_________________________________________________________________

  E M P L O Y E E   B E N E F I T S ,   C O M P E N S A T I O N
                  A N D   P E N S I O N   L A W
                 Vol. 3,  No. 2: January 31, 2002
_________________________________________________________________

Publisher:     LSN Subject Matter Journals
               a division of
               Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. (SSEP)
               and Social Science Research Network (SSRN)

Editor:        PAMELA J. PERUN
               Urban Institute
               Mailto:pamela@planetnow.com

Copyright:     SSEP, Inc. 2002. All rights reserved.

Leading Social Science Research Delivered To Your Desktop
               http://www.SSRN.Com/

   ___________________________________________________________

                      Topic of This Issue:
                     Pension Finance Issues
   ___________________________________________________________


SEARCHING THE SSRN ELECTRONIC LIBRARY
 To search the entire SSRN Electronic Library by author, title,
 JEL code, or full text of the abstracts in our database, please
 visit http://papers.ssrn.com/

 To browse all abstracts published in this journal, please visit
 http://www.ssrn.com/link/benefits-compensation-pension-law.html

REDISTRIBUTION
 SSEP provides permission to redistribute single copies of this
 journal. No one may charge for redistribution, and the issue
 must be distributed in its entirety.

SIGN OFF
 To stop delivery of one or more of the SSRN journals, write to
 Mailto:Remove@SSRN.Com Include the JOURNAL name or the NETWORK
 name or ALL in the subject line. If your address has changed, let
 us know by writing to Mailto:AddressChg@SSRN.Com

ALIGNMENT
 If this document is misaligned, please set type face to a
 non-proportional font such as Courier 10.

PAPER DOWNLOADS
 If you need assistance downloading papers from our web site,
 please contact Mailto:Support@SSRN.Com


T A B L E   of   C O N T E N T S
_________________________________________________________________


NEW and FORTHCOMING ARTICLES

"The Next Generation of Index-Trackers: Exchange-Traded Funds and
 the Investment Duties of Fiduciaries"
      Company and Securities Law Journal, Vol. 18, November 2000
     PAUL USMAN ALI
        University of Queensland
     MARTIN L. GOLD
        MFAS Investment Advisors

WORKING PAPERS

"International Pension Swaps"
     ZVI BODIE
        Boston University
        School of Management
        National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER)
     ROBERT C. MERTON
        Harvard Business School
        National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER)


"Wealth Effects of Banks' Rights to Market and Originate
 Annuities"
     ARNOLD R. COWAN
        Iowa State University
        Department of Finance
     JANN C. HOWELL
        Iowa State University
        Department of Finance
     MARK L. POWER
        Iowa State University
        Department of Finance


"The German Social Market in the World of Global Finance: Pension
 Investment Management and the Limits of Consensual Decision
 Making"
     GORDON LESLIE CLARK
        University of Oxford
        School of Geography
     DANIEL MANSFIELD
        University of Bristol
        School of Geographical Sciences
     ADAM TICKELL
        University of Bristol
        School of Geographical Sciences


"How Much is Investor Autonomy Worth?"
     SHLOMO BENARTZI
        University of California at Los Angeles
     RICHARD H. THALER
        University of Chicago
        National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER)


"Behavioral Finance and Investor Governance"
     LAWRENCE A. CUNNINGHAM
        Yeshiva University, Benjamin Cardozo School of Law


S S R N   I N F O R M A T I O N
_________________________________________________________________

          * Partners in Publishing
          * Administrative Information
             - Missing issues & change of address
             - Solicitation of abstracts
          * Directors
          * Subscription to SSRN Journals
_________________________________________________________________

ACQUIRING PAPERS
 Download papers directly from the included web address or contact
 the author or other contact person directly. Provide an address
 to which the author or other contact person can send a paper
 copy and mention that you saw the abstract in SSRN. Some of
 SSRN's Partners in Publishing require a subscription or charge a
 fee for electronic downloads.



EDITORIAL POLICIES
 To provide the broadest coverage of research in Employee
 Benefits, Compensation and Pension Law we do not referee working
 papers. We accept abstracts of working papers in Employee
 Benefits, Compensation and Pension Law whose topics suit the
 coverage of the journal and which are part of the worldwide
 scholarly discourse.


