To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Chapter 2 assesses dominant corporate theories and norms such as shareholder primacy and shareholder wealth maximisation through the lens of climate change. It describes the ascent to dominance of these theories through the historical diversification of shareholder ownership and issue of agency costs. It highlights the three major negative contributions these theories have made to the issue of climate change: the elevation of the interests of shareholders to the detriment of non-shareholders, the fostering on a short-term approach to profit-making and finally the externalization of greenhouse gas emissions. The chapter then assesses competing theories of the corporate form which focus on stakeholder interests and the company as an entity, and how these theories provide a more holistic and appropriate model of the company in the context of climate change. The chapter concludes with the UK enlightened shareholder value approach and the US shareholder-centric approach to company law. While the United States has a more entrenched version of these dominant corporate theories such as shareholder wealth maximisation, even in this jurisdiction recent developments such as the Business Roundtable statement in 2019 illustrate discursive movements away from a shareholder-centric approach in the business world.
This introductory chapter frames the issue of companies and their role in the climate crisis. It lays out the science of climate change and the causal connection between the historic and present contributions of companies to climate change through their greenhouse gas emissions. The chapter highlights the global temperature goals under the Paris Agreement and the consequential emission reductions it necessitates. This chapter also introduces some key concepts in company law theory such as shareholder primacy and shareholder wealth maximization and their role in Anglo-American company law. The chapter provides an explanation of a number of corporate forms, including traditional for-profit corporate models (both private and public) as well as a variety of hybrid and social enterprise forms. The imperatives of profit making, as illustrated by dominant corporate norms, are relevant (in varying degrees) to all of these corporate forms. The chapter concludes with a summary of systemic barriers of short-termism as well as opportunities such as corporate social responsibility and societal expectations which surround companies in the context of climate change, and why the United Kingdom is used as a model jurisdiction.
This Element aims to connect the literature of street-level bureaucrats with that of policy entrepreneurship in order to analyze why and how bureaucrats operating at the street level can promote policy change in public administration at the individual level. I demonstrate how street-level bureaucrats act as policy entrepreneurs in different contexts around the globe to promote policy change and analyze what they think of policy entrepreneurship and what they do about it in practice. For this purpose, I use multiple research methods: a survey, in-depth interviews, focus groups and textual analyses. I also offer recommendations to decision-makers to promote street-level policy entrepreneurship, highlighting the benefits of doing so. Lastly, I critically discuss the normative aspects of street-level policy entrepreneurship: ultimately, is it desirable?
This article uses philosopher Miranda Fricker’s work on epistemic injustice to shed light on the legal concept of the fiduciary, alongside demonstrating the wider contribution Fricker’s work can make to business ethics. Fiduciary, from the Latin fīdūcia, meaning “trust,” plays a fundamental role in all financial and business organisations: it acts as a moral safeguard of the relationship between trustee and beneficiary. The article focuses on the ethics of the fiduciary, but from a unique historical perspective, referring back to the original formulation of the fiduciary within a familial context to investigate presuppositions regarding agential capabilities, whilst also paying attention to the power mechanism embedded in the trustee–beneficiary relationship. Using Fricker’s theory of pre-emptive testimonial injustice, the analysis elucidates the impact of cumulative beneficiary silencing in contemporary contexts, and the article uncovers ethical issues of an epistemological kind at the core of the fiduciary—of epistemic injustice.
The interaction between product market competition, R&D investment, and the financing choices of R&D-intensive firms on the development of innovative products is only partially understood. We hypothesize that as competition increases, R&D-intensive firms will: i) increase R&D investment relative to existing assets in place; ii) carry more cash; and iii) maintain less net debt. Using the Hatch–Waxman Act as an exogenous shock to competition, we provide causal evidence supporting these hypotheses through a differences-in-differences analysis that exploits differences between the biopharma industry and other industries, and heterogeneity within the biopharma industry. We also explore how these changes affect innovative output.
