Figure 2 - available via license: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
Content may be subject to copyright.
The effect of tweets during the campaign and when Trump was president-elect are significant at the 95 percent level. Note that the effects are not significant before Trump becomes the nominee and actually indicate strengthening of the peso after the inauguration. The values shown are absolute changes in the peso.
Source publication
This paper examines the effects of foreign electoral shocks on currency markets. I develop a theory of signaling and uncertainty to explain why elections in countries with close economic ties should affect exchange rates. Methodologically, this paper focuses on several case studies, with the 2016 US election as a central case. I utilize an event an...
Context in source publication
Context 1
... findings in this paper rely on the results of several different models. The per-tweet effect of the event analysis is shown in figure 2. The results are significant at the 95 percent level for both tweets during the campaign and as president-elect, although not for tweets before the campaign or after the inauguration. ...
Similar publications
This research explores upside and downside jumps in the dynamic processes of three rates: domestic interest rates, foreign interest rates, and exchange rates. To fill the gap between the asymmetric jump in the currency market and the current models, a correlated asymmetric jump model is proposed to capture the co-movement of the correlated jump ris...
Citations
Global market responses to elections are at the core of debates about financial globalization in developing countries. While existing research focuses on the ability of global markets to reward and punish national governments, much less is known about the role of domestic finance. I argue that domestic financial markets (1) react more strongly to elections than global markets due to excessive exposure to political risk at home and (2) lead global market responses to elections where domestic investors have an information advantage. I find support for these hypotheses using data on country fund pricing for major emerging markets between 1988 and 2015. The results show swifter and more dramatic reactions by domestic investors, which are transmitted to international markets. The findings underscore the underappreciated role of domestic investors in state-market relations under limited globalization.
The negative “Trump Effect” on international students has attracted wide media and scholarly attention. Surprisingly, the best existing evidence remains anecdotal and case-based. In this study, we fill this important gap. We employ a difference-in-differences (DID) design to estimate the Trump effect for the US vis-a-vis various control groups: top 5, top 10, top 20, and all other countries that compete with the US. We find a statistically significant and negative Trump effect that drives international students from the US to competing destinations. Relative to the top five competitors, about 12% fewer students came to the US during the first 3 years of the Trump Presidency. The average treatment effect is statistically significant across the top 5, top 10, and top 20 destination groups but not for the group of all other destinations as a whole. Pairwise DID estimates between the US and 91 individual countries further indicate that the Trump effect is primarily driven by 26 host nations. These findings contribute to our understanding of Trump effects, student flows, and migration.
