Search results

The purpose of this paper is to give an updated overview over the development of employee-ownership in Italy, France, Spain including Mondragon, the UK and the US with relatively many employee-owned firms. How have the barriers for employee-ownership been overcome in these countries?

The overview is based on updated descriptions of the development of employee-ownership included in this special issue. The analysis follows the structure of overcoming five barriers: the organization problem; the problem of entry and exit of employee-owners; the startup and takeover problem; the capital- and the risk problem.

Italy, France and Spain have overcome the barriers by specific legislation for worker cooperatives, this includes rules for entry and exit of employee members. Cooperative support organizations play an important role for monitoring and managing the startup problem and for access to capital. The Mondragon model includes individual ownership elements and a group structure of cooperatives. The EOT and ESOP models are well suited for employee takeovers, financing are eased by tax advantages and they are all-employee schemes. While the EOT has no individual risks, the ESOP model has the possibility for capital gains for employees but also the risk of losing these gains.

Comprehensive and updated overview of the development in employee-ownership in the five countries to identify successful formats of employee-ownership for implementation in countries with few employee-owned firms.

This study examines whether insider share ownership and personal share collateral affect corporate payout decisions.

This study estimates logit, Tobit and ordinary least squares regression models to explore how insider ownership is related to share repurchase probability, completion rates and the long-term performance following the repurchase announcements and how insider share collateral affects the above associations.

The results show that insider share ownership is negatively associated with the probability of announcing share repurchases and repurchase completion rates and is positively associated with the firm's post-announcement performance. This study further explores the incentive of insiders with high share collateral announcing share repurchases under a threat of margin call. For firms with a high percentage of insider share collateral, the results show that insider share ownership is associated with higher repurchase probability but is associated with lower repurchase completion rates and poorer post-announcement performance.

This study clarifies the interrelationships between insider ownership, insider share collateral and decisions in share repurchases and subsequent performance. This study provides evidence for both the convergence of interest and the entrenchment theories.

Little systematic work has been completed on the incidence of employee ownership in a Chinese context. Similar to the situation in Eastern Europe, this type of ownership was quite widespread in China, particularly during the 1990s. Based on the existing literature and available statistical data, the purpose of this paper is to identify drivers of, and barriers to, the development of employee ownership in China.

The scattered evidence from the literature and official statistical sources are collected and structured in a systematic analysis where the drivers and barriers for employee ownership in the transition process from plan to market are identified at three levels: society, the company and the individual.

Employee ownership developed as a transitory stage between state and private ownership; employees acquired ownership stakes as part of the privatisation of small- and medium-sized state-owned enterprises as well as collectively owned enterprises. However, in most cases the dynamics of ownership resulted in dominant ownership by managers. This trend became more noticeable at later stages of the privatisation process.

The paper shows how policies and institutional settings at the society level are determining for the development of employee ownership.

The contribution of the paper is to give a general and systematic analysis of the development of employee ownership in China both based on a comprehensive literature review and by utilising existing statistical sources.

The purpose of this paper is to review the historical background for broad-based ownership in the USA, the development of forms of employee ownership and profit sharing in the USA, the research literature on employee ownership and profit sharing and related employee participation, the development of policy and options for new policies.

It is a literature review.

There are four reasons to be interested in employee stock ownership and profit sharing today: first, employee share ownership and profit sharing can increase worker pay and wealth and broaden the overall distribution of income and wealth, a key ingredient for a successful democracy. To be a tool for reducing inequality, employee stock ownership and profit sharing must be spread more widely and meaningfully than it is today. Second, employee share ownership and profit sharing provide incentives for more effort, cooperation, information sharing and innovation that can improve workplace performance and company productivity. Third, employee share ownership and profit sharing can save jobs by enhancing firm survival and employment stability, with wider economic benefits that come from decreasing unemployment. Fourth, employee share ownership and profit sharing can create more harmonious workplaces with greater corporate transparency and increased worker involvement in their work lives through access to information and participation in workplace decisions.

Growth has been extraordinarily sluggish in the recovery from the Great Recession and has weakened in advanced countries over a longer period, leading some analysts to believe that the authors have entered a new economic era of small to modest growth. This may turn out to be true, which will increase the importance of growth-enhancing policies. The evidence that firms with employee stock ownership and/or profit-sharing perform better than others suggests that policies that extend ownership would boost the country’s lagging growth rate. The evidence that employee share ownership firms preserve jobs and survive recessions better than others suggests that policies that extend ownership could help stabilize the economy when the next recession comes down the pike.

Because there may be informational or institutional barriers about the benefits of ownership and sharing and the ways firms can introduce such programs that government can help overcome. Government has often played a role in promoting performance-enhancing work practices to enhance overall economy-wide outcomes from higher productivity and innovation, such as the long history of agricultural extension services (since 1887) to spread information on best practices in farming, and employer education on safety practices conducted by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.

