal, 0(Special I), 93–130.Google Scholar
  136. Nordhaus, W., & Moffat, A. (2017). Evolution of modeling of the economics of global warming: Changes in the DICE model, 1992–2017 (Cowles Foundation discussion papers 2096). Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.Google Scholar
  137. Nordhaus, W., & Van Der Heyden, L. (1983). Induced technical change: A programming approach. In S. Schurr, S. Sonnenblum, & D. Wood (Eds.), Energy, productivity and economic growth. Oelgeschlager: Gunn & Hain.Google Scholar
  138. Nwogugu, M. (2005). Towards multifactor models of decision making and risk: Critique of Prospect theory and related approaches, part one. Journal of Risk Finance, 6(2), 150–162.Google Scholar
  139. Nwogugu, M. (2013). Decision-making, sub-additive recursive “matching” noise and biases in risk-weighted index calculation methods in in-complete markets with partially observable multi-attribute preferences. Discrete Mathematics, Algorithms and Applications, 5, 1350020.Google Scholar
  140. Nwogugu, M. (2017). Some biases and evolutionary homomorphisms implicit in the calculation of returns. In M. Nwogugu, Anomalies in net present value, returns and polynomials, and regret theory in decision making (Chapter 8). London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  141. Oura, H., Arregui, N., et al. (2015). The asset management industry and financial stability. In Global financial stability report: Navigating monetary policy challenges and managing risks (pp. 93–135).Google Scholar
  142. Page, S. (2006). Path dependence. Quarterly Journal of Political Science, 1(1), 88.Google Scholar
  143. Pang, T., & Duan, M. (2016). Cap setting and allowance allocation in China’s emissions trading pilot programmes: Special issues and innovative solutions. Climate Policy, 16(7), 815–835.Google Scholar
  144. Parente, S. (2001). The failure of endogenous growth. Knowledge Technology & Policy, 13(4), 49–58.Google Scholar
  145. Perkins, D., Palmer, N., & García-Ramírez, M. (2011). Psychosocial studies of migration and community: Introduction to the special issue. Psychosocial Intervention, 20(3), 237–242.Google Scholar
  146. Pirvu, T., & Schulze, K. (2012). Multi-stock portfolio optimization under prospect theory. Mathematics and Financial Economics, 6(4), 337–362.Google Scholar
  147. Prasanna, P., & Menon, A. (2013). Speed of information adjustment in Indian stock indices. IIMB Management Review, 25(3), 150–159.Google Scholar
  148. Puy, D. (2016). Mutual funds flows and the geography of contagion. Journal of International Money and Finance, 60, 73–93.Google Scholar
  149. Ramaswamy, S. (2011, April). Market structures and systemic risk of exchange-traded funds (BIS working papers, no. 343).
  150. Rauterberg, G., & Verstein, A. (2013). Index theory: The law, promise and failure of financial indices. Yale Journal on Regulation, 30(1), 1–10.Google Scholar
  151. Rieger, M., & Bui, T. (2011). Too risk-averse for prospect theory? Modern Economy, 2(4), 691–700.Google Scholar
  152. Rizvi, S., & Arshad, S. (2017). Understanding time-varying systematic risks in Islamic and conventional sectoral indices. Economic Modelling, 70(C), 561–570.Google Scholar
  153. Romer, P. (1983). Dynamic competitive equilibria with externalities, increasing returns and unbounded growth (PhD thesis). University of Chicago.Google Scholar
  154. Romer, P. (1990). Endogenous technological change. Journal of Political Economy, 98(5), S71–S102.Google Scholar
  155. Romer, P. (1996). Preferences, promises, and the politics of entitlement. In V. Fuchs (Ed.), Individual and social responsibility (Chapter 7).Google Scholar
  156. Romer, P. (2007). Economic growth. In D. Henderson (Ed.), The concise encyclopedia of economics. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.Google Scholar
  157. Romer, D. (2011). Endogenous growth. In Advanced macroeconomics (4th ed., pp. 101–149). New York: McGraw-Hill. ISBN 978-0-07-351137-5.Google Scholar
  158. Romer, P., & Jones, C. (2010). The new Kaldor facts: Ideas, institutions, population, and human capital. American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, 2(1), 224–245.Google Scholar
  159. Rompotis, G. G. (2008). Interfamily competition on index tracking: The case of the vanguard ETFs and index funds. ETFs & Indexing, 1, 111–123.Google Scholar
  160. Rompotis, G. G. (2011). ETFs vs. mutual funds: Evidence from the Greek market. South-Eastern Europe Journal of Economics, 9(1), 27–43.Google Scholar
  161. Rompotis, G. G. (2013). ETFs vs. Index funds in the Greek market before and during the crisis. The Journal of Index Investing, 4(3), 42–49.Google Scholar
  162. Rukmana, D. (2013). Rapid urbanization and the need for sustainable transportation policies in Jakarta. IOP conference series: Earth and environmental science (Vol. 124), conference 1.Google Scholar
  163. Schmidt, S., Starmer, C., & Sugden, R. (2008). Third generation prospect theory. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 36, 203–223.Google Scholar
  164. Schneider, L., Kollmuss, A., & Lazarus, M. (2015). Addressing the risk of double counting emission reductions under the UNFCCC. Climatic Change, 131(4), 473–486.Google Scholar
