Nina Boeger - Academia.edu (original) (raw)
Papers by Nina Boeger
The Changing Legal Framework for Services of General Interest in Europe, 2009
Cambridge yearbook of European legal studies, 2012
This chapter considers the evolving institutional responses to the challenge of regulating teleco... more This chapter considers the evolving institutional responses to the challenge of regulating telecoms in the EU, taking in the Commission’s push for creating an EU agency versus the resilience of the transnationally networked model, which is usually attributed to the Member States’ sovereignty reflex. Were recent negotiations over the reform of the Regulatory Framework for telecoms, concluded in 2009, simply a turf-war in which the Commission sought to extend the EU’s role against resistance from the Member States, or did the national telecoms regulators and their existing transnational network influence the eventual compromise to retain the soft law, networked model, albeit with some hardening? Characterised as a classic integration struggle, the Member States’ intergovernmental instincts were pitched against the Commission’s supranational instincts and its preference for instruments of control premised on the centralised exercise of hierarchical power. But this chapter paints a more...
Public Administration and the Modern State
The Cambridge Handbook of Social Enterprise Law, 2019
Businesses are like cement. Both are an integral part of the society we inhabit and yet, for the ... more Businesses are like cement. Both are an integral part of the society we inhabit and yet, for the most part, barely visible to us as tangible entities. We give them little thought, but our lives would be very different were we to wake up to a world without either. In April 2016, the UK government did invite us to think about the nature of business though, as part of what it called a review of 'mission-led business'. It set up an advisory panel and ran a public consultation and, seven months on, the panel reported to the government with its recommendations. In this essay, David Hunter and Nina Boeger consider the review's implications against a backdrop of ongoing political and economic turmoil in the UK and beyond, and a climate marked by an ever-diminishing trust in the governance of our mainstream corporations. Many recognise that 'business as usual' is not an option for corporate governance in the 21st century. But does the review point towards a wider paradigm shift, a movement towards more responsible and sustainable business governance, or simply a re-booting of the well-rehearsed (business) case for greater 'corporate social responsibility'? The authors examine the arguments and make a number of suggestions; amongst them, a proposal that would see the development of a new legal form-a stakeholder company-that is tailored to the needs of missionled businesses to support their growth.
The Law and Governance of Decentralised Business Models, 2020
The current model of corporate governance needs reform. There is mounting evidence that the pract... more The current model of corporate governance needs reform. There is mounting evidence that the practices of shareholder primacy drive company directors and executives to adopt the same short time horizon as financial markets. Pressure to meet the demands of the financial markets drives stock buybacks, excessive dividends and a failure to invest in productive capabilities. The result is a ‘tragedy of the horizon’, with corporations and their shareholders failing to consider environmental, social or even their own, long-term, economic sustainability. With less than a decade left to address the threat of climate change, and with consensus emerging that businesses need to be held accountable for their contribution, it is time to act and reform corporate governance in the EU. The statement puts forward specific recommendations to clarify the obligations of company boards and directors and make corporate governance practice significantly more sustainable and focused on the long term.
Where journals were once full of articles analyzing the process of European integration, they are... more Where journals were once full of articles analyzing the process of European integration, they are now full of articles analyzing the EU as a system of governance. This chapter combines these themes, arguing that to understand the process by which the EU is now integrating it has become necessary to understand the EU as a system of governance. More particularly, it asks whether intergovernmental and neofunctionalist traditions, each of which attributes institutional (trans)formations in the EU to the preferences of particular political principals, end up neglecting the impact that their chosen institutional agents — communities of expertise — have on their own (trans)formation. In an institutionalist bent, this chapter asks whether these communities of expertise, successful as they are at embedding themselves in the EU’s existing institutional architecture, also bring their own internal practices to bear upon it.
SSRN Electronic Journal, 2019
Journal of Law and Society, 2018
This article considers various, established and emerging, alternative business forms that differ ... more This article considers various, established and emerging, alternative business forms that differ categorically from the traditional corporation in terms of their governance, objectives, and/or ownership structures, including mission‐led businesses, social enterprises, cooperatives, and co‐owned firms. Notwithstanding their considerable diversity, the underpinning pattern of these alternatives points towards a stakeholder model of corporate governance that commits the firm to generating value by maximizing the positive impact on its (internal and external) stakeholders while limiting negative impacts, with trade‐offs carefully balanced against each other. Through these commitments, the firm internalizes a process of democratic contestation: a procedure to mediate the different interests of these market actors is incorporated directly into the structure of the firm, through procedural mechanisms embedded within its internal constitution.