Because of the “externalities” – effects that extend beyond the firm and its members – that greater ownership/profit sharing can bring us. If employee ownership and profit sharing lead to fewer layoffs and firm closures, this can reduce recession-created drops in consumer purchasing power and aggregate demand; government expenditures on unemployment compensation and other forms of support; decreased tax base for supporting schools and infrastructure; and potentially harmful social and personal effects, such as marital breakups and alcohol abuse. Apart from unemployment, more broadly shared prosperity and lower inequality may also have wider benefits for macroeconomic growth, stability and societal outcomes, as described by a number of social scientists. To the extent the ownership and profit sharing is a public good, a nudge in policy to consider the idea makes sense.

Because it is hard to find policy options that are as bipartisan as the shares policy. In The Citizens’ Share, and in other articles and venues, the authors lay out the areas in which there is evidence or logic for in-depth development of, and experimentation with, several broad policy directions, with the details to be worked out by members of Congress based on their deliberations.

The global economic crisis and the housing bubble meltdown have had a significant impact on the Spanish property market. As a result, the homeownership–tenancy dichotomy has become a matter of discussion, and efforts are made to discover formulas that provide affordable, stable and flexible housing access. Taking this background into account, the Catalan lawmaker has implemented the so-called “intermediate tenures” (temporal ownership and shared ownership) into the Catalan Civil Code, which are conceived as a middle ground between ownership and renting. This paper aims to explores how these “intermediate tenures” work.

These tenures are conceived as a middle ground between ownership and renting and may be used for a variety of purposes. As the Catalan lawmaker has fragmented the right of ownership on the basis of English law, which is a great breakthrough regarding the long-standing conception of the right of ownership in continental legal systems, the paper explores how these “intermediate tenures” work, as regulated in Act 19/2015, in a comparative perspective.

The paper offers an overview of how these “intermediate tenures” are regulated and which are the problems arising from legislation and the potential uses.

As the temporal ownership confers on the titleholder the domain of an asset for a specifically defined period of time, it does not conform to the right of ownership as it is currently conceived in continental European legal systems, given that it is based on the English leasehold; shared ownership confers on the buyer a property share in the thing, entitling him to the full possession, use and exclusive enjoyment of the thing and to gradually acquire the remaining share. Both are based on the English shared ownership scheme and leasehold, and are legal transplants worth to be analysed.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the role of affordable home ownership in the light of the recent global financial crisis.

The paper draws on recent research conducted by the authors and others which included analysis of secondary data and policy documents and interviews with key stakeholders including housing associations and developers. The theoretical scope of the paper is outlined in the first section which looks at the principles behind the two main approaches to providing affordable home ownership: shared equity and shared ownership. Given continuing aspirations on the part of most households in England to become home owners, the key comparison is with the attributes of full ownership.

The paper finds that the main products share many of the attributes of full home ownership while remaining more affordable. The economic situation post‐2007 made both shared ownership and shared equity more difficult. The crisis and its aftermath also suggest that there is a need to develop a more robust and longer term market in equity sharing. This could be of real significance into the longer term, especially if the availability of mortgage finance remains constrained for many years to come. The paper concludes that in the longer term, developing a range of partial tenures which provide most of the benefits of owner‐occupation but which reduce risks to individual households and improve affordability in the early years is a desirable strategy.

There are clear implications for policy makers in other countries, notably the benefits from developing an intermediate tenure market which includes institutional equity and risk taking rather than continued large‐scale reliance on debt finance.

Given stated governmental ambitions to meet housing aspirations, this paper clarifies how it is possible to meet an identified need for affordable home ownership products to fill the growing “gap” between first‐time buyers who can purchase with parental help and those who have no means of achieving home ownership, even though they have the income to support such a choice.

This paper addresses the social value of commercial enterprises that are jointly owned by a government and private sector investors and where the shares are listed on a stock exchange: thus, “listed public–private enterprises” (LPPEs). The theoretical part of the paper addresses how differences in ownership patterns influence the behavior and performance of LPPEs.

We develop a conceptual taxonomy, drawing on the empirical evidence on the behavior and performance of public–private hybrid enterprises and on the application of agency theory to that evidence. The taxonomy discussion predicts how different ownership patterns affect enterprise productive efficiency and the ability of governments to achieve social goals through LPPEs. We review the empirical literature on government enterprise ownership and on the concentration of private share ownership to deduce how these matter for owner and managerial behavior and productive efficiency. We review the literature that considers the informational content that listing of an enterprise's shares on a stock exchange can provide to enterprise owners, managers and other domestic audiences with a policy interest. We employ a social welfare perspective to derive policy implications as to when the LPPE governance structure is most appropriate.