N E W   and   F O R T H C O M I N G   Articles
_________________________________________________________________

"The Next Generation of Index-Trackers: Exchange-Traded Funds and
 the Investment Duties of Fiduciaries"
      Company and Securities Law Journal, Vol. 18, November 2000

      BY:  PAUL USMAN ALI
              University of Queensland
           MARTIN L. GOLD
              MFAS Investment Advisors

 Contact:  PAUL USMAN ALI
   Email:  Mailto:pau_ali@hotmail.com
  Postal:  University of Queensland
           T.C. Beirne School of Law
           St. Lucia
           4072 Brisbane, Queensland   AUSTRALIA
   Phone:  +61 7 3365 2206
     Fax:  +61 7 3365 1454
 Co-Auth:  MARTIN L. GOLD
   Email:  Mailto:martinlgold@hotmail.com
  Postal:  MFAS Investment Advisors
           Level 10 Aurora Place
           88 Phillip Street
           Sydney NSW 2000,   AUSTRALIA

ABSTRACT:
 This article explains the structure of Exchange-Traded Funds
 (ETFs), and describes the proposed Australian ETFs, as well as
 the ETFs that have been launched in the United States, the UK
 and Europe, and Asia. The article also considers the key issues
 under Australian law confronting fund managers, pension trustees
 and other fiduciaries who are considering investing in ETFs.

 Under Australian law, fiduciaries are required to invest the
 funds entrusted to them in accordance with the "prudent investor
 rule". However, an allocation of funds to an ETF raises a more
 fundamental legal issue: has the fiduciary, by investing funds
 in an ETF, improperly delegated its investment powers and so
 breached its legal obligation to act personally? This issue
 arises each time a fiduciary appoints an external manager to
 invest fund assets, but is particularly acute in the case of
 ETFs and other managed strategies where the fund assets are
 committed to a strategy without the ability for the fiduciary to
 intercede in the strategy.

 The law on delegation by fiduciaries in Australia is in an
 unsatisfactory state. The common law places strict limits on
 delegation - it is only in cases of "necessity", that a
 fiduciary can depart from its legal obligation to exercise
 investment powers personally. This principle has arguably been
 superseded by the broad statutory powers conferred by the
 Australian Corporations Law on fiduciaries that are responsible
 for managed funds. In contrast, despite the introduction of
 special legislation regulating pension funds, questions remain
 about the ability of pension trustees to invest pension assets
 in ETFs and other managed strategies.

 Keywords: Exchange-Traded Funds, Managed Funds, Pension Funds,
 Investment Powers, Fiduciary Duties


JEL Classification: K22, G23
______________________________

W O R K I N G   P A P E R   Abstracts
_________________________________________________________________

"International Pension Swaps"

      BY:  ZVI BODIE
              Boston University
              School of Management
              National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER)
           ROBERT C. MERTON
              Harvard Business School
              National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER)

Document:  Available from the SSRN Electronic Paper Collection:
           http://papers.ssrn.com/paper.taf?abstract_id=288781

Paper ID:  Boston University School of Management Working Paper
           No. 02-01
    Date:  January 2002

 Contact:  ZVI BODIE
   Email:  Mailto:zbodie@bu.edu
  Postal:  Boston University
           School of Management
           Finance/Economics
           595 Commonwealth Avenue
           Boston, MA 02215  USA
   Phone:  (617) 353-4160
     Fax:  (617) 353 6667
 Co-Auth:  ROBERT C. MERTON
   Email:  Mailto:rmerton@hbs.harvard.edu
  Postal:  Harvard Business School
           Morgan 397
           Soldiers Field
           Boston, MA 02163  USA

ABSTRACT:
 During the past twenty years, swap contracts have become key
 financial "adapters" linking diverse national financial systems
 to the global financial network. Today banks and investment
 companies around the world use swaps extensively to manage their
 currency, interest-rate, and equity-market risks and to lower
 their transaction costs. Yet pension funds, which have grown
 rapidly over that same 20-year period, hardly use swaps at all.
 This paper suggests how pension funds could use swaps to achieve
 the risk-sharing benefits of broad international diversification
 and hedging while avoiding the "flight" of scarce domestic
 capital to other countries. The paper also shows how swaps can
 be used to lower the risks of expropriation and to lower the
 other transaction costs of investing in other countries.

 Keywords: Pensions, diversification, risk-sharing, swaps


JEL Classification: F3, G15, G18, G23, K23, K33
______________________________

"Wealth Effects of Banks' Rights to Market and Originate
 Annuities"

      BY:  ARNOLD R. COWAN
              Iowa State University
              Department of Finance
           JANN C. HOWELL
              Iowa State University
              Department of Finance
           MARK L. POWER
              Iowa State University
              Department of Finance

Document:  Available from the SSRN Electronic Paper Collection:
           http://papers.ssrn.com/paper.taf?abstract_id=287161

