Securities laws in transition economies (Czech Republic, Poland, Hungary, Estonia, Slovenia)

Do stock markets in transition economies benefit from more extensive and effective securities laws? La Porta, Lopez de Silanes, and Shleifer (2003) identify three hypotheses of the effects of securities laws: (1) they are irrelevant or even damaging; (2) they benefit markets by reducing private contracting costs; or (3) they require public enforcement in order to benefit market development. The dissertation is comprised of three essays which consider the above hypotheses for five Eastern European transition economies. The first essay consists of an overview of stock market performance and securities law mechanisms for the economies in the sample. It argues that the varied performance of these economies' stock markets cannot be convincingly explained by differences in securities laws. The second essay uses the event study methodology to examine the impact of an SEC-type body on the investment fund industry in the Czech Republic. The results suggest that the transfer of securities law enforcement powers to a public agency was not a value adding policy change. The final essay explores the empirical relationship between law and finance in the transition economy sample. Specifically, it estimates the effect of securities laws on stock market performance using panel data analysis, with the bid-ask spread as a measure of stock market success. It finds that effective public enforcement of securities laws increases spreads, suggesting that public enforcement of securities law may be damaging to stock market development.