  165. Scott, J. (Zurich Insurance Group). (2015). The risks of rapid urbanization in developing countries.
  166. Sharifzadeh, M., & Hojat, S. (2012). An analytical performance comparison of exchange-traded funds with index funds: 2002–2010. Journal of Asset Management, 13(3), 196–209.Google Scholar
  167. Sijm, J., Neuhoff, K., & Chen, Y. (2006). CO2 cost pass-through and windfall profits in the power sector. Climate Policy, 6(1), 49–72.Google Scholar
  168. Singh, J., Ahmad, W., & Mishra, A. (2018). Coherence, connectedness and dynamic hedging effectiveness between emerging markets equities and commodity index funds. Resources Policy, in press.Google Scholar
  169. Smulders, S. (1998). Technological change, economic growth and sustainability. In J. C. J. M. Van den Bergh & M. W. Hofkes (Eds.), Theory and implementation of economic models for sustainable development (Economy & environment book series, Vol. 15). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  170. Stošić, D., Stošić, D., et al. (2015). Multifractal properties of price change and volume change of stock market indices. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and Its Applications, 428, 46–51.Google Scholar
  171. Sushko, V., & Turne, G. (2018, March). The implications of passive investing for securities markets. BIS Quarterly Review,
  172. Tanaka, M., & Chen, Y. (2012). Market power in emissions trading: Strategically manipulating permit price through fringe firms. Applied Energy, 96, 203–211.Google Scholar
  173. Tanuro, D. (2008). Fundamental inadequacies of carbon trading for the struggle against climate change.
  174. Trivedi, J., Sareen, H., & Dhyani, M. (2008). Rapid urbanization – Its impact on mental health: A south Asian perspective. Indian Journal of Psychiatry, 50(3), 161–165.Google Scholar
  175. Turnovsky, S. (2015). Economic growth and inequality: The role of public investment. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 61, 204–221.Google Scholar
  176. Tynkkynen, N. (2014). Russia and global climate governance. IFRI – Russia/NIS Center.
  177. UNIDO. (2015). Technological change in developing countries: Trade-offs between economic, social, and environmental sustainability (Inclusive and sustainable industrial development working paper series; WP 21 | 2015).Google Scholar
  178. US Securities & Exchange Commission. (2015). Response to SEC questions regarding exchange traded products. File Number S7-11-15.
  179. U.S. Senate. (2011, October 19). Market Micro-structure: Examination of Exchange-Traded Funds (ETFs). Senate Committee on Banking hearing. Available at:
  180. Vergne, J., & Durand, R. (2010). The missing link between the theory and empirics of path dependence: Conceptual clarification, testability issue, and methodological implications. Journal of Management Studies, 47(4), 736.Google Scholar
  181. Vlachou, A., & Pantelias, G. (2017). The EU’s emissions trading system, Part-2: A political economy critique. Capitalism Nature Socialism, 28(3), 108–127.Google Scholar
  182. Wakker, P. (2010). Prospect theory: For risk and ambiguity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  183. Wang, H., Shang, P., & Xia, J. (2016). Compositional segmentation and complexity measurement in stock indices. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and Its Applications, 442, 67–73.Google Scholar
  184. Wang, X., Teng, F., Zhou, S., & Cai, B. (2017). Identifying the industrial sectors at risk of carbon leakage in China. Climate Policy, 17(4), 443–457.Google Scholar
  185. Weishaar, S. E. (2014). Linking emissions trading schemes, emissions trading design – A critical overview. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  186. World Economic Forum. (2018). The global risks report 2018 – 13th Edition. World Economic Forum.Google Scholar
  187. Wu, X., & Li, J. (2017). Income inequality, economic growth, and subjective well-being: Evidence from China. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 52, 49–58.Google Scholar
  188. Xu, L., & Yin, X. (2017). Does ETF trading affect the efficiency of the underlying index? International Review of Financial Analysis, 51, 82–101.Google Scholar
  189. Yamada, T. (2012). Income risk, macroeconomic and demographic change, and economic inequality in Japan. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 36(1), 63–84.Google Scholar
  190. Yarovaya, L., Brzeszczyński, J., & Lau, M. (2016). Intra- and inter-regional return and volatility spillovers across emerging and developed markets: Evidence from stock indices and stock index futures. International Review of Financial Analysis, 43, 96–114.Google Scholar
  191. Zeng, Y., Weishaar, S., & Vedder, H. (2018). Electricity regulation in the Chinese national emissions trading scheme (ETS): Lessons for carbon leakage and linkage with the EU ETS. Climate Policy, 18(10), 1246–1259.Google Scholar
  192. Zhou, Y., & Chen, S. (2016). Cross-correlation analysis between Chinese TF contracts and treasury ETF based on high-frequency data. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and Its Applications, 443, 117–127.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael I. C. Nwogugu
    • 1
  1. 1.EnuguNigeria

Personalised recommendations