未来还是幻想?公益公司的实证研究

Michael B. Dorff, J. Hicks, Steven Davidoff Solomon
{"title":"未来还是幻想?公益公司的实证研究","authors":"Michael B. Dorff, J. Hicks, Steven Davidoff Solomon","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.3433772","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The public benefit corporation (“PBC”) is one of the most hyped developments in corporate law, due to the PBC’s unique social purpose. Unlike the traditional corporation, directors of PBCs are required under their fiduciary duties to consider the impact of their decisions on a range of stakeholders and communities. This new form is hailed by many as a framework for a reformed capitalism. Critics, on the other hand, have assailed PBCs as unworkable—at best allowing corporations to “greenwash,” providing a thin disguise for ordinary corporate profit-seeking behavior. What has been lacking in this debate is evidence about whether and how the new form is being adopted. We fill this gap with an empirical study of early-stage investment in PBCs. Early-stage investment, consisting of venture capital and similar funds, presents an interesting test case for PBC funding, because these investors have profit-maximizing incentives and fiduciary duties of their own. Using our novel dataset, we can discern whether for-profit investment is occurring in PBCs, and if so, whether it is different in kind from ordinary early stage investment. We find that PBCs are receiving investment at significant rates, and that funding is coming from typical sources of venture capital—including traditional, profit-seeking VC firms. We also find that VC firms are investing in more consumer-facing industries, as well as investing smaller amounts than traditional investments at the same stage, raising concerns about greenwashing. While the ultimate arc of the PBC remains uncertain, our results show that it is gaining acceptance as an investment that can earn an acceptable rate of return—though, as we argue, the PBC status itself may be a secondary factor in VCs’ decisions. We use these results to develop a theory of future PBC development, which asserts that in the medium term, investment in PBCs is likely to remain siloed in smaller, newly formed firms. We conclude that widespread adoption of the form will take time, as network effects build and experience with the form becomes embedded within the entrepreneurial and legal ecosystem. The PBC is not a failure. But it is in its infancy, and any full embrace will take a significant period of time.","PeriodicalId":57292,"journal":{"name":"公司治理评论","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Future or Fancy? An Empirical Study of Public Benefit Corporations\",\"authors\":\"Michael B. Dorff, J. Hicks, Steven Davidoff Solomon\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.3433772\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The public benefit corporation (“PBC”) is one of the most hyped developments in corporate law, due to the PBC’s unique social purpose. Unlike the traditional corporation, directors of PBCs are required under their fiduciary duties to consider the impact of their decisions on a range of stakeholders and communities. This new form is hailed by many as a framework for a reformed capitalism. Critics, on the other hand, have assailed PBCs as unworkable—at best allowing corporations to “greenwash,” providing a thin disguise for ordinary corporate profit-seeking behavior. What has been lacking in this debate is evidence about whether and how the new form is being adopted. We fill this gap with an empirical study of early-stage investment in PBCs. Early-stage investment, consisting of venture capital and similar funds, presents an interesting test case for PBC funding, because these investors have profit-maximizing incentives and fiduciary duties of their own. Using our novel dataset, we can discern whether for-profit investment is occurring in PBCs, and if so, whether it is different in kind from ordinary early stage investment. We find that PBCs are receiving investment at significant rates, and that funding is coming from typical sources of venture capital—including traditional, profit-seeking VC firms. We also find that VC firms are investing in more consumer-facing industries, as well as investing smaller amounts than traditional investments at the same stage, raising concerns about greenwashing. While the ultimate arc of the PBC remains uncertain, our results show that it is gaining acceptance as an investment that can earn an acceptable rate of return—though, as we argue, the PBC status itself may be a secondary factor in VCs’ decisions. We use these results to develop a theory of future PBC development, which asserts that in the medium term, investment in PBCs is likely to remain siloed in smaller, newly formed firms. We conclude that widespread adoption of the form will take time, as network effects build and experience with the form becomes embedded within the entrepreneurial and legal ecosystem. The PBC is not a failure. But it is in its infancy, and any full embrace will take a significant period of time.