MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6986197592

Osgoode Hall Law School Professor to Publish New Book on Corporate Board Diversity

2014· article· en· W6986197592 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueeYLS (Yale Law School) · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFetal and Pediatric Neurological Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublicationNorwegianCommissionDiversity (politics)Corporate governanceCorporate lawGender diversity
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Osgoode Hall Law School Professor to Publish New Book on Corporate Board Diversity\nTORONTO, November 17, 2014 – New research by Professor Aaron Dhir of York University’s Osgoode Hall Law School offers compelling insights into the role law can play in addressing the lack of gender diversity in corporate boardrooms.\nIn his forthcoming book, Challenging Boardroom Homogeneity, to be published by Cambridge University Press in February, Dhir analyses the homogeneity of corporate boards around the world and the two main ways in which law has been used to address this heated topic of debate. He compares the U.S. model of diversity disclosure with the Norwegian quota model, revealing stark contrasts.\nDhir examines the disclosures that the S&P 100 submitted to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission after the SEC implemented a rule in 2010 requiring companies to report on whether they consider diversity in nominating directors. He finds that since the SEC provides no definition of the term “diversity,” corporations most frequently define the term with reference to a director’s prior experience rather than his or her socio-demographic characteristics. The SEC rule thus gives firms little reason to think seriously about the socio-demographic composition of their boards.\nBy contrast, Dhir’s study of the Norwegian quota model reveals a strategy that has produced very different results. Norway was the first country to enact a board diversity quota and today women in the country hold 40.5 percent of board positions. While speculation about the effects of corporate board quotas abounds, Dhir, who interviewed Norwegian corporate directors about their experiences under Norway’s controversial law, replaces the conjecture with an account of real-life boardroom reality.\n“The lack of gender parity in the governance of business corporations has ignited intense global debate, leading policymakers to wrestle with difficult questions that lie at the intersection of market activity and social identity politics,” said Dhir, who is currently a Visiting Professor of Law at Yale Law School.\n“Regulators globally are now debating what paths to pursue to diversify the upper echelons of their corporate sectors. Canada is no exception. Just last month, the Ontario Securities Commission and eight other provincial and territorial securities regulators announced new disclosure rules that will require Canadian firms to be more forthcoming about the inclusion of women in their governance structures. At the same time, a bill currently under consideration in the Canadian Senate seeks to mandate gender parity in corporate boardrooms.”\nDhir’s research findings are generating considerable media attention ahead of the publication of his book, including coverage in the New York Times, Forbes, and ThinkProgress. Journalists are welcome to access three preview chapters from the book, available for download here: \nhttp://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2487149 http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2488153 http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2488154 \nDhir can be reached for comment at: adhir@osgoode.yorku.ca or aaron.dhir@yale.edu\n-30-\nYork University is helping to shape the global thinkers and thinking that will define tomorrow. York U’s unwavering commitment to excellence reflects a rich diversity of perspectives and a strong sense of social responsibility that sets us apart. A York U degree empowers graduates to thrive in the world and achieve their life goals through a rigorous academic foundation balanced by real-world experiential education. As a globally recognized research centre, York U is fully engaged in the critical discussions that lead to innovative solutions to the most pressing local and global social challenges. York U’s 11 faculties and 27 research centres are thinking bigger, broader and more globally, partnering with 288 leading universities worldwide. York U’s community is strong − 55,000 students, 7,000 faculty and staff, and more than 250,000 alumni.\nMedia Contact:\nVirginia Corner, Communications Manager, Osgoode Hall Law School of York University, 416-736-5820, vcorner@osgoode.yorku.ca

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.475
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.006

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.216 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeYLS (Yale Law School)Same topicFetal and Pediatric Neurological DisordersFrench-language works237,207