Suchergebnisse

The following chapter identifies the meaning and main features of corporate governance, underlines the importance of an entity, which regulates and balances the interests of shareholders, stakeholders, and managers in order to realize a corporation's long-run goals. Currently, all models of corporate governance can be divided by their characteristics into three types: Anglo-American, German, and Japanese; each of these models has some unique elements that are required by a particular country. The process of forming and development of corporate governance in transitional economies are described as well. As the accuracy of corporate government influences the wiliness of investors to sink their capital, it is crucial to understand the methods of corporate governance efficiency evaluation by international rating agencies. Moreover, the example of Enron Corporation's failure shows the exceptional role of corporate governance in protecting and ensuring the rights of shareholders and stakeholders, solving the conflict between managers seeking higher bonuses and investors' goals on stable future return and potential growth.

Governance is a highly contested concept that concerns the exercise of collective control towards common goals. In higher education institutes' (HEIs) context, the concept of governance refers to their internal structure, organisation and management. Simply explained, academic governance is the way in which universities are operated; it concerns both the internal (institutional) and external (system) governance of the institution. Internal governance refers to the institutional arrangements within universities (e.g., lines of authority, decision making processes, financing and staffing) whereas external governance refers to the institutional arrangements on the macro- or system-level (e.g., laws and decrees, funding arrangements, evaluations). The principal academic governance model for both public and private universities, until the 1980s, was based on a collegial shared form of governance. The tradition of shared governance rests on the assumption that faculty should hold a substantive role in decision making alongside the institution's key stakeholders; these stakeholders include the university Rector/President/CEO, and representatives from the management, administrative staff, and the students. The most visible vehicle for faculty involvement is typically a faculty senate or a similar body with a different name; such senates currently exist in more than 90 percent of colleges and universities in the U.S.A. and with small variations in Europe and the rest of the world. During the 1980s the idea of the so called corporate or entrepreneurial university emerged; it was based on the notion that, even non-profit public universities should be run as a business in order to address both the society and market needs and be able to control their own budgets. In practical terms this meant that universities should develop relationships with the industry, secure external (other than government) funding, and be able to at least break even in terms of managing their finance. Today, both models co-exist in a delicate balance: the traditional model advocates for free public higher education (HE) for anyone at any cost, whereas the new model argues for a market-driven performance-led university for those who can afford it. This entry is about the existing models of academic governance, their structure, key issues, and the current and future perspectives.

Cover; Half Title; Title Page; Copyright Page; Table of Contents; List of figures; List of tables; List of contributors; Preface; Introduction and overview: polarization explained and applied; Part I Polarized mass publics and electoral politics; 1 Concerted action in complex environments: a comparison of industrial restructuring in mid-sized city-regions in Canada and the United States; 2 Lines in the sand: how Americans' polarization results in unwillingness to accept compromise policy outcomes.

Geoengineering—the deliberate interference in the climate system to affect global warming—could have significant global environmental and social implications. How to shape formal geoengineering governance mechanisms is an issue of debate. This paper describes and analyses the geoengineering governance landscape that has developed in the absence of explicit geoengineering regulation. An Earth System Governance perspective provides insight into the formation of norms resulting from an overlap in international treaties and from the actions of engaged non-state agents. Specifically, the paper explores the instruments and actors having effect in existing formal and informal geoengineering governance mechanisms. It finds that geoengineering is subject to a form of 'governance-by-default'. This is due to a situation in which state actors have not resolved the tension between two legal norms: that of 'precaution' and that of 'harm minimisation'. This governance-by-default is characterised by uneven regulation from existing multilateral agreements established for other purposes, an absence of regulation specifically focused on geoengineering, guidance from an international ambition to hold global average warming below 2 °C and to achieve net-zero emissions in the second half of the century, and strong normative engagement by the research community. Governance-by-default is likely to be a stopgap development until more enduring and focused governance emerges.

This book discusses the tasks and functions of corporate governance in the light of current challenges and the dynamics that arise from a broader approach to company management and the integration of corporate governance with corporate social responsibility (CSR) and sustainability. Addressing the corporate governance shortcomings that are believed to have contributed to the recent financial crisis, it explores the interplay between corporate governance and CSR, and includes examples of company practice to show how such changes affect the practices of shareholders, boards of directors and regulators. In particular, the book examines shareholders' activities, their different investment strategies, specific reporting expectations and the submission of proposals to the annual meeting. Further, for boards of directors it explores the need to revise their tasks with respect to the criteria for executive appointments, their corporate strategy, performance measures and diversity recommendations, while for directors it provides recommendations to reconsider the structure of executive pay and performance incentives. Lastly, for regulators the book investigates the need to introduce new laws addressing, for instance, the need for integrated reporting, limiting the voice of short term oriented shareholders and providing guidelines for executive compensation.

Following recent theoretical contributions, this article suggests a new approach to finding the governance in Internet governance. Studies on Internet governance rely on contradictory notions of governance. The common understanding of governance as some form of deliberate steering or regulation clashes with equally common definitions of Internet governance as distributed modes of ordering. Drawing on controversies in the broader field of governance and regulation studies, we propose to resolve this conceptual conundrum by grounding governance in mundane activities of coordination. We define governance as reflexive coordination – focusing on those 'critical moments', when routine activities become problematic and need to be revised, thus, when regular coordination itself requires coordination. Regulation, in turn, can be understood as targeted public or private interventions aiming to influence the behaviour of others. With this distinction between governance and regulation, we offer a conceptual framework for empirical studies of doing Internet governance.

This paper deals with the general concept of (good) governance in sports organizations, explaining its required particularities through a look at its principles, existing challenges and issues that have yet to be resolved. It will also give an overview of which obstacles need to be taken into account for the implementation of good governance. Furthermore, it lays out some potential ideas for enhanced good governance through the example of mega-events such as the Olympic Games.

This volume explores the way in which political organizations must confront situations of relatively high uncertainty and unpredictability with limited knowledge, and how turbulent times provide opportunities to investigate the sustainability of governance systems.