We study a regulatory change that led to over 300 shareholder proposals to instate proxy access and more than 250 firms adopting proxy access from 2012 to 2016. The firms expected to benefit most from proxy access have the most positive market reaction to receiving a proposal, but adoptions are not concentrated at these firms. We find that proposing and voting shareholders do not discriminate between firms that would or would not benefit and that management resists proxy access at the firms that stand to benefit most. This process results in the concentration of adoptions at large, already-well-governed firms.

Fiscal deficits represent an important variable for banks’ aggregate credit risk, revealing governments’ ability to curb banks’ losses in bad states, either with direct cash infusions or with macroeconomic stabilization policies. Deteriorating deficits are associated with increasing financial distress of the banking sector and higher levels of loan-loss provisions. The effect is more pronounced for banks with a strong aversion to underprovisioning and is robust to a battery of tests and to the identification of fiscal shocks using military-spending data. This association represents an additional source of negative comovement between provisions and economic conditions, with implications for financial stability.

There is a widely held but scarcely challenged belief that most organizational changes fail, especially in mergers and acquisitions (M&A). Failure of M&A is often attributed to factors such as differences in organizational cultures, contested identities, perceived injustice, lack of trust, ineffective leadership and poor communication. A qualitative study was conducted in an acquiring company and two target companies to identify the criteria of a successful change, to explore perceptions of the degree of success of the acquisition(s) they had experienced, and to investigate the factors influencing these perceptions. The findings demonstrated that M&A can be considered successful when attention is paid, not only to integration of practices, but also to socio-cultural factors in managing M&A processes. The overall evaluation of these two acquisitions was that they had been successful. Implications for theory and practice include the possible differences between small- and large-scale M&A experiences.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) has regulated drinking water since the 1974 Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). Congress directed it to achieve three conflicting goals: (i) establish stringent nationwide standards, (ii) ensure that these standards are both technologically and economically feasible, and (iii) accommodate significant differences in cost among water systems of different sizes with different water sources. USEPA chose to emphasize goal (i) at the expense of (ii) and (iii). In 1986, Congress intensified its preference for (i), was silent concerning goal (ii), and criticized USEPA for failing to achieve goal (iii). In lieu of economic feasibility, the Agency substituted “affordability,” defined as expenditures up to 2.5 % of national median household income irrespective of the benefits. This imposed deadweight losses, and substantial inequities on rural areas, low-income communities, and low-income households generally. In 1996, Congress directed USEPA to use benefit-cost analysis positively and normatively. Regulations issued since 1996 do not appear to comply, however. A review of post-1996 drinking water standards indicates that most were certified by USEPA as having benefits that justified costs, but these determinations were unsupported by the Agency’s own regulatory impact analyses. This article proposes that USEPA define by regulation that “economic feasibility” means marginal benefits exceed marginal costs for the smallest water system subject to SDWA, and that all future drinking water standards must be economically feasible. Economic efficiency would be greatly enhanced and the pervasive inequities of “affordability” greatly diminished. Unlike “affordability,” this definition is objective and compatible with lay intuition about the meaning of key regulatory terms.

How do corporate bond mutual funds manage liquidity to meet investor redemptions? We show that during tranquil market conditions, these funds tend to reduce liquid asset holdings to meet redemptions, temporarily increasing relative exposures to illiquid asset classes. When aggregate uncertainty rises, however, they tend to scale down their liquid and illiquid assets proportionally to preserve portfolio liquidity. This fund-level dynamic management of liquidity appears to affect the broad financial market: Redemptions from the corporate bond fund sector lead to more corporate bond selling during high-uncertainty periods, which generates price pressures and predicts strong return reversals.

We use an exogenous event, namely, the spillover effects of Hurricane Katrina on corporate bonds through the liquidation of bond holdings by insurance companies, to study how companies react to temporary changes in the relative availability of bond and bank financing. We find that the negative shock on bonds induces firms to shift from bond financing to bank-based borrowing and to shorten the debt maturity. This shift in debt policy does not revert in the long term. There is no significant change in capital structure, suggesting that the substitution from bonds to bank loans is sufficient for the amount of borrowing.

The question of how to engage with stakeholders in situations of value conflict to create value that includes a plurality of conflicting stakeholder value perspectives represents one of the crucial current challenges of stakeholder engagement as well as of value creation stakeholder theory. To address this challenge, we conceptualize a discursive sharing process between affected stakeholders that is oriented toward discursive justification involving multiple procedural steps. This sharing process provides procedural guidance for firms and stakeholders to create pluralistic stakeholder value through the discursive accommodation of diverging stakeholder value perspectives. The outcomes of such a discursive value-sharing process range from stakeholder value dissensus to low (agreement to disagree) and increasing levels of stakeholder value congruence (value compromise) to stakeholder value consensus (shared values). Hence, this article contributes to the emerging literature on integrative stakeholder engagement by conceptualizing a procedural framework that is neither overly oriented towards dissensus nor consensus.

Publicly listed firms respond to capital supply conditions shaped by local investing preferences. Public firms headquartered in areas with higher proportions of senior citizens and women use more debt financing. These demographics are associated with conservative investing, leading to a higher and more stable local supply of debt capital. The demographics–leverage relation is more pronounced for firms that cannot easily tap public bond markets, which is the majority of public firms. Changes in firms’ financing activities around exogenous shocks to credit supplies, including interstate banking deregulation and the 2008–2009 financial crisis, support the local capital supply hypothesis.

In this article, I aim to clarify some key issues in the ongoing debate about the relationship between Rawlsian political philosophy and business ethics. First, I discuss precisely what we ought to be asking when we consider whether corporations are part of the “basic structure of society.” I suggest that the relevant questions have been mischaracterized in much of the existing debate, and that some key distinctions have been overlooked. I then argue that although Rawlsian theory’s potential implications for business ethics are more extensive than some have suggested, the nature of the concern that we ought to have about the effects of corporate behavior on individuals’ economic and social conditions should lead us to reject the view that corporations are bound by principles of justice only if, and insofar as, they are part of the basic structure.