Abstract
AbstractCorporate stewardship holds great promise for the improvement of shareholder engagement and the encouragement of more responsible and long-term oriented value creation. This is particularly true since the outbreak of the global COVID-19 pandemic. Many countries have long adopted a best practice code for the stewardship role of institutional investors and asset managers, but Germany has so far refused to follow that trend. This paper explores the reasons for this reluctance, as well as whether the adoption of a Stewardship Code would still make sense in the regulatory framework of Germany today. Despite the increased presence of shareholder engagement (and even activism), several reasons may be put forward for why lawmakers have refused to adopt a stewardship code. This paper argues that the main political reason for this reluctance lies in the limited geographical reach of such a code, which would primarily be restricted to the (limited) domestic fund industry and would thus be unable to prescribe any meaningful principles to foreign-based asset managers. Still, I argue that the adoption of a code in the German context may make sense, for example to define expectations and to clarify the obligations of investee companies. Most importantly, it would benefit domestic investors that are typically ‘home biased’ and thereby frequently disproportionately invested in domestic funds.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Law,Political Science and International Relations,Business and International Management
Reference130 articles.
1. Aghion P, Van Reenen J, Zingales L (2013) Innovation and institutional ownership. Am Econ Rev 103:277–304
2. Aguilera RV, Crespi-Cladera R (2016) Global corporate governance: on the relevance of firms’ ownership structure. J World Bus 51:50–57
3. Alvaro S, Maugeri M, Strampelli G (2019) Institutional investors, corporate governance and stewardship codes: problems and perspectives. January 2019. CONSOB Legal Papers No 19. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3393780. Accessed 6 Jan 2020
4. Antunes EJ et al (2011) Report of the reflection group on the future of EU Company Law. 5 April 2011. https://ssrn.com/abstract=1851654. Accessed 6 Jan 2020
5. Appel IA, Gormley TA, Keim DB (2016) Passive investors, not passive owners. J Financ Econ 121:111–144
Cited by
8 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献