机构投资者和所有权参与

S. Çelik, M. Isaksson
{"title":"机构投资者和所有权参与","authors":"S. Çelik, M. Isaksson","doi":"10.1787/FMT-2013-5JZ734PWTRKC","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article provides a framework for analysing the character and degree of ownership engagement by institutional investors.It argues that the general term “institutional investor” in itself doesn’t say very much about the quality or degree of ownership engagement. It is therefore an evasive “shorthand” for policy discussions about ownership engagement. The reason is that there are large differences in ownership engagement between different categories of institutional investors. There are also differences in ownership engagement within the same category of institutional investors such as hedge funds, investment funds,etc. These differences arise from the fact that the degree of ownership engagement is determined by a number of different features and choices that together make up the institutional investor’s “business model”. When ownership engagement is not a central part of the business model,public policies and voluntary standards aiming to improve the quality of ownership engagement among institutional investors are likely to have limited effect. Based on an empirical overview of the relative sise of different categories of institutional investors, the article identifies a set of 7 features and 19 choices that in different combinations define the institutional investor’s business model. These features and choices are then used to establish a taxonomy for identifying different degrees of ownership engagement ranging from “no engagement” to “inside engagement”.","PeriodicalId":444795,"journal":{"name":"Oecd Journal: Financial Market Trends","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"81","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Institutional investors and ownership engagement\",\"authors\":\"S. Çelik, M. Isaksson\",\"doi\":\"10.1787/FMT-2013-5JZ734PWTRKC\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article provides a framework for analysing the character and degree of ownership engagement by institutional investors.It argues that the general term “institutional investor” in itself doesn’t say very much about the quality or degree of ownership engagement. It is therefore an evasive “shorthand” for policy discussions about ownership engagement. The reason is that there are large differences in ownership engagement between different categories of institutional investors. There are also differences in ownership engagement within the same category of institutional investors such as hedge funds, investment funds,etc. These differences arise from the fact that the degree of ownership engagement is determined by a number of different features and choices that together make up the institutional investor’s “business model”. When ownership engagement is not a central part of the business model,public policies and voluntary standards aiming to improve the quality of ownership engagement among institutional investors are likely to have limited effect. Based on an empirical overview of the relative sise of different categories of institutional investors, the article identifies a set of 7 features and 19 choices that in different combinations define the institutional investor’s business model. These features and choices are then used to establish a taxonomy for identifying different degrees of ownership engagement ranging from “no engagement” to “inside engagement”.\",\"PeriodicalId\":444795,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Oecd Journal: Financial Market Trends\",\"volume\":\"17 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-03-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"81\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Oecd Journal: Financial Market Trends\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1787/FMT-2013-5JZ734PWTRKC\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oecd Journal: Financial Market Trends","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1787/FMT-2013-5JZ734PWTRKC","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 81

摘要

本文为分析机构投资者股权参与的特征和程度提供了一个框架。它认为,“机构投资者”这个通用术语本身并不能说明所有权参与的质量或程度。因此,对于有关所有权参与的政策讨论来说,这是一种闪烁其词的“简写”。原因在于,不同类别的机构投资者在所有权参与方面存在很大差异。在同一类别的机构投资者(如对冲基金、投资基金等)中,所有权参与也存在差异。这些差异源于这样一个事实,即所有权参与程度是由许多不同的特征和选择决定的,这些特征和选择共同构成了机构投资者的“商业模式”。当所有权参与不是商业模式的核心部分时,旨在提高机构投资者所有权参与质量的公共政策和自愿标准可能效果有限。在对不同类别机构投资者的相对规模进行实证分析的基础上,本文确定了7个特征和19个选择,这些特征和选择以不同的组合方式定义了机构投资者的商业模式。然后使用这些特征和选择来建立分类,以识别从“无参与”到“内部参与”的不同程度的所有权参与。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Institutional investors and ownership engagement
This article provides a framework for analysing the character and degree of ownership engagement by institutional investors.It argues that the general term “institutional investor” in itself doesn’t say very much about the quality or degree of ownership engagement. It is therefore an evasive “shorthand” for policy discussions about ownership engagement. The reason is that there are large differences in ownership engagement between different categories of institutional investors. There are also differences in ownership engagement within the same category of institutional investors such as hedge funds, investment funds,etc. These differences arise from the fact that the degree of ownership engagement is determined by a number of different features and choices that together make up the institutional investor’s “business model”. When ownership engagement is not a central part of the business model,public policies and voluntary standards aiming to improve the quality of ownership engagement among institutional investors are likely to have limited effect. Based on an empirical overview of the relative sise of different categories of institutional investors, the article identifies a set of 7 features and 19 choices that in different combinations define the institutional investor’s business model. These features and choices are then used to establish a taxonomy for identifying different degrees of ownership engagement ranging from “no engagement” to “inside engagement”.
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
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