    Date:  October 2001

 Contact:  ARNOLD R. COWAN
   Email:  Mailto:arnie@iastate.edu
  Postal:  Iowa State University
           Department of Finance
           Carver Hall
           Ames, IA 50011-2063  USA
   Phone:  515-294-8112
 Co-Auth:  JANN C. HOWELL
   Email:  Mailto:jhowell@iastate.edu
  Postal:  Iowa State University
           Department of Finance
           Carver Hall
           Ames, IA 50011-2063  USA
 Co-Auth:  MARK L. POWER
   Email:  Mailto:mpower@iastate.edu
  Postal:  Iowa State University
           Department of Finance
           Carver Hall
           Ames, IA 50011-2063  USA

ABSTRACT:
 We examine wealth effects, for banks and insurers, of bank
 rights to sell and underwrite annuities. The stock-price
 reactions to four court and regulatory decisions are consistent
 with expectations of bank gains at insurers' expense.
 Cross-sectionally, smaller, riskier insurers with higher
 distribution costs and substantial annuity business sustain
 larger wealth losses. Larger, riskier bank holding companies
 with fee-based and consumer business gain most, consistent with
 the extension of federal safety-net guarantees as a source of
 gains. Banking stock-price reactions to the Supreme Court's
 decision are opposite other findings, possibly reflecting
 unfulfilled expectations of a broader mandate for expanded bank
 rights.

 Keywords: Annuities, VALIC, financial modernization,
 deregulation, deposit insurance, Blackfeet National Bank, event
 studies


JEL Classification: G21, G22, G28, G14, L51
______________________________

"The German Social Market in the World of Global Finance: Pension
 Investment Management and the Limits of Consensual Decision
 Making"

      BY:  GORDON LESLIE CLARK
              University of Oxford
              School of Geography
           DANIEL MANSFIELD
              University of Bristol
              School of Geographical Sciences
           ADAM TICKELL
              University of Bristol
              School of Geographical Sciences

Document:  Available from the SSRN Electronic Paper Collection:
           http://papers.ssrn.com/paper.taf?abstract_id=238701

    Date:  August 1, 2000

 Contact:  GORDON LESLIE CLARK
   Email:  Mailto:gordon.clark@geog.ox.ac.uk
  Postal:  University of Oxford
           School of Geography
           Mansfield Road
           Oxford OX1 3TB,    UK
   Phone:  +44 1865 271928
     Fax:  +44 1865 271940
 Co-Auth:  DANIEL MANSFIELD
   Email:  not available
  Postal:  University of Bristol
           School of Geographical Sciences
           University Road
           Bristol BS8 1SS,    UNITED KINGDOM
 Co-Auth:  ADAM TICKELL
   Email:  not available
  Postal:  University of Bristol
           School of Geographical Sciences
           University Road
           Bristol BS8 1SS,    UNITED KINGDOM

ABSTRACT:
 In a previous paper we emphasised the changing national and
 international accounting standards used to measure net pension
 liability. Beginning with the implications of this analysis for
 the financing of German employer-sponsored pensions, in this
 paper we focus upon the internal management of corporate pension
 assets and liabilities. Two issues drive the analysis. One has
 to do with the emerging coalescence of interests joining
 corporate management and shareholders in relation to the
 management of pension assets and liabilities. The second issue
 has to do with the allocation of risk and uncertainty between
 social partners when negotiating the financing and final value
 of promised retirement income. We analyse the importance of
 workers' risk aversion and the widely-held goal of stable
 long-term real incomes for the management of pension assets. In
 the context of global financial markets, we suggest that the
 institutional framework of investment decision making common to
 many of Germany's largest firms is under considerable pressure;
 three models of investment decision making relevant to pension
 assets and liabilities are used to illustrate this point.
 Contrasts are drawn with competing systems of corporate
 governance, noting the incorporation of pension financing into
 Anglo-American corporate treasuries. Implications are drawn with
 respect to the changing status of German employer-sponsored
 supplementary pensions in relation to debate over the future of
 social security and social insurance.


JEL Classification: G23, G28, L33
______________________________

"How Much is Investor Autonomy Worth?"

      BY:  SHLOMO BENARTZI
              University of California at Los Angeles
           RICHARD H. THALER
              University of Chicago
              National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER)

Document:  Available from the SSRN Electronic Paper Collection:
           http://papers.ssrn.com/paper.taf?abstract_id=294857

           Other Electronic Document Delivery:
           http://www.afajof.org/prog2002.shtml
           SSRN only offers technical support for papers
           downloaded from the SSRN Electronic Paper Collection
           location. When URLs wrap, you must copy and paste
           them into your browser eliminating all spaces.

