scholarly journals Do Voting Power Considerations Explain the Formation of Political Coalitions? A Re-Evaluation

Author(s):  
Vincent C. H. Chua ◽  
Dan S. Felsenthal
Author(s):  
María Luz Martínez Sola

National Development Banks (NDB) could be pictured as engines pushing backward economies through the developmental ladder's rungs. After being key protagonists of industrial policy after Second World War, most NDBs were dismantled during the 1980s and 90 s. Notable exceptions to this trend exist, however. The goal of this study is thus to understand the political economy issues; Institutional Capacity International Bargaining Power and Domestic Political Coalitions; that explain those trajectories, by taking the cases of Argentina (BANADE) and Brazil (BNDES). When analyzing these three dimensions of political economy the paper concludes that the main difference between BANADE and BNDES' trajectories seems to stem from the diverse Domestic Political Coalitions crafted by Argentina and Brazil, in each historical period. Understanding the underlying conditions to create a cohesive and solid NDB is fundamental to reassess their roles in the XXI century industrial policy.


2020 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 31-55
Author(s):  
Chiraz Ben Ali ◽  
Sabri Boubaker ◽  
Michel Magnan

SUMMARY This paper examines whether multiple large shareholders (MLS) affect audit fees in firms where the largest controlling shareholder (LCS) is a family. Results show that there is a negative relationship between audit fees and the presence, number, and voting power of MLS. This is consistent with the view that auditors consider MLS as playing a monitoring role over the LCS, mitigating the potential for expropriation by the LCS. Therefore, our evidence suggests that auditors reduce their audit risk assessment and audit effort and ultimately audit fees in family controlled firms with MLS. Data Availability: Data are available from the public sources cited in the text. JEL Classifications: G32; G34; M42; D86.


2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 153-180
Author(s):  
Stephen Macedo

AbstractIn the U.S., and elsewhere, populism has been democracy’s way of shaking elites up. We can view populism in part as a revolt of the losers, or perceived losers, of globalization. Yet elites have often paid too little heed to the domestic distributive impact of high immigration and globalized trade. Immigration and globalization are also spurring forms of nativism and demagoguery that threaten both democratic deliberation and undermine progressive political coalitions. The challenge now is to find the most reasonable – or least unreasonable – responses to the new politics of resentment: ways that recognize that egalitarian liberalism and social democracy are national projects and preserve progressive political coalitions, while also acknowledging our interconnections, duties, and moral obligations to those beyond our borders.


1998 ◽  
Vol 36 (4) ◽  
pp. 549-562 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tapio Raunio ◽  
Matti Wiberg
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document