Die Offenlegung von Management-Transaktionen: Stand der schweizerischen Regelung im internationalen Kontext

Für die an der SWX kotierten Unternehmen besteht seit dem 1. Juli 2005 die Pflicht, Transaktionen in Bezug auf Beteiligungsrechte des Emittenten, welche Angehörige von dessen Management durchführen, der SWX anzuzeigen. In einem ersten Schritt wird die Bedeutung dieser spezifischen Offenlegungspflicht im Zusammenhang sonstiger Ad-hoc-Publizitätspflichten sowie im weiteren Kontext von Corporate Governance erörtert; anschliessend werden Geltungsgrund und normative Reichweite der schweizerischen Regelung vor dem Hintergrund vergleichbarer Regelungen im europäischen Ausland und in den USA analysiert. Abschliessend wird kritisch hinterfragt, ob sich die Verpflichtung zur Offenlegung von Director's Dealings tatsächlich durch die Signal- oder Indikatorfunktion rechtfertigen lässt.

Ready for a crisis? How supervisory boards affect the formalized crisis procedures of small and medium-sized family firms in Germany

Overcoming a crisis situation in which the socioemotional wealth (SEW) of a family is at risk can be threatened by a lack of formal crisis procedures, which can increase the probability of organizational decline. Thus, not being prepared for a crisis situation may be a critical factor in the long-term survival of family firms. From a corporate governance perspective, supervisory boards may achieve higher levels of crisis readiness. Applying the resourced-based view and SEW theory, we analyze the relationship between family ownership and formalized crisis procedures in 150 small and medium-sized German firms. Our results show that formalized crisis procedures decrease as family ownership increases. Including supervisory boards in our analysis, we find a significant moderating effect of supervisory boards on the relationship between family ownership and formalized crisis procedures. Specifically, our results suggest that family firms with supervisory boards show similar levels of formalized crisis procedures as non-family firms with supervisory boards. In contrast, family firms without supervisory boards exhibit lower levels of formalized crisis procedures compared with non-family firms without supervisory boards. We also discuss managerial implications, limitations, and future research.

Marginal lands or marginal people? Analysing key processes determining the outcomes of large-scale land acquisitions in Lao PDR and Cambodia

This chapter aims to overcome the gap existing between case study research, which typically provides qualitative and process-based insights, and national or global inventories that typically offer spatially explicit and quantitative analysis of broader patterns, and thus to present adequate evidence for policymaking regarding large-scale land acquisitions. Therefore, the chapter links spatial patterns of land acquisitions to underlying implementation processes of land allocation. Methodologically linking the described patterns and processes proved difficult, but we have identified indicators that could be added to inventories and monitoring systems to make linkage possible. Combining complementary approaches in this way may help to determine where policy space exists for more sustainable governance of land acquisitions, both geographically and with regard to processes of agrarian transitions. Our spatial analysis revealed two general patterns: (i) relatively large forestry-related acquisitions that target forested landscapes and often interfere with semi-subsistence farming systems; and (ii) smaller agriculture-related acquisitions that often target existing cropland and also interfere with semi-subsistence systems. Furthermore, our meta-analysis of land acquisition implementation processes shows that authoritarian, top-down processes dominate. Initially, the demands of powerful regional and domestic investors tend to override socio-ecological variables, local actors’ interests, and land governance mechanisms. As available land grows scarce, however, and local actors gain experience dealing with land acquisitions, it appears that land investments begin to fail or give way to more inclusive, bottom-up investment models.

Business and Public–Private Partnerships for Sustainability: Beyond Corporate Social Responsibility?

This article analyses public–private partnerships (PPPs) in the field of sustainable development from an international relations perspective with insights from the business and ethics literature. We argue that the role of business in these types of arrangements has not been sufficiently explored. After presenting three ways of approaching PPPs to stress the many facets of partnerships across the public–private divide, we discuss the emergence of these novel forms of governance from a demand side and contrast such a functionalist reading with the supply side. Then we look at the micro-economic incentives for corporations to engage in such endeavours. We develop arguments derived from the dominant literature to provide an analytical framework for explaining business participation. Finally, we discuss the role of PPPs in light of input and output legitimacy. We conclude by alluding to the emergence of an expectation-capacity gap and normative issues related to the global PPP architecture.

Dynamics of governance and control in inter-organizational software development

In recent years, development of information systems (IS) has rapidly changed towards increasing division of labor between firms. Two trends are emerging. First, client companies increasingly outsource software development to external service providers. Second, the formerly oligopolistic enterprise application software industry has started to disintegrate into focal partnership networks – so called platform ecosystems. Despite the increasing prominence of IS outsourcing and platform ecosystems, many of these inter-organizational partnerships fail to achieve expected benefits. Ineffective governance and control frequently plays a pivotal role in producing these failures. While designing effective governance and control mechanisms is always challenging, inter-organizational software development projects are often business-critical and exhibit additional dynamics and uncertainty. As a consequence governance and control have to be adapted over time. The three research projects included in this book provide a better understanding of how and why governance and control can be effectively adapted over time. The implications for successful management of inter-organizational software development projects are highly relevant for theory and practice.

Institutions for sustainable governance of forests: Equity, robustness and cross-level interactions in Mawlyngbna, Meghalaya, India

This study adopts Ostrom’s Social-Ecological Systems (SES) framework in empirical fieldwork to explain how local forestry institutions affect forest ecosystems and social equity in the community of Mawlyngbna in North-East India. Data was collected through 26 semi-structured interviews, participatory timeline development, policy documents, direct observation, periodicals, transect walks, and a concurrent forest-ecological study in the village. Results show that Mawlyngbna's forests provide important sources of livelihood benefits for the villagers. However, ecological disturbance and diversity varies among the different forest ownership types and forest-based livelihood benefits are inequitably distributed. Based on a bounded rationality approach, our analysis proposes a set of causal mechanisms that trace these observed social-ecological outcomes to the attributes of the resource system, resource units, actors and governance system. We analyse opportunities and constraints of interactions between the village, regional, and state levels. We discuss how Ostrom’s design principles for community-based resource governance inform the explanation of robustness but have a blind spot in explaining social equity. We report experiences made using the SES framework in empirical fieldwork. We conclude that mapping cross-level interactions in the SES framework needs conceptual refinement and that explaining social equity of forest governance needs theoretical advances.