Abstract
One of the standard regulatory reactions to troubling events in the corporate world—such as the collapse of one of Australia's largest insurers, HIH, the Enron failure in the US, and the Polly Peck accounting scandal in the UK—has been regulation that mandates formally independent directors, and plenty of them. Yet some of the most recent initiatives paint a more mixed picture than usual. For example, in Australia the most recent changes to the ASX Corporate Governance Principles are focused on diversity. In the UK, the Walker Review suggested that expertise was the answer. This paper argues that there is a growing recognition that a reliance on formal independence, as it has been conceived in corporate governance regulation, is unsatisfactory. This paper deconstructs the concept of independence and uses these different understandings of independence to evaluate how the regulation of independent directors has evolved in recent years.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
