Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-jr42d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T07:58:22.378Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

From fictions and aggregates to real entities in the theory of the firm

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2009

DAVID GINDIS
DAVID GINDIS*
Affiliation:
Laboratoire d'économie de la firme et des institutions (LEFI), University of Lyon 2, France
*
*Email: david.gindis@univ-lyon2.fr
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

According to the dominant ‘nexus of contracts’ and ‘collection of assets’ views of the firm, the firm is a either a fiction or an aggregate. Although legal personality is important in both accounts, everything is said to be achieved by private contract alone and the law's role in creating legal entity status is dismissed. The paper challenges both these aspects by reconsidering an alternative ‘real entity theory’ that dominated debates at the turn of the twentieth century. This forgotten view holds that the firm is neither a fiction nor an aggregate but a real entity, and underlines the creation of legal entity status as a fundamental role of the law. The paper discusses this view's ontological and legal insights, clarifies the proposition that the firm is a real entity, and proposes it as a starting point for a theory of the firm.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Institutional Economics , Volume 5 , Issue 1 , April 2009 , pp. 25 - 46
Copyright
Copyright © The JOIE Foundation 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alchian, Armen A. (1984), ‘Specificity, Specialization and Coalitions’, Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics, 140 (1): 34–49.Google Scholar
Alchian, Armen A. and Demsetz, Harold (1972), ‘Production, Information Costs and Economic Organization’, American Economic Review, 62 (5): 777–795.Google Scholar
Alchian, Armen A. and Woodward, Susan (1988), ‘The Firm Is Dead; Long Live the Firm: A Review of Oliver E. Williamson's The Economic Institutions of Capitalism’, Journal of Economic Literature, 26 (1): 65–79.Google Scholar
Aristotle, Metaphysics, in McKeon, Richard (2001) (ed.), The Basic Works of Aristotle, New York: Modern Library.Google Scholar
Avi-Yonah, Reuven S. (2005), ‘The Cyclical Transformations of the Corporate Form: A Historical Perspective on Corporate Social Responsibility’, Delaware Journal of Corporate Law, 30 (3): 767–818.Google Scholar
Baker, Lynne R. (2004), ‘The Ontology of Artifacts’, Philosophical Explorations, 7 (2): 99–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barzel, Yoram (1989), Economic Analysis of Property Rights, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Berle, Adolf A. (1947), ‘The Theory of Enterprise Entity’, Columbia Law Review, 47 (3): 343–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berle, Adolf A. and Means, Gardiner C. (1932), The Modern Corporation and Private Property, New York: Harcourt, Brace & World.Google Scholar
Biondi, Yuri (2007), ‘Accounting and the Economic Nature of the Firm as an Entity’, in Biondi, Yuri, Canziani, Arnaldo, and Kirat, Thierry (eds), The Firm as an Entity: Implications for Economics, Accounting and the Law, London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Blackwell, Thomas F. (1999), ‘The Revolution is Here: The Promise of a Unified Business Entity Code’, Journal of Corporation Law, 24 (2): 333–378.Google Scholar
Blair, Margaret M. (1999), ‘Firm-Specific Human Capital and Theories of the Firm’, in Blair, Margaret M. and Roe, Mark J. (eds), Employees and Corporate Governance, Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
Blair, Margaret M. (2003), ‘Locking-In Capital: What Corporate Law Achieved for Business Organizers in the Nineteenth Century’, UCLA Law Review, 51 (2): 387–455.Google Scholar
Blair, Margaret M. (2004), ‘The Neglected Benefits of the Corporate Form: Entity Status and the Separation of Asset Ownership from Control’, in Grandori, Anna (ed.), Corporate Governance and Firm Organization: Microfoundations and Structural Forms, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Blumberg, Phillip I. (1990), ‘The Corporate Personality in American Law: A Summary Review’, American Journal of Comparative Law, 38 (S): 49–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blumberg, Phillip I. (1993), The Multinational Challenge to Corporation Law: The Search for a New Corporate Personality, New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bratton, William W. (1989a), ‘The “Nexus-of-Contracts” Corporation: A Critical Appraisal’, Cornell Law Review, 74 (2): 407–465.Google Scholar
