Shareholder Democracy Under Autocracy: Voting Rights and Corporate Performance in Imperial Russia

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy Dayton ◽  
Amanda G. Gregg ◽  
Steven Nafziger
2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 446-481
Author(s):  
Amanda Gregg ◽  
Steven Nafziger

Abstract This article investigates the financing of corporations in industrialization’s early stages by examining new balance sheet data describing all Imperial Russian corporations in 1914. We emphasize differences between two Russian corporation types: share partnerships and A-corporations. Share partnerships issued greater dividends, were less likely to issue bonds, and had larger accounts payable. We find that capital structures varied with age, size, and sector according to modern corporate finance theories and that scaled profits did not demonstrate differential market power across corporation types. Thus, Russian corporations exhibited considerable financial flexibility, and reducing incorporation costs could have benefited the Imperial Russian economy.


Author(s):  
Lucas A. Powe Jr.

Texas has created more constitutional law than any other state. In any classroom nationwide, any basic constitutional law course can be taught using nothing but Texas cases. That, however, understates the history and politics behind the cases. Beyond representing all doctrinal areas of constitutional law, Texas cases deal with the major issues of the nation. This book charts the rich and pervasive development of Texas-inspired constitutional law. From voting rights to railroad regulations, school finance to capital punishment, poverty to civil liberty, this book provides a window into the relationship between constitutional litigation and ordinary politics at the Texas Supreme Court, illuminating how all of the fiercest national divides over what the Constitution means took shape in Texas.


Controlling ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 17 (11) ◽  
pp. 645-652 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernard Marr

Author(s):  
Ekaterina Pravilova

“Property rights” and “Russia” do not usually belong in the same sentence. Rather, our general image of the nation is of insecurity of private ownership and defenselessness in the face of the state. Many scholars have attributed Russia's long-term development problems to a failure to advance property rights for the modern age and blamed Russian intellectuals for their indifference to the issues of ownership. This book refutes this widely shared conventional wisdom and analyzes the emergence of Russian property regimes from the time of Catherine the Great through World War I and the revolutions of 1917. Most importantly, the book shows the emergence of the new practices of owning “public things” in imperial Russia and the attempts of Russian intellectuals to reconcile the security of property with the ideals of the common good. The book analyzes how the belief that certain objects—rivers, forests, minerals, historical monuments, icons, and Russian literary classics—should accede to some kind of public status developed in Russia in the mid-nineteenth century. Professional experts and liberal politicians advocated for a property reform that aimed at exempting public things from private ownership, while the tsars and the imperial government employed the rhetoric of protecting the sanctity of private property and resisted attempts at its limitation. Exploring the Russian ways of thinking about property, the book looks at problems of state reform and the formation of civil society, which, as the book argues, should be rethought as a process of constructing “the public” through the reform of property rights.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document