PurposeWhile regulators and policymakers are interested in promoting banking competition for economic welfare gains, the franchise value hypothesis argues that increased banking competition leads to increased credit risk exposure. It is against this dilemma that this study relies on the credit information sharing regulation (CISR) and additionally takes advantage of the introduction of credit information sharing in Ghana to test how credit information sharing regulation regime has influenced the increasing effect of banking competition on bank credit risk.Design/methodology/approachThis study uses a battery of estimation techniques of 29 banks covering periods between 2000 and 2020 and additionally controls for year and technological effects.FindingsThe findings show that improved competition worsens credit risk, while CISRR lowers bank credit risk. The joint term of banking competition and CISRR has significant negative effect on credit risk while the net effect computation shows that under CISRR the positive contribution of competition to credit risk is reduced. These results suggest that policymakers in the pursuit of banking competitiveness must do so consciously because it can worsen bank credit risk. Similarly, while these results imply that regulators and bank managers can rely on CISR to tame credit risk directly, CISR can also suppress the positive effect of competition to credit risk.Research limitations/implicationsThis study is focused on and limited to Ghana as an African emerging economy using 29 banks between 2000 and 2020. Hence, the findings are limited to Ghana and other African economies with similar features like Ghana. From a theoretical perspective, the study establishes that the franchise value hypothesis explains the competition-credit risk nexus while noting that credit information sharing as supported by the information sharing theory tames the positive contribution of competition to credit risk exposure of banks in Ghana.Practical implicationsThe results suggest that policymakers in the pursuit of banking competitiveness must do so consciously because it can worsen bank credit risk. Similarly, while these results imply that regulators and bank managers can rely on CISR to tame credit risk directly, CISR can also suppress the positive effect of competition to credit risk. This calls for regulators and policymakers to enact laws that deepen and expand the coverage of CISR to improve the quality and depth of information shared among banks/lenders as doing so can improve the predictive power and screening abilities of banks for credit risk reduction.Originality/valueThis study provides first time evidence on how credit information sharing regulation can lower the positive effect of competition on credit risk in an African emerging economy setup.
PurposeThis study aims to investigate whether professional financial traders predominantly perceive their decision-making processes as rational or intuitive. Although recent scholarship has increasingly acknowledged the intuitive nature of financial market decisions, it was hypothesized that traders may persist in identifying their decisions as analytical, potentially due to entrenched industry conventions. This study further aims to assess whether traders attribute greater positive value to rational decision-making relative to intuitive decisions. Additionally, this study explores the extent to which traders' perceptions are informed by the culturally pervasive construct of hegemonic masculinity, wherein financial markets are symbolically associated with gendered norms of aggression, competitiveness and rationality.Design/methodology/approachTrader perception of decision-making was explored through interviews with 14 professional financial traders working in the City of London. Interviews were analyzed through a content analysis and a discourse analysis.FindingsTraders view their decision-making as significantly more rational than intuitive. Rational decisions were viewed significantly more positively than intuition. Traders may "valorize" rationality because of the construction of hegemonic masculinity in their accounts.Originality/valueThis research is the first investigation into financial traders' perceptions of both rationality and intuition within the context of decision-making. The findings reveal a tendency among traders to characterize their decisions as rational, even when presented with opportunities to acknowledge the significance of intuitive processes. One explanation for this preference considered here is the cultural association between rationality and hegemonic masculinity. These insights advance our understanding of the enduring appeal of rationality in traders' perception of their decision-making, highlighting the persistence of these beliefs despite potential misalignment with actual decision-making practices.
Autistic people are overrepresented among people experiencing homelessness, and better recognition of autism may improve access to homelessness services. This study examined whether staff working in homelessness services identify autism in service users. A total of 203 staff working with people experiencing homelessness in the UK completed an online survey in which they were asked to identify a mental health or neurodevelopmental condition from five vignettes co-developed with experts by experience. Participants were most accurate at identifying more traditional presentations of autism and least accurate at identifying Emotionally Unstable Personality Disorder (EUPD). Personal or professional connection to, and experience with, autism did not predict accuracy or whether participants said they would make adaptations. These findings suggest that recognition of more nuanced presentations of autism needs to improve. Future research should examine how adaptations are implemented in practice and how service users experience those adaptations.