Bratton, William W. (1989b), ‘The New Economic Theory of the Firm: Critical Perspectives from History’, Stanford Law Review, 41 (6): 1471–1527.Google Scholar
Brown, W. Jethro (1905), ‘The Personality of the Corporation and the State’, Law Quarterly Review, 21 (4): 365–379.Google Scholar
Bunge, Mario (2003), Emergence and Convergence: Qualitative Novelty and the Unity of Knowledge, Toronto: Toronto University Press.Google Scholar
Bunge, Mario (2006), Chasing Reality: Strife over Realism, Toronto: Toronto University Press.Google Scholar
Butler, Henry N. (1989), ‘The Contractual Theory of the Corporation’, George Mason University Law Review, 11 (4): 99–123.Google Scholar
Cheung, Steven N. S. (1983), ‘The Contractual Nature of the Firm’, Journal of Law and Economics, 26 (1): 1–21.Google Scholar
Coase, Ronald H. (1937), ‘The Nature of the Firm’, Economica, 4 (16): 386–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, Felix S. (1935), ‘Transcendental Nonsense and the Functional Approach’, Columbia Law Review, 35 (6): 809–849.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Commons, John R. (1924), Legal Foundations of Capitalism, New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Copp, David (1979), ‘Collective Actions and Secondary Actions’, American Philosophical Quarterly, 24 (4): 177–186.Google Scholar
Copp, David (1984), ‘What Collectives Are: Agency, Individualism and Legal Theory’, Dialogue, 23 (2): 249–269.Google Scholar
Davis, John B. (2003), The Theory of the Individual in Economics: Identity and Value, London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Dejnožka, Jan (2003), The Ontology of the Analytic Tradition and Its Origins: Realism and Identity in Frege, Russell, Wittgenstein and Quine, 2nd edition, New York: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Dejnožka, Jan (2006), Corporate Entity, unpublished book manuscript (available online at http://www.members.tripod.com/~Jan_Dejnozka/corporate_entity_book.pdf).Google Scholar
Demsetz, Harold (1988), ‘The Theory of the Firm Revisited’, Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, 4 (1): 141–161.Google Scholar
Dewey, John (1925), Experience and Nature, Chicago: Open Court.Google Scholar
Dewey, John (1926), ‘The Historic Background of Corporate Legal Personality’, Yale Law Journal, 35 (6): 655–673.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dicey, Albert V. (1905), Lectures on the Relation between Law and Public Opinion in England during the Nineteenth Century, London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Dix, Maurice J. (1953), ‘The Economic Entity’, Fordham Law Review, 22 (3): 254–273.Google Scholar
Dodd, E. Merrick (1932), ‘For Whom Are Corporate Managers Trustees?’, Harvard Law Review, 45 (7): 1145–1163.Google Scholar
Easterbrook, Frank H. and Fischel, Daniel R. (1985), ‘Limited Liability and the Corporation’, University of Chicago Law Review, 52 (1): 89–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Easterbrook, Frank H. and Fischel, Daniel R. (1991), The Economic Structure of Corporate Law, Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Elder-Vass, Dave (2005), ‘Emergence and the Realist Account of Cause’, Journal of Critical Realism, 4 (2): 315–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fama, Eugene F. (1980), ‘Agency Problems and the Theory of the Firm’, Journal of Political Economy, 88 (2): 288–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fama, Eugene F. and Jensen, Michael C. (1983), ‘Separation of Ownership and Control’, Journal of Law and Economics, 26 (2): 301–325.Google Scholar
French, Peter A. (1982), ‘Crowds and Corporations’, American Philosophical Quarterly, 19 (3): 271–277.Google Scholar
Freund, Ernst (1897), The Legal Nature of Corporations, Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Gierke, Otto von (1900), Political Theories of the Middle Age, translated with an introduction by Maitland, Frederick W., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gindis, David (2007), ‘Some Building Blocks for a Theory of the Firm as a Real Entity’, in Biondi, Yuri, Canziani, Arnaldo, and Kirat, Thierry (eds), The Firm as an Entity: Implications for Economics, Accounting and the Law, London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Goldstein, Jeffrey (1999), ‘Emergence as a Construct: History and Issues’, Emergence, 1 (1): 49–72.Google Scholar
Grossman, Sanford and Hart, Oliver D. (1986), ‘The Costs and Benefits of Ownership: A Theory of Vertical and Lateral Integration’, Journal of Political Economy, 94 (2): 691–719.Google Scholar
