IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/corgov/v5y1997i1p37-44.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Institutional Voting in the UK: Is Mandatory Voting the Answer?

Author

Listed:
  • Helen Short
  • Kevin Keasey

Abstract

Institutional shareholders are increasingly being urged to take a more active role in the governance of the companies in which they invest. In particular, attention has focused on the level of voting by institutions at annual general meetings, which has historically been rather low, and many commentators argue that institutions (particularly the pension funds) should have a legal duty to exercise their voting rights on behalf of their beneficiaries. This paper examines the issues regarding institutional voting and considers whether mandatory institutional voting is likely to lead to more active institutional involvement in corporate governnance at the individual firm level. In particular, it is argued that the imposition of mandatory voting is unlikely to result in informed voting, which is essential if the objective of increasing effective institutional involvement in corporate governance is to be met. This paper concludes that the imposition of mandatory voting is unlikely to result in a change in the investment and ownership ethos of the institutions.

Suggested Citation

  • Helen Short & Kevin Keasey, 1997. "Institutional Voting in the UK: Is Mandatory Voting the Answer?," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(1), pages 37-44, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:corgov:v:5:y:1997:i:1:p:37-44
    DOI: 10.1111/1467-8683.00038
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8683.00038
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1467-8683.00038?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:corgov:v:5:y:1997:i:1:p:37-44. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0964-8410&site=1 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.