Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Acknowledgements
- Table of cases
- Table of legislation
- 1 Introduction
- PART 1 Theories of corporate governance
- PART 2 Supranational regulatory techniques
- 4 Harmonisation
- 5 Negative integration
- 6 Variety and integration: reflexive corporate governance regulation
- PART 3 EC regulation of corporate governance
- 11 Conclusion: the genius of EC corporate governance regulation
- Bibliography
- Index
- References
6 - Variety and integration: reflexive corporate governance regulation
from PART 2 - Supranational regulatory techniques
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 04 August 2010
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Acknowledgements
- Table of cases
- Table of legislation
- 1 Introduction
- PART 1 Theories of corporate governance
- PART 2 Supranational regulatory techniques
- 4 Harmonisation
- 5 Negative integration
- 6 Variety and integration: reflexive corporate governance regulation
- PART 3 EC regulation of corporate governance
- 11 Conclusion: the genius of EC corporate governance regulation
- Bibliography
- Index
- References
Summary
Introduction
The EC's historical approach to corporate governance regulation was discussed at length in the previous two chapters. Community law still has to deal with the various situations where market integration remains restricted by means of harmonisation. Although it now plays a smaller role in market integration, it is still required in precisely those areas in which political agreement is very difficult, because what is at stake – employee participation and productive coalition corporate governance – is viewed as a public good in some Member States.
Reflexive law has offered a way forward, or at least offers an ex post rationalisation of the political compromises which have been reached in this area. Theories of reflexive regulation explain how EC law has been able to further market integration without undermining national regulatory diversity. Its advocates claim that reflexive law is capable of ‘regulating systems of regulation that otherwise would be impossible to regulate’. Its non-prescriptive nature means that no choice has to be made between shareholder and stakeholder models of corporate governance, which in turn allows the political obstacles to agreement on common rules to be avoided. The regulator does not have to choose between traditional full harmonisation of corporate governance and unrestrained regulatory competition. If appropriate procedures can be designed, the efficiency advantages of regulatory competition, in terms of experimentation and (perhaps) regulatory diversity, can be combined with the capacity of regulation to solve market failures, and all this without requiring ex ante instrumental action and unbounded knowledge of the regulatory context on the part of the supranational regulator.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- EC Regulation of Corporate Governance , pp. 214 - 244Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2009
References
, ‘Regulatory Competition Versus Harmonization in European Company Law’, in and (eds.), Regulatory Competition and Economic Integration: Comparative Perspectives (Oxford University Press, 2001) at 209–13Google Scholar
, ‘Two Types of Regulatory Competition: Competitive Federalism Versus Reflexive Harmonization: a Law and Economics Perspective on Centros’ (1999) Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ‘The Autopoietic Approach and Its Form’, in and (eds.), State, Law and Economy as Autopoietic Systems (Milan: Giuffre, 1992) at 30Google Scholar
, ‘Spaces and Places: a Systems Theory Approach to Regulatory Competition in European Company Law’ (2006) 12 European Law Journal534CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ‘Reflexive Governance and European Company Law’ (2007) CLPE Research Paper 20/2007 Vol. 3 No. 4 at 7Google Scholar
, ‘Proceduralisation and its Use in a Post-modern Legal Policy’, in , and (eds.), Governance in the European Union (Brussels: Cahiers of the Forward Studies Unit, European Commission, 2001) at 56Google Scholar
, ‘Law and Social Change: the Semi-autonomous Social Field as an Appropriate Subject of Study’ (1973) 7 Law & Society Review719CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ‘What is Legal Pluralism?’ (1986) 24 Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law1 at 26–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, Fundamental Principles of the Sociology of Law (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1936)Google Scholar
, ‘Juridification: Concepts, Aspects, Limits, Solutions’, in (ed.), Juridification of Social Spheres: a Comparative Analysis in the Areas of Labor, Corporate, Antitrust, and Social Welfare Law (Berlin: De Gruyter, 1987) at 21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ‘How the Law Thinks – Toward a Constructivist Epistemology of Law’ (1989) 23 Law & Society Review727 at 730CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ‘Enterprise Corporatism – New Industrial-Policy and the Essence of the Legal Person’ (1988) 36 American Journal of Comparative Law130 at 137–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and , ‘Organizations as Distinction Generating and Processing Systems: Niklas Luhmann's Contribution to Organization Studies’ (2006) 13 Organization9 at 15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ‘Economics of Gift – Positivity of Justice: the Mutual Paranoia of Jacques Derrida and Niklas Luhmann’ (2001) 18 Theory Culture Society29 at 41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ‘Self-subversive Justice: Contingency or Transcendence Formula of Law’ (2009) Modern Law Review1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and , ‘An Evolutionary Approach to Law and Economics’, in (ed.), Evolutionary Concepts in Contemporary Economics (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1994)Google Scholar