Hager, Mark M. ((1989)), ‘Bodies Politic: The Progressive History of Organizational “Real Entity” Theory’, University of Pittsburgh Law Review, 50 (3): 575–654.Google Scholar
Hansmann, Henry and Kraakman, Reinier (2000), ‘The Essential Role of Organizational Law’, Yale Law Journal, 110 (3): 387–440.Google Scholar
Hansmann, Henry, Kraakman, Reinier, and Squire, Richard (2005), ‘The New Business Entities in Evolutionary Perspective’, University of Illinois Law Review (February): 5–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hansmann, Henry, Kraakman, Reinier, and Squire, Richard (2006), ‘Law and the Rise of the Firm’, Harvard Law Review, 119 (5): 1333–1403.Google Scholar
Harré, Rom and Madden, Edward H. (1975), Causal Powers: A Theory of Natural Necessity, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Harris, Ron (2006), ‘The Transplantation of the Legal Discourse on Corporate Personality Theories: From German Codification to British Political Pluralism and American Big Business’, Washington and Lee Law Review, 63 (4): 1421–1478.Google Scholar
Hart, Oliver D. (1989), ‘An Economist's Perspective on the Theory of the Firm’, Columbia Law Review, 89 (7): 1757–1774.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hart, Oliver D. (1995), Firms, Contracts and Financial Structure, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hart, Oliver D. and Moore, John (1990), ‘Property Rights and the Nature of the Firm’, Journal of Political Economy, 98 (6): 1119–1158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hessen, Robert (1979), ‘A New Concept of Corporations: A Contractual and Private Property Model’, Hastings Law Journal, 30 (5): 1327–1350.Google Scholar
Hodgson, Geoffrey M. (2002), ‘The Legal Nature of the Firm and the Myth of the Firm-Market Hybrid’, International Journal of the Economics of Business, 9 (1): 36–60.Google Scholar
Hodgson, Geoffrey M. (2003), ‘The Hidden Persuaders: Institutions and Individuals in Economic Theory’, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 27 (2): 159–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodgson, Geoffrey M. (2004), On the Evolution of Institutional Economics: Agency, Structure and Darwinism in American Institutionalism, London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hodgson, Geoffrey M. and Knudsen, Thorbjørn (2004), ‘The Firm as an Interactor: Firms as Vehicles for Habits and Routines’, Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 14 (2): 281–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horwitz, Morton J. (1992), The Transformation of American Law, 1870–1960: The Crisis of Legal Orthodoxy, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Humphreys, Paul (1997), ‘Emergence, Not Supervenience’, Philosophy of Science, 64 (S): S337–S345.Google Scholar
Iacobucci, Edward M. and Triantis, George G. (2007), ‘Economic and Legal Boundaries of the Firm’, Virginia Law Review, 93 (3): 515–570.Google Scholar
Iwai, Katsuhito (1999), ‘Persons, Things and Corporations: The Corporate Personality Controversy and Comparative Corporate Governance’, American Journal of Corporation Law, 47 (4): 583–632.Google Scholar
Jensen, Michael C. and Meckling, William H. (1976), ‘Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs and Capital Structure’, Journal of Financial Economics, 3 (4): 305–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jhering, Rudolf (1852) Der Geist des römischen Rechts, Leipzig: Auflage.Google Scholar
Khalil, Elias L. (1997), ‘Is the Firm an Individual?’, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 21 (4): 519–544.Google Scholar
Kim, Jaegwon (2006), ‘Emergence: Core Ideas and Issues’, Synthese, 151 (3): 547–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klein, William A. and Coffee, John C. (2002), Business Organization and Finance: Legal and Economic Principles, 8th edition, New York: Foundation Press.Google Scholar
Lamoreaux, Naomi R. (1998), ‘Partnerships, Corporations and the Theory of the Firm’, American Economic Review, 88 (2): 66–71.Google Scholar
Laski, Harold J. (1916), ‘The Personality of Associations’, Harvard Law Review, 29 (4): 404–426.Google Scholar
Lawson, Tony (1997), Economics and Reality, London and New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leibniz, Gottfried W. (1902) [1687], Correspondence with Arnauld, in McCormack, Thomas J. (ed.), Leibniz: Basic Writings, La Salle, IL: Open Court.Google Scholar
Lowe, Jonathan E. (2003), ‘Identity, Individuality and Unity’, Philosophy, 78 (3): 321–336.Google Scholar
Machen, Arthur W. (1911), ‘Corporate Personality’, Harvard Law Review, 24 (4): 253–267.Google Scholar