\",\"PeriodicalId\":57292,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"公司治理评论\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"公司治理评论\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3433772\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"公司治理评论","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3433772","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

公益公司由于其独特的社会目的而成为公司法领域最受关注的发展趋势之一。与传统的公司不同,民生银行的董事在受托责任下需要考虑其决策对一系列利益相关者和社区的影响。这种新形式被许多人誉为改革后资本主义的框架。另一方面,批评人士抨击PBCs行不通——充其量只能让企业“洗绿”,为普通的企业逐利行为提供一层薄薄的伪装。在这场辩论中缺乏的是关于新形式是否以及如何被采用的证据。我们通过对PBCs早期投资的实证研究来填补这一空白。早期投资,包括风险投资和类似的基金,为中国人民银行的融资提供了一个有趣的测试案例,因为这些投资者有利润最大化的动机和他们自己的信托责任。使用我们的新数据集,我们可以辨别营利性投资是否发生在PBCs中,如果是,它是否与普通的早期投资在种类上有所不同。我们发现,民生银行正以相当高的比率接受投资,这些资金来自典型的风险资本来源——包括传统的、追求利润的风险投资公司。我们还发现,风险投资公司正在投资更多面向消费者的行业,而且在同一阶段的投资额比传统投资要小,这引发了人们对“漂绿”的担忧。虽然PBC的最终弧线仍然不确定,但我们的研究结果表明,作为一种可以获得可接受回报率的投资,PBC的地位本身可能是风险投资决策的次要因素。我们利用这些结果发展了一个未来PBC发展的理论,该理论断言,在中期,对PBC的投资可能仍然局限于规模较小的新成立的公司。我们的结论是,随着网络效应的建立和对这种形式的体验嵌入到企业和法律生态系统中,这种形式的广泛采用需要时间。中国人民银行并不失败。但它还处于起步阶段,任何全面拥抱都需要相当长的一段时间。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The Future or Fancy? An Empirical Study of Public Benefit Corporations
The public benefit corporation (“PBC”) is one of the most hyped developments in corporate law, due to the PBC’s unique social purpose. Unlike the traditional corporation, directors of PBCs are required under their fiduciary duties to consider the impact of their decisions on a range of stakeholders and communities. This new form is hailed by many as a framework for a reformed capitalism. Critics, on the other hand, have assailed PBCs as unworkable—at best allowing corporations to “greenwash,” providing a thin disguise for ordinary corporate profit-seeking behavior. What has been lacking in this debate is evidence about whether and how the new form is being adopted. We fill this gap with an empirical study of early-stage investment in PBCs. Early-stage investment, consisting of venture capital and similar funds, presents an interesting test case for PBC funding, because these investors have profit-maximizing incentives and fiduciary duties of their own. Using our novel dataset, we can discern whether for-profit investment is occurring in PBCs, and if so, whether it is different in kind from ordinary early stage investment. We find that PBCs are receiving investment at significant rates, and that funding is coming from typical sources of venture capital—including traditional, profit-seeking VC firms. We also find that VC firms are investing in more consumer-facing industries, as well as investing smaller amounts than traditional investments at the same stage, raising concerns about greenwashing. While the ultimate arc of the PBC remains uncertain, our results show that it is gaining acceptance as an investment that can earn an acceptable rate of return—though, as we argue, the PBC status itself may be a secondary factor in VCs’ decisions. We use these results to develop a theory of future PBC development, which asserts that in the medium term, investment in PBCs is likely to remain siloed in smaller, newly formed firms. We conclude that widespread adoption of the form will take time, as network effects build and experience with the form becomes embedded within the entrepreneurial and legal ecosystem. The PBC is not a failure. But it is in its infancy, and any full embrace will take a significant period of time.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
135
期刊最新文献
ProMarket 11 Recommends Financial Advisor with AI, Yet It Gets No Interest from Italian Financial Services. Why R. Abravanel Is Wrong and Why No Italian Google Exists Corporate Real Estate Usage and Firm Valuation: Evidence from a Dynamic Partial Adjustment Model Rights of Secured Creditors under Indian Insolvency Law Do Lenders Still Monitor? Leveraged Lending and the Search for Covenants Once Bitten, Twice Shy: Learning From Corporate Fraud and Corporate Governance Spillovers
×
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