JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
In this paper, three instruments for empowering small, individual shareholders are compared: proxy investing, proxy voting institutions and infomediaries. The working of each instrument is discussed with special emphasis on the problems of information gathering and coalition forming. Subsequently, each instrument is analysed with respect to appropriateness, costs and effectiveness. No instrument turns out to be clearly superior to the others. Although proxy investing is the most popular concept among small (individual) shareholders at present, the long-run potential of proxy voting institutions and infomediaries may be higher. Since more research could be helpful to establish which of these two options is best, both non-profit organisations and governments could in the meantime stimulate experiments with proxy voting institutions and infomediaries for small shareholders. Copyright (c) 2006 The Authors; Journal compilation (c) 2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
This paper discusses a new system of firm governance. In the system, the responsibility for voting the shares of a firm (“voice”) is given to the people who ultimately provided the money, who, however, have to delegate it to proxy voting institutions. The system helps overcome collective action problems and conflicts of interest within firms, and it reduces the private benefits of control. The disadvantages for firm governance may be relatively modest. However, since the new system of voice is a conceptual innovation, the analysis of its effects is rather tentative. Further research and experimentations are required for firmer conclusions.corporate governance, collective action, shareholder democracy, “voice”,
The existing instruments for improving the competitive balance within a sports league, such as revenue sharing, restrictions on free agency and salary caps, all have their shortcomings. In this paper, we show that a progressive sports tax, the revenues of which are not redistributed to smaller teams in the league, could be a better instrument. From the broader perspective of the theory of optimum taxation, this instrument may have advantages as well. Copyright (c) Scottish Economic Society 2005.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.