<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Nelissen, J.H.M.</title>
    <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/aut/4522/</link>
    <description>List of Publications</description>
    <language>en</language>
    
    <item>
      <title>Early Retirement: The Impact of Changes in the Benefit Level (Research Paper)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/6820/</link>
      <pubDate>2002-03-21T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>In the Netherlands a transition takes place from early retirement schemes, which are characterized by high implicit tax rates to schemes that have a higher degree of actuarial fairness. in this paper we look at the impact of this change at the labor participation rates of 55 to 65 years old persons. The analysis has been applied on repeated choices on the basis of stated preferences. We estimate a mixed (or random parameters) logit model. The most important finding is the independent role that is played by the number of years for which has built up pension claims. Its impact does not only run via the discounted value of future pension streams. The results indicate that the change in the early retirement schemes will considerably increase labor participation. A participation rate of 50% for the age group under consideration is within reach.</description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Should the Same Side of the Market always move first in a Transaction? An Experimental Study (Research Paper)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/6842/</link>
      <pubDate>2001-10-03T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>This paper investigates whether transactions where the buyer (or the seller) always moves first, and the seller (or the buyer) always moves second in the exchange gives higher payoffs than exchanges in which it is randomly determined who moves first. We examine the effect of two treatment variables: Partners versus Strangers and fixed versus changing positions. We find that both with fixed and with changing positions, second movers take advantage of their position by exploiting the first mover by "not delivering" the demanded good. However, with fixed positions exploitation occurs significantly less while reciprocal exchanges happen more often. In spite of this, it turns out that with fixed positions payoffs are very unevenly distributed. Unequal payoff distributions occur both under Partners and Strangers, but they appear to be more extreme among Strangers.</description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Efficiency Effects of Bank Mergers and Acquisitions (Research Paper)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/6843/</link>
      <pubDate>2001-10-03T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>Next to technological progress and deregulation, the introduction of the euro is widely considered to be an important catalyst for bank consolidation in Europe. In order to assess the public policy issues surrounding bank mergers, this paper analyzes the efficiency effects of 52 horizontal bank mergers over the period 1994-1998, i.e. the period immediately preceding the start of EMU. We find evidence of substantial unexploited scale economies and large X-inefficiencies in European banking. The dynamic merger analysis indicates that the cost efficiency of merging banks is positively affected by the merger, while the relative degree of profit efficiency improves only marginally. We do not find any evidence that merging banks are able to exercise greater market power in the deposit market. Hence, the bank M&amp;As in this study appear to be socially beneficial.</description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Simple and Complex Gift Exchange in the Laboratory (Research Paper)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/6844/</link>
      <pubDate>2001-10-03T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>We examine an experimental gift exchange game in which the players can improve upon the unique no-gifts equilibrium through cooperative gift giving. The main feature of the study is that there are two different types of gift exchange, which we call simple and complex exchange, respectively. Complex exchange gives higher payoffs than simple exchange but it requires not only mutual trust, like simple exchange, but also a substantial degree of coordination. We examine whether players are able to conclude simple and complex exchanges and how this is affected by the move and matching structure of the game.</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>