Power, choice, exposure and fragility: Reframing fairness in equity for the corporate and insolvency sphere

IF 0.3 3区 社会学 Q4 BUSINESS, FINANCE
Jennifer L. L. Gant
{"title":"Power, choice, exposure and fragility: Reframing fairness in equity for the corporate and insolvency sphere","authors":"Jennifer L. L. Gant","doi":"10.1002/iir.70006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Where is the place of humanity in current corporate and insolvency frameworks and their theoretical underpinning? How can it be assured that the institutions that have been invented through human ingenuity and brilliance serves the collective human experience fully and equitably? Insolvency law has long been theoretically conceptualised on the basis of legal and contractual entitlements with the core purpose of maximising returns to the creditors owed by the debtor during its financial distress. With the onset and steady growth of the rescue culture with its acknowledgment of the broader impacts of insolvency on society and the economy, the simple creditor wealth maximisation approach does not provide equitable solutions for all of the stakeholder associated with the debtor company. In particular, involuntary, non-adjusting, and undiversified creditors, such as employees, tort creditors, and the environment, are often with little recourse and few opportunities for participation at the negotiation table. These stakeholders suffer from greater exposure and fragility in their corporate relationships with little power or choice on that relationship and its impact on them. If theories are devised with humans in mind, it may be possible to redress the inequity in fairness by changing the way we view financial distress and the broader purpose for resolving it. This article seeks to reframe the way fairness is assessed and applied to achieve equitable solutions in the corporate and insolvency sphere by examining it through a feminist jurisprudential lens, with a particular focus on Martha Fineman's Vulnerability Theory.</p>","PeriodicalId":53971,"journal":{"name":"International Insolvency Review","volume":"34 2","pages":"302-336"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/iir.70006","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Insolvency Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/iir.70006","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Where is the place of humanity in current corporate and insolvency frameworks and their theoretical underpinning? How can it be assured that the institutions that have been invented through human ingenuity and brilliance serves the collective human experience fully and equitably? Insolvency law has long been theoretically conceptualised on the basis of legal and contractual entitlements with the core purpose of maximising returns to the creditors owed by the debtor during its financial distress. With the onset and steady growth of the rescue culture with its acknowledgment of the broader impacts of insolvency on society and the economy, the simple creditor wealth maximisation approach does not provide equitable solutions for all of the stakeholder associated with the debtor company. In particular, involuntary, non-adjusting, and undiversified creditors, such as employees, tort creditors, and the environment, are often with little recourse and few opportunities for participation at the negotiation table. These stakeholders suffer from greater exposure and fragility in their corporate relationships with little power or choice on that relationship and its impact on them. If theories are devised with humans in mind, it may be possible to redress the inequity in fairness by changing the way we view financial distress and the broader purpose for resolving it. This article seeks to reframe the way fairness is assessed and applied to achieve equitable solutions in the corporate and insolvency sphere by examining it through a feminist jurisprudential lens, with a particular focus on Martha Fineman's Vulnerability Theory.

权力、选择、风险和脆弱性:重塑企业和破产领域的公平
在当前的公司和破产框架及其理论基础中,人性的位置在哪里?怎样才能保证通过人类的聪明才智和智慧而创造出来的制度能够充分而公平地服务于人类的集体经验呢?长期以来,破产法在法律和合同权利的基础上进行了理论上的概念化,其核心目的是在债务人陷入财务困境时使其所欠债权人的回报最大化。随着认识到破产对社会和经济的广泛影响的救助文化的兴起和稳步发展,简单的债权人财富最大化方法并不能为与债务人公司相关的所有利益相关者提供公平的解决方案。特别是,非自愿的、非调整的和单一的债权人,如雇员、侵权债权人和环境,往往很少有追索权和参与谈判的机会。这些利益相关者在他们的企业关系中遭受更大的暴露和脆弱性,在这种关系及其对他们的影响上几乎没有权力或选择。如果在设计理论时考虑到人类,就有可能通过改变我们看待金融危机的方式和解决金融危机的更广泛目的,来公平地纠正这种不平等。本文试图通过女权主义法理学的视角来审视公平,并特别关注玛莎·芬曼的脆弱性理论,从而重新构建公平的评估和应用方式,以实现公司和破产领域的公平解决方案。
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
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
33.30%
发文量
36
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信