Article

An Empirical Assessment of Country Risk Ratings and Associated Models

Journal of Economic Surveys (Impact Factor: 1.33). 02/2004; 18(4):539-588. DOI: 10.1111/j.0950-0804.2004.00230.x
Source: RePEc

ABSTRACT Country risk has become a topic of major concern for the international financial community over the last two decades. The importance of country ratings is underscored by the existence of several major country risk rating agencies, namely the Economist Intelligence Unit, Euromoney, Institutional Investor, International Country Risk Guide, Moody's, Political Risk Services, and Standard and Poor's. These risk rating agencies employ different methods to determine country risk ratings, combining a range of qualitative and quantitative information regarding alternative measures of economic, financial and political risk into associated composite risk ratings. However, the accuracy of any risk rating agency with regard to any or all of these measures is open to question. For this reason, it is necessary to review the literature relating to empirical country risk models according to established statistical and econometric criteria used in estimation, evaluation and forecasting. Such an evaluation permits a critical assessment of the relevance and practicality of the country risk literature. The paper also provides an international comparison of risk ratings for twelve countries from six geographic regions. These ratings are compiled by the International Country Risk Guide, which is the only rating agency to provide detailed and consistent monthly data over an extended period for a large number of countries. The time series data permit a comparative assessment of the international country risk ratings, and highlight the importance of economic, financial and political risk ratings as components of a composite risk rating. Copyright Blackwell Publishers Ltd, 2004.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Suhejla Hoti, Aug 31, 2015
2 Followers
 · 
235 Views
  • Source
    • "The reprisal of country risk ratings began again after World War II when investment lending passed from government to the commercial sector. The 1970s led to increased international debt among less developed countries with a subsequent rise in those countries inability to pay or service that debt increasing the need for country risk assessments (Hoti & McAleer, 2004). The inability upon default meant that lenders needed a way in which to assess country performance and management, which led to the establishment of formalized country risk definitions and assessments. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This conceptual article looks at corporate responsibility (CR) and country risk claiming that there is a relationship, and then positing the directionality of the relationship. An understanding of this relationship can help firms respond to a variety of pressures from organizations and this knowledge may help firms prevent negative media coverage with the need to “bolt” CR strategies on to existing corporate strategies. When firms have an understanding of how country risk affects them, they can plan entire clusters of CR initiatives to fulfill needs within the operating community. To understand the CR–country risk relationship, the authors build on Matten and Moon’s (2008) distinction between implicit and explicit CR. The first argument is that firms engage in no explicit CR (explicit CR that is voluntary and goes beyond legal requirement) when country risk is very high. As country risk lowers to high, firms engage in explicit CR, which creates little impact to the firm if CR must be withdrawn. The second argument is that as country risk shifts to moderate, firms commence to engage in high levels of explicit CR and low levels of implicit CR. The third argument concludes that when country risk shifts to low or very low, firms will engage in the least amount of explicit CR and the most amount of implicit CR. A set of three propositions develops these arguments.
    Business & Society 10/2014; 53(5):625-651. DOI:10.1177/0007650312475123 · 1.94 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "For assessing the EBRs in the LSI, four main criteria, namely political risks, economic risks, social risks, and natural hazards, are investigated. This classification follows the recommendation and adaptation of various studies in the literature (CLSCM, 2003; Hoti and McAleer, 2004; UNCTAD, 2011; Riahi et al. 2013). Table 1 presents the summary of the identified factors for assessing the EBRs in the LSI. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The liner shipping industry (LSI) is a complex and dynamic industry. With the era of unprecedented global changes, the LSI faces a variety of internal as well as external risks. Furthermore, the values of the liner shipping operators' performances and operational reliability are not fixed and change within different environments. As a result, an appropriate dynamic model for evaluation of environmental-based risks (EBRs), which is capable of dealing with the external risks, is needed. In this study, for assessment of the values of EBRs, a generic model is constructed and a combination of different decision-making techniques such as analytical hierarchy process (AHP) and fuzzy set theory (FST) is used. Furthermore, evidential reasoning (ER) is used to synthesize the belief values or degrees of linguistic variables of EBRs' criteria. Through the proposed methodology, a decision support framework is developed for the liner shipping operators, which enables them to assess the risk value of a country or a port of call prior to investment or strategic planning. In addition, with the help of the proposed methodology, the liner shipping operators will be able to assess the overall level of existing EBRs in order to proactively facilitate continuous improvement strategies.
    Second International Conference on Vulnerability and Risk Analysis and Management (ICVRAM) and the Sixth International Symposium on Uncertainty, Modeling, and Analysis (ISUMA), Liverpool, United Kingdom; 07/2014
  • Source
    • "For assessing the EBRs in the LSI, four main criteria, namely political risks, economic risks, social risks, and natural hazards, are investigated. This classification follows the recommendation and adaptation of various studies in the literature (CLSCM, 2003; Hoti and McAleer, 2004; UNCTAD, 2011; Riahi et al. 2013). Table 1 presents the summary of the identified factors for assessing the EBRs in the LSI. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The liner shipping industry (LSI) is a complex and dynamic industry. With the era of unprecedented global changes, the LSI faces a variety of internal as well as external risks. Furthermore, the values of the liner shipping operators’ performances and operational reliability are not fixed and change within different environments. As a result, an appropriate dynamic model for evaluation of environmental-based risks (EBRs), which is capable of dealing with the external risks, is needed. In this study, for assessment of the values of EBRs, a generic model is constructed and a combination of different decision-making techniques such as analytical hierarchy process (AHP) and fuzzy set theory (FST) is used. Furthermore, evidential reasoning (ER) is used to synthesize the belief values or degrees of linguistic variables of EBRs’ criteria. Through the proposed methodology, a decision support framework is developed for the liner shipping operators, which enables them to assess the risk value of a country or a port of call prior to investment or strategic planning. In addition, with the help of the proposed methodology, the liner shipping operators will be able to assess the overall level of existing EBRs in order to proactively facilitate continuous improvement strategies.
    Second International Conference on Vulnerability and Risk Analysis and Management (ICVRAM) and the Sixth International Symposium on Uncertainty, Modeling, and Analysis (ISUMA); 06/2014
Show more