论文部分内容阅读
当前,全球化背景下各种公司治理模式是否趋同的问题,是比较公司治理学者争论的棱心问题。然而无论是趋同论者的新古典综合学派的效率理论,还是存续论者的新制度经济学派的路径依赖理论及政治寻租理论,在解释趋同或存续时都存在着明显的方法论缺陷。运用辩证唯物主义和历史唯物主义的观点和方法,对趋同论和存续论进行考察,便可发现:制度价值的释放只有在相适应的制度环境中和互补性制度的支撑下才有可能;路径依赖不仅仅是阻碍趋同的力量而且还可以成为推动趋同的力量;政治寻租及利益集团的压力随着经济自由度和清廉度的提高将会被压制在一个极小的空间内。因此,趋同的力量正在压倒存续的力量并将最终战胜后者。
At present, the question of whether the various corporate governance models converge in the context of globalization is a matter of primal comparison to the controversy among corporate governance scholars. However, both the efficiency theory of the neoclassical school of convergence and the path dependence of the neo-institutional economics of survivors and the theory of political rent-seeking, there are obvious methodological flaws in the interpretation of convergence or existence. Using the perspectives and methods of dialectical materialism and historical materialism and examining the theory of convergence and existentialism, we can find that the release of institutional value is only possible under the support of a compatible institutional environment and complementarity system. The path Dependence is not only a force that hinder convergence but also a force that drives convergence; the pressure of political rent-seeking and interest groups will be suppressed in a very small space with the increase of economic freedom and cleanliness. Therefore, the forces of convergence are overcoming the surviving forces and will eventually defeat the latter.