The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics

2018 Edition
| Editors: Macmillan Publishers Ltd

Corporate Governance

  • Luigi Zingales
Reference work entry


Introduced in the mid-1980s, the term ‘corporate governance’ can be defined as the set of conditions that shapes the ex post bargaining over the quasi-rents generated by a firm. The incomplete contracts approach has been very successful in explaining the corporate governance of entrepreneurial firms and also some important features of large corporations, such as allocation of ownership to the providers of capital who are dispersed, and the importance of internal organization. Aspects that remain to be investigated include the role of the board of directors, interaction between different mechanisms of corporate governance, and the normative implications of the approach.


Asymmetric information Bargaining Bilateral monopoly Coase theorem Contractual governance Control rights Corporate governance Firm, theory of Free-rider problem Human capital Incomplete contracts Mechanism design Nexus of contracts view of the firm Property rights view of the firm Quasi-rent Risk aversion Takeovers 

JEL Classifications

G30 P50 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.


  1. Aghion, P., and P. Bolton. 1992. An incomplete contract approach to financial contracting. Review of Economic Studies 59: 473–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aghion, P., P. Bolton, and L. Felli. 1997. Some issues on contract incompleteness. Working Paper, London School of Economics.Google Scholar
  3. Alchian, A., and H. Demsetz. 1972. Production, information costs and economic organization. American Economic Review 62: 777–795.Google Scholar
  4. Bebchuk, L., and L. Zingales. 1996. Corporate ownership structures: Private versus social optimality. Working Paper No. 5584. Cambridge, MA: NBER.Google Scholar
  5. Berle, A., and G. Means. 1932. The modern corporation and private property. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  6. Blair, M.M. 1995. Ownership and control. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
  7. Blair, M.M., and L. Stout. 1997. A theory of corporation law as a response to contracting problems in team production. Working Paper, Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
  8. Chandler, A. 1966. Strategy and structure. Garden City: Anchor Books.Google Scholar
  9. Fama, F., and M.C. Jensen. 1983a. Separation of ownership and control. Journal of Law and Economics 26: 301–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fama, E., and M.C. Jensen. 1983b. Agency problems and residual claims. Journal of Law and Economics 26: 327–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Grossman, S., and O. Hart. 1980. Takeover bids, the free rider problem and the theory of the corporation. Bell Journal of Economics 11: 42–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Grossman, S., and O. Hart. 1986. The costs and the benefits of ownership: A theory of vertical and lateral integration. Journal of Political Economy 94: 691–719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hansmann, H. 1996. The ownership of enterprise. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Hart, O. 1989. An economist’s perspective on the theory of the firm. Columbia Law Review 89: 1757–1774.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hart, O. 1995. Firms, contracts, and financial structure. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hart, O., and J. Moore. 1990. Property rights and the nature of the firm. Journal of Political Economy 98: 1119–1158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hellwig, M. 1997. Unternchmensfinanzierung, Unterichmenskontrolle und Ressourcenallokation: Was leister das Finanzsystem. Arbeitspapier Nr. 97/02, University of Mannheim.Google Scholar
  18. Jensen, M.C., and W. Meckling. 1976. Theory of the firm; managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics 3: 305–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Klein, H., R. Crawford, and A. Alchian. 1978. Vertical integration, appropriable rents and the competitive contracting process. Journal of Law and Economics 21: 297–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. La Porta, R., F. Lopez de Silancs, A. Shleifer, and R. Vishny. 1996. Law and finance. Working Paper No. 5661. Cambridge, MA: NBER.Google Scholar
  21. La Porta, R., F. Lopez de Silancs, A. Shleifer, and R. Vishny. 1997. Legal determinants of external finance. Journal of Finance 52: 1131–1150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Maskin, F., and J. Tirole. 1997. Unforeseen contingencies, property rights and incomplete contracts. Working Paper No. 1796, Institute of Economic Research, Harvard University.Google Scholar
  23. Milgrom, P. 1988. Employment contracts, influence activities, and efficient organization design. Journal of Political Economy 96: 42–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Milgrom, P., and J. Roberts. 1990. Bargaining costs, influence costs and the organization of economics activity. In Perspectives on positive political economy, ed. J. Alt and K. Shepsle. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Myerson, R. 1979. Incentive compatibility and the bargaining problem. Econometrica 47: 61–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Novaes, W., and L. Zingales. 1995. Capital structure choice when managers are in control: Entrenchment versus efficiency. Working Paper No. 5384. Cambridge, MA: NBER.Google Scholar
  27. Rajan, R., and L. Zingales. 1996. The tyranny of the inefficient: An enquiry into the adverse consequences of power struggles. Working Paper No. 5396. Cambridge, MA: NBER.Google Scholar
  28. Rajan, R., and L. Zingales. 1998. Power in a theory of the firm. Quarterly Journal of Economics 113: 387–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Rajan, R., and L. Zingales. 2001. The firm as a dedicated hierarchy. Quarterly Journal of Economics 116: 805–851.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Rajan, R., H. Servaes, and L. Zingales. 2000. The cost of diversity: Diversification discount and inefficient investment. Journal of Finance 55: 35–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Shleifer, A., and R. Vishny. 1989. Management entrenchment: The case of manager- specific investments. Journal of Financial Economics 25: 123–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Shleifer, A., and R. Vishny. 1997. A survey of corporate governance. Journal of Finance 52: 737–783.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Wiggins, S.N., and G.D. Libecap. 1985. Oil field unitization: Contractual failure in the presence of imperfect information. American Economic Review 75: 368–385.Google Scholar
  34. Williamson, O. 1985. The economic institutions of capitalism. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  35. Zingales, L. 1995a. Insider ownership and the decision to go public. Review of Economic Studies 62: 425–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Zingales, L. 1995b. What determines the value of corporate votes? Quarterly Journal of Economics 110: 1047–1073.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Luigi Zingales
    • 1
  1. 1.