In 1538–39 Francisco de Vitoria delivered two relections: De Indis and De iure belli. This article distills from these writings the topic of free trade as a “human right” in accordance with ius gentium or the “law of peoples.” The right to free trade is rooted in a more fundamental right to communication and association. The rights to travel, to dwell, and to migrate precede the right to trade, which is also closely connected to the rights to preach, to protect converts, and to constitute Christian princes. This has significant repercussions on the field of business ethics: the right to free trade is ultimately founded directly on natural law and indirectly on divine law; trade is not independent of ethics; and trade is presented as an opportunity to develop the virtues of justice and friendship, among other repercussions. Vitoria is portrayed as a defender of private initiative and free markets.
Theory says an American call should never be exercised early, except possibly just before an ex-dividend date. But the best market bid is regularly lower than the intrinsic value for in-the-money short-maturity options. An American option can always be exercised to recover the intrinsic value, whereas selling a European call in the market may return considerably less. The article derives the liquidity value of American exercise in closed form as a function of the bid–ask spread and shows empirically that it is of comparable magnitude to, and often greater than, the theoretical value of American exercise to collect a dividend.
In this perspective article, I draw on transition research that has been developed to account for the transitions in many socio-technical systems within human society, such as energy, water, and food. I argue that many ideas developed in transition research can be applied to the ecosystem of contemporary business schools in China for its transformation. Using the multi-level perspective (MLP) from transition research as an analytic framework, I examine the socio-technical system of business schools in China for understanding the main forces that may shape a potential transition of the sector. I also draw on transition management theory and insights from research on the politics of transitions for important conditions that are required to enable a transition in this specific context.
Pursuing ambidextrous foreign direct investment (FDI) has been suggested as a desirable strategic choice of emerging economy (EE) firms in their internationalization. Yet, reconciling explorative and exploitative activities overseas is complicated due to their conflicting and tensional nature. This study explores why some EE firms can achieve high levels of ambidextrous FDI while others cannot. Drawing on upper echelons theory, we propose a micro-foundation perspective of ambidextrous FDI by studying top management teams’ (TMTs) attributes. Applying a configurational approach to a sample of 294 EE firms’ FDI observations (of which 43 are ambidextrous FDI in nature) from 2011 to 2015, we not only confirm the equal importance of both TMT incentive and cognitive factors as causal conditions to achieve a high degree of ambidextrous FDI, but also provide original evidence on the interactive configurations of those factors that lead to ambidextrous FDI.
The COVID-19 has grandly shaken all organizations, creating a complex and challenging environment for managers and human resource management (HRM) practitioners, who need to find ingenious solutions to ensure the continuity of their companies and to help their employees to cope with this extraordinary crisis. Studies addressing the impact of this crisis on HRM are sparse. This paper is a general literature review, which aims at broadening the scope of management research, by exploring the impact of the COVID-19 on HRM. It identifies the main challenges and opportunities that have arisen from this new pandemic and it offers insights for managers and HRM practitioners into possible future organizational directions that might arise from these opportunities.
Miami Beach was the nation’s premier winter resort between the 1930s and the 1950s. The city attracted a diverse crowd of visitors, some interested in a peaceful respite from the frigid north, others drawn by the drinking, dancing, and musical entertainment offered by its many bars and nightclubs. As part of an elaborate effort to sustain the city’s lively symbiotic urban leisure-services economy, the Miami Beach City Council addressed three types of market failures: chaotic competition, interproducer conflicts, and monopolistic business practices. This article demonstrates how these practices expressed a coherent vernacular philosophy of regulated capitalism arising from the city’s identity as a collective economic enterprise.
The idea of assessing the costs and benefits of public and private projects is not new to Europe, dating back to studies at the Ecole des Ponts et Chaussees (Paris) in the XIX century. Later on, in the last century, Benefit-Cost Analysis (BCA) in its current form has been more extensively used in the United States than in Europe. In the last two decades, however, there has been a rapid increase in its use in a number of European countries and at the European Union (EU) level. European governments often undertake tasks that would be done by private companies in the United States, such as the provision of transport, energy, water and waste management, health services, etc. In the United States the focus of BCA has often been regulatory impact analysis, rather than public project evaluation. One might, therefore, expect that Europeans might approach some things differently from their American counterparts and that new insights might result from these efforts. The articles in this symposium, taken from the recent European Society for Benefit-Cost Analysis (SBCA) conference in Toulouse, illustrate some of these differences and some converging themes.