We show how the monitoring and performance weaknesses of state ownership are offset by some private ownership, particularly when combined with listing on a stock exchange. We demonstrate the effects of different governance structures on enterprise productive efficiency. We find that the LPPE structure is particularly appropriate as an alternative to nationalization or to full privatization and regulation of natural monopoly public utilities, and as an alternative to full private ownership and taxation of non-renewable natural resource extractive enterprises.

This paper explicitly addresses the question of why and how the combination of government ownership, private investor ownership and listing on an exchange is socially valuable in providing information on productive efficiency to governments.

Profit‐sharing and employee share ownership schemes have attracted great interest in the 1980s. The findings of the first phase of a Department of Employment study which involved a large‐scale investigation of British companies is reported. Details on the operation, coverage and type of scheme which had been adopted were gathered for 822 firms and extended interviews were conducted with a further 303 firms. A highly varied rate of adoption of schemes in different industrial sectors and with diverse economic and industrial relations experiences is revealed. If further advances in profit‐sharing and share ownership are considered to be worthwhile, policy initiatives should be centred on the medium and smaller companies in Britain. Considerable efforts outside the financial sector are necessary to effect any marked acceleration of profit‐sharing and share ownership. If future developments are envisaged senior management of the main types of enterprise are a vital target group. Foreign‐based companies should also be encouraged to embark on profit‐sharing or share ownership. If the advancement of more specific Inland Revenue APS schemes is to become general policy, information and advice for companies outside the financial sector is needed.

The paper discusses the relationship between systemic inequity and wealth disparity and advocates for expanding employee share ownership as a strategy to address divides in income and wealth by race and gender. It targets diverse actors including policymakers, philanthropic leaders and social investors and presents a set of policy proposals and practice ideas that seek to advance a broader understanding of employee share ownership and build the capacity of key organizations to support employee-owned businesses.

This paper draws on data indicating positive outcomes from employee share ownership programs (ESOPs) related to job quality, economic stability and wealth-building, as well as widespread political support for ESOPs.

This paper suggests that employee share ownership can help to strengthen job quality and address race and gender income and wealth gaps. It argues that there is both public support and a range of different strategies actors can implement to expand awareness and access to different forms of employee share ownership.

Additional research focused on other forms of employee share ownership (beyond ESOPs) is needed to deepen understanding of how each form can play a role in addressing racial and gender wealth inequities. The paper acknowledges that despite the potential of employee share ownership to mitigate racial and gender wealth gaps, additional simultaneous strategies are required to address the range of systemic barriers that have disproportionately limited women and people of color's participation in ESOPs.

Policymakers are actively seeking new proposals, while philanthropic leaders, social investors and others are also eager to build awareness and understanding of employee ownership models and develop the institutional capacity necessary to support strong employee-owned businesses. This paper directly responds to these needs and contributes to a broader collaborative effort to spread employee share ownership policies and practices that support economic recovery and lay the foundation for a more equitable and resilient economy.

Employee share ownership is not yet a strategy that is well understood among policymakers and the public, but it connects to and supports outcomes that are top of mind for many, including increasing local ownership and bolstering local economies, helping small business owners retire in ways that preserve local jobs and businesses, strengthening job quality and workforce development, addressing racial inequity and economic inequality and providing workers greater voice and agency. This paper seeks to connect employee ownership to these high-priority issues and support efforts by a range of organizations to implement policy and practice solutions.

This paper fulfills an identified need to aggregate recent research on the relationship between employee share ownership and wealth inequities on the basis of race and gender. It also offers a timely argument that employee ownership strategies can play an important role in responding to the challenges facing communities and workers – particularly women workers and workers of color – as we rebuild from the COVID-19 pandemic.

The study aims to seeks to ascertain the impact of corporate disclosure on foreign equity ownership. Corporate disclosures are important to for stock markets because it is an activity that mitigates information differences between company insiders and outsiders.

Corporate disclosures assume an even greater important when company outsiders are not domiciled in the same country as the company and the company insiders. In this study, the relation between foreign share ownership and corporate disclosures using data on Ghana, Kenya and Nigeria is examined.

The consistent results in this study are that foreign share ownership is positively related to firm size. A negative relation, however, between foreign share ownership and corporate disclosure is found, but this turns out to be related to disclosures about ownership, while disclosures on financial reporting and board management have a positive and insignificant statistical relation taking into account unobserved country, time and firm effects. Further analysis shows that corporate disclosures are very persistent and negatively related to lag foreign share ownership. No consistent statistical relation is found between disclosure and market-to-book values as a proxy for investment opportunities. It is recommended to African-listed firms to pursue adoption of high-quality financial reporting standards and to increase their reporting on board management. The study also recommends that the African Government weighs the benefits of detailed ownership disclosures.

The study utilises frontier market data to complement existing literature on how corporate disclosure and transparency influences foreign investors decision to invest in Africa.