With the growth of the number of international crosslistings during the 1990s, a number of researchers asked whether there are net benefits not only to the firms making the choice to list overseas but also to other firms from the same country, to the vitality of the local capital markets, and to the economies as a whole. There are two competing views. As a positive externality, the growth of cross-listings can represent a catalyst for greater integration
with global markets, attracting the attention of global investors, and thereby bringing greater visibility, credibility, and enhanced liquidity to local markets. The alternative view implies a negative externality, so that international cross-listings divert investment flows and trading activity away from local markets, which leads, in turn, to increased fragmentation, segmentation from global markets, and an overall deterioration in quality. Hargis and Ramanlal (1998) were the first to develop a model of the impact of international cross-listing on domestic market liquidity and trading volume. Their model predicts that the overall level of corporate transparency in the market matters: waves of cross-listings from smaller, less liquid markets, and those with greater foreign ownership restrictions in place should be associated with the greatest improvement in domestic market quality.