The development of artificial intelligence and the growing use of algorithms to optimize prices have generated significant debate about their benefits and potential adverse effects on competition and consumers. Two key issues dominate this discussion: algorithmic price discrimination through personalized pricing and algorithmic tacit collusion. Although the risks associated with algorithmic tacit collusion have been extensively studied, the potential harms from algorithmic price discrimination remain underexplored. This article examines algorithmic price discrimination from an EU perspective and whether the current EU competition law framework is adequate to tackle algorithmic price discrimination that harms consumers. It argues for robust competition law enforcement under Article 102(a) Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to ensure that algorithmic pricing does not become a tool for exploitative abuse in the digital economy.
Purpose The purpose of this study is to comparatively examine how different blockchain consensus mechanisms – Proof-of-Work (PoW) and Proof-of-Stake (PoS), including the transition from PoW to PoS – shape sustainability, scalability and governance outcomes in enterprise-relevant blockchain networks. By analysing Bitcoin, Ethereum and Cardano using a mixed-methods design, the study moves beyond single-metric evaluations and provides an integrated socio-technical assessment of consensus architecture. In doing so, it contributes to theory, practice and policy by clarifying how consensus design choices influence the development of sustainable and resilient blockchain infrastructures. Design/methodology/approach This study adopts a mixed-methods, documentary comparative research design. It analyses Bitcoin (Proof-of-Work) and Ethereum (PoW-to-PoS transition) as primary empirical cases using secondary quantitative indicators (energy consumption, transaction throughput and finality) and qualitative document analysis of protocol and governance materials. Sustainability, scalability and governance are employed as analytical lenses to guide cross-case comparison. Qualitative data are examined through structured thematic coding to contextualise quantitative trends. Findings The findings indicate that Proof-of-Stake delivers substantial sustainability and scalability advantages over Proof-of-Work. Ethereum's transition to PoS resulted in a reduction in energy consumption of over 99%, while enabling gradual improvements in transaction throughput and settlement finality relative to Bitcoin's static baseline. However, these performance gains are accompanied by governance trade-offs, including risks of validator concentration and delegator passivity. The analysis suggests that although PoS improves environmental and operational efficiency, its long-term effectiveness depends on governance mechanisms capable of preserving decentralisation and accountability. Research limitations/implications First, it relies primarily on secondary data and documentary sources, which may not fully capture real-time network dynamics or evolving governance practices. Second, the comparative analysis focuses on a limited set of major blockchain networks – Bitcoin, Ethereum and Cardano – which constrains the generalisability of the findings to other platforms with different consensus architectures. Despite these limitations, the study provides important implications for researchers, practitioners and policymakers by highlighting the central role of consensus design in shaping sustainability, scalability and governance outcomes. Future research could extend this framework to additional blockchain platforms, incorporate primary stakeholder interviews and employ real-time network telemetry to refine performance and energy-consumption assessments. Practical implications The findings offer actionable guidance for blockchain developers, enterprises and policymakers. Developers should prioritise energy-efficient consensus designs and implement governance mechanisms that mitigate validator concentration. Enterprises seeking scalable and sustainable blockchain solutions may benefit from PoS-based networks that offer lower operational costs and faster transaction finality. For policymakers, the results highlight the importance of regulatory frameworks that incentivise energy-efficient blockchain infrastructures while safeguarding decentralisation, transparency and open participation across staking and governance systems. Social implications The transition from energy-intensive Proof-of-Work to Proof-of-Stake consensus mechanisms has broader social implications for trust, participation and digital inclusion in blockchain ecosystems. Reduced energy consumption addresses public concerns around environmental harm and social legitimacy of blockchain technologies. However, PoS systems may introduce participation inequalities if staking requirements favour wealthier actors. These findings highlight the importance of inclusive governance designs that promote broad validator participation, transparency and accountability, ensuring that sustainability gains do not come at the expense of decentralisation or equitable access to blockchain-based infrastructures. Originality/value This study provides an original comparative assessment of blockchain consensus mechanisms by integrating sustainability, scalability and governance within a single analytical framework. Unlike prior research that often examines energy efficiency or performance in isolation, the study combines quantitative benchmarking with qualitative governance analysis to reveal the socio-technical trade-offs associated with Proof-of-Stake adoption. By analysing a PoW-to-PoS transition alongside a mature PoW system and drawing on PoS-native platforms in the literature as comparative reference points, the article offers new insights into how consensus design choices shape the long-term viability of enterprise-relevant blockchain networks.
