<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance</title>
	<atom:link href="https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2012/09/10/ownership-dispersion-and-the-london-stock-exchanges-two-thirds-rule/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu</link>
	<description>The leading online blog in the fields of corporate governance and financial regulation.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Jul 2026 11:32:28 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.5.8</generator>

 
	<item>
		<title>Ownership Dispersion and the London Stock Exchange’s &#8220;Two-Thirds Rule&#8221;</title>
		<link>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2012/09/10/ownership-dispersion-and-the-london-stock-exchanges-two-thirds-rule/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=ownership-dispersion-and-the-london-stock-exchanges-two-thirds-rule</link>
		<comments>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2012/09/10/ownership-dispersion-and-the-london-stock-exchanges-two-thirds-rule/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Sep 2012 12:48:59 +0000</pubDate>
<!-- 		<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator> -->
				<category><![CDATA[Academic Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Empirical Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Corporate Governance & Regulation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Securities Regulation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International governance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IPOs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Securities regulation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/corpgov/?p=32727?d=20150105110415EST</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In contrast to most other countries, in both Britain and the United States, a hallmark of corporate governance is a separation of ownership and control in major business enterprises. Various theories that have been advanced to account for why patterns of ownership and control differ across borders, with the most influential being that the “law [&#8230;]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<hgroup><em>Posted by June Rhee, Co-editor, HLS Forum on Corporate Governance and Financial Regulation, on Monday, September 10, 2012 </em><div class='e_n' style='background:#F8F8F8;padding:10px;margin-top:5px;margin-bottom:10px;text-indent:2.5em;'><strong style='margin-left:-2.5em;'>Editor's Note: </strong> <p style="margin:0; display:inline;">The following post comes to us from <a href="http://www.jbs.cam.ac.uk/research/faculty/chambersd.html" target="_blank">David Chambers</a> of Cambridge Judge Business School at University of Cambridge; <a href="http://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/br-cheffins/3" target="_blank">Brian Cheffins</a>, Professor of Corporate Law at the University of Cambridge; and Dmitri K Koustas of University of California, Berkeley.</p>
</div></hgroup><p>In contrast to most other countries, in both Britain and the United States, a hallmark of corporate governance is a separation of ownership and control in major business enterprises. Various theories that have been advanced to account for why patterns of ownership and control differ across borders, with the most influential being that the “law matters” in the sense that ownership dispersion is unlikely to become commonplace in public companies unless company law provides substantial protection to outside investors. As one of us has argued <a href="http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/corpgov/2008/11/24/corporate-ownership-and-control-british-business-transformed/">elsewhere</a>, these theories do not explain effectively why a separation of ownership and control became the norm in the UK. In our paper “<a href="http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2094538" target="_blank">Ownership Dispersion and the London Stock Exchange’s ‘Two-Thirds Rule’: An Empirical Test</a>”, recently published on SSRN we analyze a different law-related hypothesis concerning the evolution of ownership patterns and show that it similarly lacks substantial explanatory power.</p>
<p> <a href="https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2012/09/10/ownership-dispersion-and-the-london-stock-exchanges-two-thirds-rule/#more-32727" class="more-link"><span aria-label="Continue reading Ownership Dispersion and the London Stock Exchange’s &#8220;Two-Thirds Rule&#8221;">(more&hellip;)</span></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2012/09/10/ownership-dispersion-and-the-london-stock-exchanges-two-thirds-rule/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