Paper ID:  AFA 2002 Atlanta Meetings
    Date:  March 2001

 Contact:  SHLOMO BENARTZI
   Email:  Mailto:shlomo.benartzi@anderson.ucla.edu
  Postal:  University of California at Los Angeles
           Anderson Graduate School of Management
           Box 951481
           405 Hilgard Avenue
           Box 951361
           Los Angeles, CA 90095-1361  USA
   Phone:  310-206-9939
     Fax:  310-267-2193
 Co-Auth:  RICHARD H. THALER
   Email:  Mailto:richard.thaler@gsb.uchicago.edu
  Postal:  University of Chicago
           Room 205D
           1126 East 59th Street
           Chicago, IL 60637  USA

ABSTRACT:
 There is a worldwide trend towards increasing investor autonomy.
 Investors are increasingly able to pick their own portfolios.
 How good a job are they doing? We present individuals saving for
 retirement with information about the distribution of outcomes
 they could expect from the portfolios they picked and also the
 median portfolio selected by their peers. A majority of our
 survey participants actually prefer the median portfolio to the
 one they picked for themselves. Furthermore, we find that a
 majority of investors who preferred to form their own portfolio
 rather than accept one that was picked for them by a
 professional investment manager, preferred the distribution of
 returns implied by the suggested portfolio to the one they
 selected on their own. We investigate various alternatives to
 these findings and offer some evidence to support the view that
 part of the results are attributable to the fact that investors
 do not have well-defined preferences.

______________________________

"Behavioral Finance and Investor Governance"

      BY:  LAWRENCE A. CUNNINGHAM
              Yeshiva University, Benjamin Cardozo School of Law

Document:  Available from the SSRN Electronic Paper Collection:
           http://papers.ssrn.com/paper.taf?abstract_id=255778

Paper ID:  Cardozo Law School, Public Law Research Paper No. 32
    Date:  January 2001

 Contact:  LAWRENCE A. CUNNINGHAM
   Email:  Mailto:cunning@ymail.yu.edu
  Postal:  Yeshiva University, Benjamin Cardozo School of Law
           55 Fifth Ave.
           New York, NY 10003  USA
   Phone:  212-790-0435
     Fax:  212-790-0205

ABSTRACT:
 The efficient market hypothesis is a special case in finance. It
 explains only tiny fractions of observed phenomena. Perhaps its
 major contribution is a formal definition of an ideal market
 world, to which policy formulations may be directed and against
 which they can be measured. Indeed, it seems unlikely that the
 infirmities of market action ever will be so minuscule as to
 render the EMH more than a special case, though it may explain
 more in the future than it does now. However things evolve,
 during the evolutionary course the shackles of the EMH should be
 unloosed from corporate and investing culture.

 Part I presents behavioral finance as to how prices of stocks
 are formed–including a theoretical framework, empirical
 evidence, and psychological explanations. It integrates these
 materials into a model of market and investor behavior that can
 be used as a lens through which to analyze a wide variety of
 legal rules and policies bearing on market regulation and
 corporate governance. Part II is a series of prescriptions on
 the implications of this account relating to investor
 governance. It starts with a proposal to promote and expand
 investor education concerning the cognitive biases behavioral
 finance exposes. It proceeds to introduce and propose reforms in
 three critical areas of law and policy that this model impacts:
 (1) the market regulatory environment in which investors
 participate, including suitability and churning rules and
 policies relating to day trading, margin trading, and circuit
 breakers; (2) the legal duties of boards of directors in making
 capital allocation decisions such as equity offerings, dividend
 distributions and stock acquisitions; and (3) issues in
 corporate and securities litigation, principally the reliance
 requirement in securities fraud cases and the stock market
 exception to the appraisal remedy in cash out mergers.

 The efficient market idea turns out to be an aspiration worth
 pursuing, but one never likely to be realized. These proposals
 and prescriptions therefore operate both to push the reality
 toward the ideal and to deal with the gap that will persist. The
 article has a major public policy subtext too, at stake in the
 discussion of how prices are formed is the overarching question
 of capital allocation. Society is better off in terms of
 aggregate wealth when its resources are allocated to those best
 able to deploy them. Investors allocating capital based on
 rational calculation will produce that result, while those
 allocating based on sentiment will not.

 A word on methodology concludes the piece concerning where the
 piece fits in the bourgeoning legal literature drawing on
 behavioral social science. Throughout the intellectual history
 and genealogy of behavioral finance, legal scholars with a
 social science inclination have drawn on various strands of
 thought pioneered in these fields, importing the work of the
 cognitive psychologists, principally behavioral decision theory
 (which they call BDT). Concerns of the lead importers center on
 the usefulness of BDT to legal scholarship and policymaking
 generally include whether all it will do is furnish criticism of
 law and economics and fail to offer its own positive theories of
 law or normative prescriptions. Whatever power BDT has for legal
 scholarship in general, this Article should leave no doubt that
 it furnishes a positive theory of market behavior quite
 different than that of efficiency (imported and promoted by some
 law and economics devotees) and that this theory carries with it
 substantial normative implications for law and legal policy in
 the fields of securities and corporate law.