Mahoney, Paul G. (2000), ‘Contract or Concession? An Essay on the History of Corporate Law’, Georgia Law Review, 34 (2): 873–893.Google Scholar
Maitland, Frederick W. (1900), ‘The Corporation Sole’, Law Quarterly Review, 16 (4): 335–354.Google Scholar
Maitland, Frederick W. (1905), ‘Moral Personality and Legal Personality’, Journal of the Society of Comparative Legislation, 6 (2): 192–200.Google Scholar
Mäki, Uskali (2001), ‘The Way the World Works (www): Towards an Ontology of Theory Choice’, in Mäki, Uskali (ed.), The Economic World View: Studies in the Ontology of Economics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mark, Gregory A. (1987), ‘The Personification of the Business Corporation in American Law’, University of Chicago Law Review, 54 (4): 1441–1483.Google Scholar
Masten, Scott E. (1988), ‘A Legal Basis for the Firm’, Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, 4 (1): 181–198.Google Scholar
Millon, David (1990), ‘Theories of the Corporation’, Duke Law Journal, 1990 (2): 201–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Molnar, George (2003), Powers: A Study in Metaphysics, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Moore, John (1992), ‘The Firm as a Collection of Assets’, European Economic Review, 36 (2–3): 493–507.Google Scholar
Naffine, Ngaire (2003), ‘Who are Law's Persons? From Cheshire Cats to Responsible Subjects’, Modern Law Review, 66 (3): 346–367.Google Scholar
Nelson, Richard R. and Winter, Sidney G. (1982), An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Orts, Eric W. (1998), ‘Shirking and Sharking: A Legal Theory of the Firm’, Yale Law and Policy Review, 16 (2): 254–329.Google Scholar
Orts, Eric W. (forthcoming), Rethinking the Firm: Theories of the Business Enterprise, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Penrose, Edith T. (1959), The Theory of the Growth of the Firm, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Pettit, Philip (2002), ‘Collective Persons and Powers’, Legal Theory, 8 (4): 443–470.Google Scholar
Phillips, Michael J. (1994), ‘Reappraising the Real Entity Theory of the Corporation’, Florida State University Law Review, 21 (4): 1061–1123.Google Scholar
Plato, Sophist, in Hamilton, Edith and Cairns, Huntington (1980) (eds), Plato: The Collected Dialogues, 10th edition, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Quine, Willard V. O. (1969), Ontological Relativity and Other Essays, New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Radin, Max (1932), ‘The Endless Problem of Corporate Personality’, Columbia Law Review, 32 (4): 643–667.Google Scholar
Ribstein, Larry E. (2006), ‘Should History Lock In Lock-In?’, Tulsa Law Review, 41 (3): 523–539.Google Scholar
Rowley, Scott (1931), ‘The Individuality of Business Associations’, Virginia Law Review, 17 (6): 557–569.Google Scholar
Savigny, Friedrich C. (1841), System des heutigen Römischen Rechts, vol. 2, Berlin: Veit.Google Scholar
Searle, John R. (2005), ‘What Is an Institution?’, Journal of Institutional Economics, 1 (1): 1–22.Google Scholar
Simon, Herbert A. (1991), ‘Organizations and Markets’, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5 (2): 25–44.Google Scholar
Singleton, W. E. (1912), ‘Entities and Real and Artificial Persons’, Journal of the Society of Comparative Legislation, 12 (2): 291–298.Google Scholar
Stauss, James H. (1944), ‘The Entrepreneur: The Firm’, Journal of Political Economy, 52 (2): 112–127.Google Scholar
Stout, Lynn A. (2005), ‘The Nature of Corporations’, University of Illinois Law Review, 2005 (1): 253–267.Google Scholar
Thomasson, Amie L. (2003), ‘Realism and Human Kinds’, Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 67 (3): 580–609.Google Scholar
Vanberg, Viktor J. (1992), ‘Organizations as Constitutional Systems’, Constitutional Political Economy, 3 (3): 223–253.Google Scholar
Vinogradoff, Paul (1924), ‘Juridical Persons’, Columbia Law Review, 24 (6): 594–604.Google Scholar
Weissman, David (2000), A Social Ontology, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Williamson, Oliver E. (1975), Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications, New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Wimsatt, William C. (1997), ‘Aggregativity: Reductive Heuristics for Finding Emergence’, Philosophy of Science, 54 (S): S372–S384.Google Scholar
Winter, Sidney G. (1988), ‘On Coase, Competence and the Corporation’, Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, 4 (1): 163–180.Google Scholar
Wormser, I. Maurice (1912), ‘Piercing the Veil of Corporate Entity’, Columbia Law Review, 12 (6): 496–518.Google Scholar
Zingales, Luigi (2000), ‘In Search of New Foundations’, Journal of Finance, 55 (4): 1623–1653.Google Scholar