Cooperation and Conflict: A Law and Economics Analysis of Meta-Organizations

Over the second part of the twentieth century inter-firm cooperations have become an increasingly popular phenomenon. These inter-firm cooperations often play out in the form of meta-organizations, which are organizations that are composed of the cooperating organizations. This thesis offers a new Law and Economics view on meta-organizations, contrasting meta-organizations with employment-based organizations in terms of the benefits and obligations involved. By integrating aspects from the fields of Law and Economics and Organization Science, the thesis contributes to the understanding of meta-organizations and their governance. Meta-organizations can be characterized as a hybrid between market and hierarchy. Because of their hybrid form, meta-organizations are different from employment based organizations. This difference originates from their distinct membership compositions, and the associated rewards and obligations. The distinct nature of the obligations and rewards in meta-organizations impedes the applicability of governance mechanisms that are well established for employment-based organizations, such as the instruments building on formal authority or corporate governance. As a consequence, meta-organizations require specific governance mechanisms. This thesis presents two examples of such governance mechanisms. Third party decision making is viewed as an integral part of the meta-organization, implying that in this context arbitrators, for example, are a complement rather than a substitute to ordinary courts. Group selection may be relevant for cooperation within meta-organizations, with a larger pool of groups fostering cooperation through self-sorting of parties according to their willingness to cooperate, but also hindering cooperation due to coordination costs of finding a suitable group. This thesis has built upon insights from both Law and Economics and Organization Science in order to shed new light on the governance of meta-organizations. The findings of this thesis, based on an integrated use of multiple disciplines, show the relevance of broadening the paradigm within Law and Economics beyond neoclassical economics

Cooperation and Conflict: a Law and Economics Analysis of Meta-Organizations

Over the second part of the twentieth century inter-firm cooperations have become an increasingly popular phenomenon. These inter-firm cooperations often play out in the form of meta-organizations, which are organizations that are composed of the cooperating organizations. This thesis offers a new Law and Economics view on meta-organizations, contrasting meta-organizations with employment-based organizations in terms of the benefits and obligations involved. By integrating aspects from the fields of Law and Economics and Organization Science, the thesis contributes to the understanding of meta-organizations and their governance. Meta-organizations can be characterized as a hybrid between market and hierarchy. Because of their hybrid form, meta-organizations are different from employment based organizations. This difference originates from their distinct membership compositions, and the associated rewards and obligations. The distinct nature of the obligations and rewards in meta-organizations impedes the applicability of governance mechanisms that are well established for employment-based organizations, such as the instruments building on formal authority or corporate governance. As a consequence, meta-organizations require specific governance mechanisms. This thesis presents two examples of such governance mechanisms. Third party decision making is viewed as an integral part of the meta-organization, implying that in this context arbitrators, for example, are a complement rather than a substitute to ordinary courts. Group selection may be relevant for cooperation within meta-organizations, with a larger pool of groups fostering cooperation through self-sorting of parties according to their willingness to cooperate, but also hindering cooperation due to coordination costs of finding a suitable group. This thesis has built upon insights from both Law and Economics and Organization Science in order to shed new light on the governance of meta-organizations. The findings of this thesis, based on an integrated use of multiple disciplines, show the relevance of broadening the paradigm within Law and Economics beyond neoclassical economics

Day fines: asymmetric information and the secondary enforcement system

The most common pecuniary sanction, i.e. fixed-fines, places an emphasis on the severity of the crime. This fine has the problem of being either too high for poorer offenders to pay or too low for the richer offenders to be deterred. Day-fines, on the other hand, systematically account for the financial situation of the offender as well as for the severity of his offense. Consequently, it imposes equivalent burden of punishment on offenders who committed similar crimes, regardless of their wealth. However, a problem of asymmetric information is raised. Accurate financial information is essential for the efficiency of day-fines, yet its collection is costly. Day-fines receive increasing attention from policy-makers around the world. Nonetheless, it is under-researched in the law and economics literature. Therefore, this article is the first to formally analyze the problem of asymmetric information in the context of day-fines and to develop an optimal secondary enforcement system that would incentivize criminals to provide accurate information regarding their wealth

Conflict Resolution in Meta-Organizations: The Peculiar Role of Arbitration

Meta-organizations, such as joint ventures and other complex forms of inter-firm organizations, are characterized by the absence of formal authority. This lack of internal hierarchy can lead to severe conflicts between cooperating organizations and hencerequires specific governance. This paper recognizes arbitration as an integral part of the organizational architecture of meta-organizations. First, attributes are identified that in the context of meta-organizations distinguish arbitration from ordinary courts. Then these attributes are considered to discuss why arbitration should be understood as aninternal rather than an external governance device, delineating the boundaries of meta-organizations, and leading to optimal investment decisions

Additional file 1 of Conflict resolution in meta-organizations: the peculiar role of arbitration

Appendix: Extended Proofs

From books to content platforms - new business models in the Dutch publishing sector

The disruptive effect of digital technology poses particular challenges to the publishing sector. Publishers react to these challenges by developing new business models that embrace digital technology and seek to seize opportunities for new ways of content distribution. Creating digital platforms for the distribution of content, publishers can establish a network that is attractive to contributors (authors) and customers alike. Substantial profit can be derived from the network if it attracts content providers because the database already has a large number of customers and, at the same time, attracts customers because of the large number of content providers

New rights or new business models? An inquiry into the future of publishing in the digital era

textabstractIn its Proposal for a Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market, the European Commission included a new neighbouring right for press publishers with regard to the digital use of their publications “to ensure quality journalism and citizens’ access to information.” (European Commission, 14 September 2016, Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on Copyright in the Digital Single Market, Doc. COM(2016) 593 final, Art. 11(1) and Recital 31.) Undoubtedly, a free and pluralist press is one of the cornerstones of democratic societies. The question is, however, whether this goal can be achieved by adopting an additional layer of protection. From an economic perspective, it seems essential that publishers, including press publishers, develop new business models in the digital environment. To ensure the survival of quality journalism, it is of utmost importance to support the transition to new business models that has already started in the publishing sector. Hence, the question arises whether the proposal of a new neighbouring right is a legislative initiative that makes sense against this background. To answer this question, the following inquiry will first provide an economic analysis of new business models in the publishing industry. On this basis, it becomes possible to assess the proposal of a new neighbouring right in the light of the need to develop new business models that are sustainable in the digital environment. The analysis will show that the introduction of a new neighbouring right is unlikely to offer support in this respect. Instead, it may even impede or delay necessary modernization steps