The Changing Legal Framework for Services of General Interest in Europe, 2009
Cambridge yearbook of European legal studies, 2012
This chapter considers the evolving institutional responses to the challenge of regulating teleco... more This chapter considers the evolving institutional responses to the challenge of regulating telecoms in the EU, taking in the Commission’s push for creating an EU agency versus the resilience of the transnationally networked model, which is usually attributed to the Member States’ sovereignty reflex. Were recent negotiations over the reform of the Regulatory Framework for telecoms, concluded in 2009, simply a turf-war in which the Commission sought to extend the EU’s role against resistance from the Member States, or did the national telecoms regulators and their existing transnational network influence the eventual compromise to retain the soft law, networked model, albeit with some hardening? Characterised as a classic integration struggle, the Member States’ intergovernmental instincts were pitched against the Commission’s supranational instincts and its preference for instruments of control premised on the centralised exercise of hierarchical power. But this chapter paints a more...
Public Administration and the Modern State
The Cambridge Handbook of Social Enterprise Law, 2019
Businesses are like cement. Both are an integral part of the society we inhabit and yet, for the ... more Businesses are like cement. Both are an integral part of the society we inhabit and yet, for the most part, barely visible to us as tangible entities. We give them little thought, but our lives would be very different were we to wake up to a world without either. In April 2016, the UK government did invite us to think about the nature of business though, as part of what it called a review of 'mission-led business'. It set up an advisory panel and ran a public consultation and, seven months on, the panel reported to the government with its recommendations. In this essay, David Hunter and Nina Boeger consider the review's implications against a backdrop of ongoing political and economic turmoil in the UK and beyond, and a climate marked by an ever-diminishing trust in the governance of our mainstream corporations. Many recognise that 'business as usual' is not an option for corporate governance in the 21st century. But does the review point towards a wider paradigm shift, a movement towards more responsible and sustainable business governance, or simply a re-booting of the well-rehearsed (business) case for greater 'corporate social responsibility'? The authors examine the arguments and make a number of suggestions; amongst them, a proposal that would see the development of a new legal form-a stakeholder company-that is tailored to the needs of missionled businesses to support their growth.
The Law and Governance of Decentralised Business Models, 2020
The current model of corporate governance needs reform. There is mounting evidence that the pract... more The current model of corporate governance needs reform. There is mounting evidence that the practices of shareholder primacy drive company directors and executives to adopt the same short time horizon as financial markets. Pressure to meet the demands of the financial markets drives stock buybacks, excessive dividends and a failure to invest in productive capabilities. The result is a ‘tragedy of the horizon’, with corporations and their shareholders failing to consider environmental, social or even their own, long-term, economic sustainability. With less than a decade left to address the threat of climate change, and with consensus emerging that businesses need to be held accountable for their contribution, it is time to act and reform corporate governance in the EU. The statement puts forward specific recommendations to clarify the obligations of company boards and directors and make corporate governance practice significantly more sustainable and focused on the long term.
Where journals were once full of articles analyzing the process of European integration, they are... more Where journals were once full of articles analyzing the process of European integration, they are now full of articles analyzing the EU as a system of governance. This chapter combines these themes, arguing that to understand the process by which the EU is now integrating it has become necessary to understand the EU as a system of governance. More particularly, it asks whether intergovernmental and neofunctionalist traditions, each of which attributes institutional (trans)formations in the EU to the preferences of particular political principals, end up neglecting the impact that their chosen institutional agents — communities of expertise — have on their own (trans)formation. In an institutionalist bent, this chapter asks whether these communities of expertise, successful as they are at embedding themselves in the EU’s existing institutional architecture, also bring their own internal practices to bear upon it.
SSRN Electronic Journal, 2019
Journal of Law and Society, 2018
This article considers various, established and emerging, alternative business forms that differ ... more This article considers various, established and emerging, alternative business forms that differ categorically from the traditional corporation in terms of their governance, objectives, and/or ownership structures, including mission‐led businesses, social enterprises, cooperatives, and co‐owned firms. Notwithstanding their considerable diversity, the underpinning pattern of these alternatives points towards a stakeholder model of corporate governance that commits the firm to generating value by maximizing the positive impact on its (internal and external) stakeholders while limiting negative impacts, with trade‐offs carefully balanced against each other. Through these commitments, the firm internalizes a process of democratic contestation: a procedure to mediate the different interests of these market actors is incorporated directly into the structure of the firm, through procedural mechanisms embedded within its internal constitution.