We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Stewardship codes as they originated in the UK focus on the role and function of institutional investors. Yet in Asia, where institutional investors play a much less dominant role, stewardship codes have also become popular. This Chapter explores why and what this means for comparative corporate governance. By showing how stewardship codes perform diverse, jurisdiction-specific functions in Asia, this Chapter reveals the utility of stewardship codes as a malleable vehicle for advancing political agendas and halo signalling. It also shows that, contrary to prevailing assumptions, UK-style stewardship codes have not been ‘transplanted’ in both form and function. Rather, Asia exhibits ‘faux convergence’a distinctive form of functional divergence within superficial formal convergence, and which challenges and adds to scholarly understanding of convergence as a global corporate governance phenomenon.
This Chapter demonstrates that institutional investors have become an important vector in China’s autochthonous corporate governance model, which can no longer be ignored. To accurately understand the role of institutional investors in Chinese corporate governance and how effective they are in improving corporate governance in China, these developments must be understood on their own terms – in China’s unique political-economic context in which the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has ultimate control. The same is true for understanding how Chinese companies and institutional investors fit into the CCP’s broad-based campaigns to address social inequality and improve the environment. The Chapter concludes that to see these developments as part of a UK-inspired ‘global shareholder stewardship’ movement, would make Western pundits seem like the proverbial woman who only has a hammer and sees everything as a nail. In arriving at this conclusion this Chapter reveals how the CCP has actively and gradually promoted the growth of domestic institutional investors, in terms of types and size, through relaxation of policies and law reforms to improve corporate governance and stabilize the stock market, while limiting the influence of foreign institutional investors. It further analyzes all the Activist Campaigns undertaken by institutional investors in China and maps the network of government bodies, regulations, and tactics that the CCP has developed to directly and indirectly control State-Owned Institutional Investors (SOIIs) and Private-Owned Institutional Investors (POIIs) for the purpose of policy channelling.
This is the first in-depth comparative and empirical analysis of shareholder stewardship, revealing the previously unknown complexities of this global movement. It highlights the role of institutional investors and other shareholders, examining how they use their formal and informal power to influence companies. The book includes an in-depth chapter on every jurisdiction which has adopted a stewardship code and an analysis of stewardship in the world's two largest economies which have yet to adopt a code. Several comparative chapters draw on the rich body of jurisdiction-specific analyses, to analyze stewardship comparatively from multiple interdisciplinary perspectives. Ultimately, this book provides a cutting-edge and comprehensive understanding of shareholder stewardship which challenges existing theories and informs many of the most important debates in comparative corporate law and governance.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.