Gender equality within boards: comparing quota and soft law

IF 1 3区 社会学 Q3 ECONOMICS European Journal of Law and Economics Pub Date : 2024-03-04 DOI:10.1007/s10657-024-09795-y
Sophie Harnay, Fabienne Llense, Antoine Rebérioux, Gwenaël Roudaut
{"title":"Gender equality within boards: comparing quota and soft law","authors":"Sophie Harnay, Fabienne Llense, Antoine Rebérioux, Gwenaël Roudaut","doi":"10.1007/s10657-024-09795-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>In 2011, Britain and France introduced affirmative action policies aiming at improving board gender mix in listed companies. While the reforms were similar in terms of target and timing, Britain opted for a ‘soft law’ (comply or explain) approach, while France enacted a mandatory quota. Using difference-in-differences analyses, we examine the differential impact of these two reforms on board composition and on women empowerment within boards. We first show that the quota has been associated with a more rapid adjustment of the gender mix without significant disruptive effects on board composition. However, we report that the quota has induced a more limited access of women to monitoring committees within boards, relative to soft law. As these committees are the most influential, this evidence shows that the quota came at a cost when considering within-board women’s influence.</p>","PeriodicalId":51664,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Law and Economics","volume":"2 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Law and Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10657-024-09795-y","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In 2011, Britain and France introduced affirmative action policies aiming at improving board gender mix in listed companies. While the reforms were similar in terms of target and timing, Britain opted for a ‘soft law’ (comply or explain) approach, while France enacted a mandatory quota. Using difference-in-differences analyses, we examine the differential impact of these two reforms on board composition and on women empowerment within boards. We first show that the quota has been associated with a more rapid adjustment of the gender mix without significant disruptive effects on board composition. However, we report that the quota has induced a more limited access of women to monitoring committees within boards, relative to soft law. As these committees are the most influential, this evidence shows that the quota came at a cost when considering within-board women’s influence.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
董事会中的性别平等:配额与软性法律的比较
2011 年,英国和法国出台了旨在改善上市公司董事会性别比例的平权行动政策。虽然改革的目标和时机相似,但英国选择了 "软法律"(遵守或解释)的方式,而法国则颁布了强制性配额。通过差异分析,我们研究了这两项改革对董事会构成和董事会中女性赋权的不同影响。我们首先表明,配额制能更快地调整性别组合,而不会对董事会的构成产生明显的破坏性影响。然而,我们报告说,与软性法律相比,配额制导致妇女进入董事会内的监督委员会的机会更加有限。由于这些委员会的影响力最大,这一证据表明,在考虑董事会内部妇女的影响力时,配额是有代价的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
7.70%
发文量
37
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Law and Economics provides readers with high-quality theoretical and empirical research in which both the legal and economic dimensions merge and combine. The journal welcomes articles that promote a better understanding of legal phenomena, legal decisions made by judges, courts or regulatory agencies, and involving economic tools. Theoretical papers are welcome, provided they have a strong basis in law and economics. We also welcome case studies, as well as empirical analyses – including empirical legal studies – and experimental investigations. The European Journal of Law and Economics does not favor any particular topic, but does have a focus on new and emerging problems. European themes are particularly welcome, because we feel it is important to exploit Europe’s considerable institutional diversity in order to build a more robust body of theory and empirical evidence. However, the purpose of the journal is also to showcase the diversity of law and economics approaches, as supplied by an international mix of authors. Drawing on the support of respected scholars from around the world, who serve as consulting editors and editorial board members, the Editors wish to give contributing authors the opportunity to improve their papers, while also offering them a quick and efficient review process. Officially cited as: Eur J Law Econ
期刊最新文献
Cartels, board gender composition and gender quotas Minimum wage non-compliance: the role of co-determination Efficiency analysis of penitentiary centers in Spain using radial and non-radial DEA and its determinants factors 2015–2020 Seller liability versus platform liability: optimal liability rule and law enforcement in the platform economy Punishment menus and their deterrent effects: an exploratory analysis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1