Firms Entangled in Geopolitical Conflicts: Evidence from the Russia-Ukraine War

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS ACS Applied Bio Materials Pub Date : 2024-07-17 DOI:10.1016/j.jimonfin.2024.103137
Onur Kemal Tosun , Arman Eshraghi , Samuel A. Vigne
{"title":"Firms Entangled in Geopolitical Conflicts: Evidence from the Russia-Ukraine War","authors":"Onur Kemal Tosun ,&nbsp;Arman Eshraghi ,&nbsp;Samuel A. Vigne","doi":"10.1016/j.jimonfin.2024.103137","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>We examine the reactions of US-based multinationals and subsequent financial market reactions to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. The multinationals’ firm-level decisions range from clean exits from the Russian market, all the way to ‘digging in’ as if the war never happened. Findings show that, in the short-term, markets favour ‘middle ground’ decisions which balance shareholder interests with regulatory and ethical concerns. This is manifest through those firms taking extreme decisions, on either end of the spectrum, experiencing more negative returns. In the longer term, however, investor ethical concerns and other considerations dominate such that firms announcing clean breaks incur lower losses compared to their peers. In other words, sitting on the fence and playing both sides does not pay off for long. We also show interesting differences in investor reactions between two major non-US markets: China − a Russia-leaning country − vs India − a neutral country. While Indian investors behave largely similar to US investors, Chinese investors do not significantly punish firms that stay put in Russia. We re-examine the situation one year into the war and show that markets reward a Russia-opposing corporate position in the longer term.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261560624001244","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We examine the reactions of US-based multinationals and subsequent financial market reactions to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. The multinationals’ firm-level decisions range from clean exits from the Russian market, all the way to ‘digging in’ as if the war never happened. Findings show that, in the short-term, markets favour ‘middle ground’ decisions which balance shareholder interests with regulatory and ethical concerns. This is manifest through those firms taking extreme decisions, on either end of the spectrum, experiencing more negative returns. In the longer term, however, investor ethical concerns and other considerations dominate such that firms announcing clean breaks incur lower losses compared to their peers. In other words, sitting on the fence and playing both sides does not pay off for long. We also show interesting differences in investor reactions between two major non-US markets: China − a Russia-leaning country − vs India − a neutral country. While Indian investors behave largely similar to US investors, Chinese investors do not significantly punish firms that stay put in Russia. We re-examine the situation one year into the war and show that markets reward a Russia-opposing corporate position in the longer term.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
卷入地缘政治冲突的企业:俄罗斯-乌克兰战争的证据
我们研究了美国跨国公司对 2022 年 2 月俄罗斯入侵乌克兰的反应以及随后的金融市场反应。跨国公司在公司层面的决策包括完全退出俄罗斯市场,以及 "坚守阵地",仿佛战争从未发生过。研究结果表明,在短期内,市场倾向于 "中庸 "决策,即在股东利益与监管和道德问题之间取得平衡。这表现在那些采取极端决策的公司,无论在哪一端,都会经历更多的负面回报。然而,从长远来看,投资者的道德关切和其他考虑因素占主导地位,因此宣布清白的公司与同行相比损失较少。换句话说,坐井观天、两面三刀的做法并不能长久地获得回报。我们还显示了两大非美国市场投资者反应的有趣差异:中国是一个倾向俄罗斯的国家,而印度则是一个中立国家。印度投资者的行为与美国投资者大体相似,而中国投资者对留在俄罗斯的企业的惩罚并不明显。我们重新审视了战争爆发一年后的形势,结果表明,从长远来看,市场会奖励持反俄立场的企业。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
期刊最新文献
A Systematic Review of Sleep Disturbance in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension. Advancing Patient Education in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension: The Promise of Large Language Models. Anti-Myelin-Associated Glycoprotein Neuropathy: Recent Developments. Approach to Managing the Initial Presentation of Multiple Sclerosis: A Worldwide Practice Survey. Association Between LACE+ Index Risk Category and 90-Day Mortality After Stroke.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1