Law and History by Numbers: Use, But with Care

B. Cheffins, Steven A. Bank, H. Wells
{"title":"Law and History by Numbers: Use, But with Care","authors":"B. Cheffins, Steven A. Bank, H. Wells","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2348654","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper, prepared for a University of Illinois College of Law symposium honoring Prof. Larry Ribstein, deals with the historical development of corporate law in the United States, focusing on the promise and perils of quantification. The paper is part of a larger project where we have already deployed the “anti-director rights index” (ADRI), a well-known mechanism for quantifying the protection various nations’ corporate laws offer investors, to “score” Delaware corporate law from the turn of the 20th century to the present day (http://ssrn.com/abstract=2079505). We are currently expanding our research by investigating two additional bodies of corporate law (Illinois and the Model Business Corporations Act) and by taking into account as a second measure of corporate law an “anti-self-dealing index” (ASDI) that focuses on regulation of transactions between a company and those who control it. We identify in this paper various reasons for undertaking a quantitative, historically-oriented analysis of U.S. corporate law. The paper focuses primarily, however, on the logistical challenges associated with such an inquiry. We indicate that it is impossible to code U.S. corporate law historically with clinical precision but nevertheless conclude that the quantification exercise in which we are currently engaging should provide sufficient insights to be worthwhile.","PeriodicalId":265444,"journal":{"name":"CGN: Other Corporate Governance: Economic Consequences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CGN: Other Corporate Governance: Economic Consequences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2348654","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

This paper, prepared for a University of Illinois College of Law symposium honoring Prof. Larry Ribstein, deals with the historical development of corporate law in the United States, focusing on the promise and perils of quantification. The paper is part of a larger project where we have already deployed the “anti-director rights index” (ADRI), a well-known mechanism for quantifying the protection various nations’ corporate laws offer investors, to “score” Delaware corporate law from the turn of the 20th century to the present day (http://ssrn.com/abstract=2079505). We are currently expanding our research by investigating two additional bodies of corporate law (Illinois and the Model Business Corporations Act) and by taking into account as a second measure of corporate law an “anti-self-dealing index” (ASDI) that focuses on regulation of transactions between a company and those who control it. We identify in this paper various reasons for undertaking a quantitative, historically-oriented analysis of U.S. corporate law. The paper focuses primarily, however, on the logistical challenges associated with such an inquiry. We indicate that it is impossible to code U.S. corporate law historically with clinical precision but nevertheless conclude that the quantification exercise in which we are currently engaging should provide sufficient insights to be worthwhile.
法律和历史的数字:使用,但要小心
这篇论文是为伊利诺斯大学法学院纪念拉里·里布斯坦教授的研讨会准备的,论述了美国公司法的历史发展,重点是量化的希望和危险。这篇论文是一个更大项目的一部分,在这个项目中,我们已经部署了“反董事权利指数”(ADRI),这是一个众所周知的量化各国公司法为投资者提供的保护的机制,以“评分”特拉华州公司法从20世纪之交到现在(http://ssrn.com/abstract=2079505)。目前,我们正在扩大研究范围,调查另外两个公司法(伊利诺伊州和《示范商业公司法》),并考虑将“反自我交易指数”(ASDI)作为公司法的第二项衡量标准,该指数侧重于对公司与其控制者之间交易的监管。我们在本文中确定了对美国公司法进行定量、历史导向分析的各种原因。然而,本文主要关注与此类调查相关的后勤挑战。我们指出,不可能以临床精确的方式对美国公司法进行历史编码,但我们得出的结论是,我们目前从事的量化工作应该提供足够的见解,值得一试。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信