, ‘The Two Faces of Janus: Rethinking Legal Pluralism’ (1992) 13 Cardozo Law Review1443 at 1453Google Scholar
, ‘Legal Irritants: Good Faith in British Law or How Unifying Law Ends up in New Divergences’ (1998) 61 Modern Law Review11 at 12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ‘Corporate Fiduciary Duties and their Beneficiaries: a Functional Approach to Legal Institutionalization of Corporate Responsibility’, in and (eds.), Corporate Governance and Directors' Liabilities: Legal, Economic and Sociological Analyses on Corporate Social Responsibility (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1985) at 159Google Scholar
, ‘Company Interest: the Public Interest of the Enterprise “in Itself”’, in and (eds.), Reflexive Labour Law (Deventer: Kluwer Law International, 1994) at 33Google Scholar
and , ‘Perspectives on Corporate Governance, Innovation and Economic Performance’, in and (eds.), Corporate Governance, Innovation and Economic Performance in the EU (Paris: European Institute of Business Administration (INSEAD), 2000)Google Scholar
and , ‘Introduction to Varieties of Capitalism’, in and (eds.), Varieties of Capitalism (Oxford University Press, 2001) at 38–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ‘The Concept of Reflexive Labour Law: its Theoretical Background and Possible Applications’, in and (eds.), Law's New Boundaries: the Consequences of Legal Autopoiesis (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2001)Google Scholar
, ‘Substantive and Reflexive Elements in Modern Law’ (1983) 17 Law & Society Review239 at 269 and 275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ‘Proceduralizing Regulation: Part I’ (2000) 20 Oxford Journal of Legal Studies597 at 606CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ‘Reflexive Law in Support of Directly Deliberative Polyarchy: Reflexive-deliberative Polyarchy as a Normative Frame for the OMC’, in and (eds.), Social Rights and Market Forces: Is the Open Co-ordination of Employment and Social Policies the Future of Social Europe? (Brussels: Bruylant, 2005)Google Scholar
, ‘From an Incentive to a Reflexive Approach to Corporate Governance’, in and (eds.), Corporate Governance: an Institutionalist Approach (The Hague: Kluwer Law International, 2003)Google Scholar
and , Toward a Theory of Governance: the Action of Norms (London: Kluwer Law International, 2003)Google Scholar
and , ‘Developing New Modes of Governance’ (2000) Working Paper of the Forward Studies Unit, European CommissionGoogle Scholar
and , ‘Beyond Neo-institutionalist and Pragmatist Approaches to Governance’ (2006) Reflexive Governance in the Public Interest Working Paper Series REFGOV-SGI/TNU-1 at 9Google Scholar
and , ‘A Constitution of Democratic Experimentalism’ (1998) 98 Columbia Law Review267 at 284–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and , ‘“Soft Law”, “Hard Law”, and European Integration: Toward a Theory of Hybridity’ (2005) University of Wisconsin Legal Studies Research Paper No. 1002 at 9–11Google Scholar
, ‘Integration through De-legalisation? An Irritated Heckler’ (2007) European Governance Papers (EUROGOV)Google Scholar
and , Responsive Regulation: Transcending the Deregulation Debate (Oxford University Press, 1992)Google Scholar
, ‘Law after the Welfare State: Formalism, Functionalism and the Ironic Turn of Reflexive Law’ (2008) Comparative Research in Law and Political Economy Research Paper13/2008Google Scholar
, ‘Competition as a Discovery Procedure’ (2002) 5 Quarterly Journal of Austrian EconomicsGoogle Scholar
, ‘Expanding the Constitution Beyond the Court: the Case of Euro-constitutionalism’ (2002) 8 European Law Journal172 at 180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and , ‘European Corporate Laws, Regulatory Competition and Path Dependence’ (2002) 13 European Journal of Law and Economics at 52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ‘Empirical Evidence and Economic Comments on Board Structure in Germany’, in , , , and (eds.), Comparative Corporate Governance: the State of the Art and Emerging Research (Oxford University Press, 1998) at 261–2Google Scholar
, and , ‘Corporate Governance and Control’ (2002) NBER Working Paper9371, December 2002 at 53Google Scholar
, ‘In-between Worlds: Marleasing and the Emergence of Interlegality in Legal Reasoning’ (2005) 11 European Law Journal766 at 775CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and , ‘Directly Deliberative Polyarchy: an Institutional Ideal for Europe?’ in and (eds.), Good Governance in Europe's Intergrated Market (Oxford University Press, 2002)Google Scholar
and , ‘Reflexive Governance: Some Clarifications and an Extension and Deepening of the Fourth (Genetic) Approach’ (2007) Reflexive Governance in the Public Interest Working Paper Series REFGOV-SGI-TNU-2 at 7Google Scholar
, ‘Vive la Différence: Exploring the Legal Framework for Reflexive Harmonization within the Single European Market’, in and (eds.), Annual of German and European Law (New York: Berghahn Books, 2003), Vol. 1Google Scholar
, ‘Experimental Governance: the Open Method of Co-ordination’ (2006) 12 European Law Journal486 at 488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and , ‘New Governance, EU Employment Policy, and the European Social Model’, in and (eds.), Governing Work and Welfare in a New Economy: European and American Experiments (Oxford University Press, 2003) at 21Google Scholar
, EU Intervention in Domestic Labour Law (Oxford University Press, 2007) at 147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ‘Maastricht: a Fundamental Change in European Labour Law’ (1992) 23 Industrial Relations Journal185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ‘Works Councils: Towards Stakeholding?’ (1997) 24 Journal of Law and Society44 at 54CrossRefGoogle Scholar