透過您的圖書館登入
IP:3.92.96.247
  • 學位論文

社會企業─企業典範轉移之研究

Social Enterprise─The Research of Enterprise Paradigm Shift

指導教授 : 曾宛如
若您是本文的作者,可授權文章由華藝線上圖書館中協助推廣。

摘要


摘要 觀察歐、美對社會企業定義的差異後,本文採納歐洲的定義認為社會企業必須確保社會使命並有相應之治理結構。進一步以公司法CSR相較,本文認為CSR與社會企業差異的關鍵應為從「權力轉變為義務」而使「CSR由量變到質變」,因此本文認為狹義的社會企業將造成公司治理的變革,帶來「企業/公司的典範轉移」。 在法制上,本文以英國CIC以及美國四大社會企業公司之立法進行比較法研究,發現兩國立法之差異應在於定性,並非單純規範密度之寬嚴,蓋因CIC整體規範邏輯是將傳統NPO的規範特徵納入公司法中以確保社會使命,呈現公司法與NPO法混合體的樣貌;而美國四大立法卻只是擴大董事對公益目的之決策權限以加強CSR的效果,未有確保社會使命的規範設計。 由於英、美均以公司組織為立法,能否克服傳統公司法對公益目的造成的困境便是檢測社會企業立法的試金石。對此,本文以傳統公司法上股東利益最大化原則的具體應用層面,包含董事受託義務、股東盈餘分派權以及併購案等面向,檢測英美社會企業法能否克服困境,復以代表公益目的受益者的利害關係人來檢驗公益目的之實踐成效,此即為四大試金石。經過四大試金石的檢驗,本文認為CIC法規已明確劃定與傳統公司不同的規範標準及行為準則,能夠克服傳統公司法上營利性的困境,並實質轉變為公益優先之社會企業,具有典範轉移的效果;而美國僅靠公司應追求公益目的、董事應平衡考量公益與股東利益之規範,不僅無法克服股東利益最大化困境,反而徒增爭訟的可能。 我國的社會企業發展,政府基於「先行政後立法」的態度提出《社會企業行動方案》,擬定未來社會企業的施政方針;惟本文認為行動方案未能掌握社會企業之核心內涵,導致施政方向未能辨明其與一般創業需求的差異而僅強調資金來源的規範鬆綁,此尤其在開放財團法人投資設立美式社會企業的營利型公司時,反促使既有財團法人及NPO規範缺漏的沉痾及弊端惡化,因此行動方案有必要再行研擬修正。

並列摘要


Abstract After exploring and analyzing the concept of “social enterprise” in European countries and that in the U.S, this thesis agrees with the European approach that “social enterprise” should ensure to pursue their social purpose and the specific governance structures which correspond to their purpose are essential. In the context of corporation law, this thesis argues that the crucial divergence between CSR and social enterprise is that CSR “allows” the board of directors to practice social responsibilities, which means they have the discretion, but social enterprise “requires” directors to carry out the social purpose, which means they bear the duty. Being aware of such substantial difference, it can be concluded that the transition from CSR to social enterprise actually evokes the reformation of “corporate governance” and brings about the enterprise/corporation paradigm shift. This thesis adopts the comparative study to compare the CIC act of U.K. and the four social enterprise legislations of the U.S. The thesis finds out that the difference between the two countries laws is the "nature" of the norms, not just the different criteria. The reason is that the CIC act appears to be a "hybrid entity" legal form given it combines characteristics of NPO regulations into company laws, the legislations of the U.S., however, merely expand directors’ discretion to decide whether or not to reinforce CSR, rather than ensure their duty of pursuing the social purpose. Given that both social enterprise legislation of U.K. and the U.S. adopt company/corporation as the legal entity, whether to conquer the conventional value of traditional corporation law which aims at shareholders’ value maximization resulting in the limitation of social purpose shall be the touchstone of social enterprise legislations. Therefore, this thesis further develops four touchstones: the first to the third touchstones which originate from the norm of the shareholder value maximization application cases are the fiduciary duty of the board of directors, dividend/surplus distribution and mergers and acquisitions. The last touchstones focus on the improvement of the stakeholders’ status since they are the beneficiary of social purposes. Via the examination of these touchstones, this thesis argues that the approach of the CIC act clearly establishes the distinctive standards and principles which are different from traditional corporation law so that the CIC could successfully conquer the existing difficulties and is exactly the social enterprise which prioritizes the social purpose. In contrast, the legislations of the U.S. merely pronounce that companies/corporations should pursue the social purpose and the board of directors must consider both the stakeholders’ and shareholders’ interests. It not only cannot solve the existing difficulties but even increases more disputes. In the context of the social enterprise development in Taiwan, the central government has proposed the social enterprise development guiding policy. However, this thesis contends that it contains a significant defect: failing to grasp the crux of social enterprise. This defect leads to the failure to distinguish the differences between a social enterprise and an ordinary business venture, and further causes that the guiding policy only emphasizes on the deregulation for raising capitals. Especially, when permitting NPO to set up a corporation which is engaged in CSR, this policy would rather worsen and deteriorate the existing regulatory defects and loopholes of NPO. This thesis contends that this policy needs to be revised.

參考文獻


2. 陳方隅. (2012),「社會經濟」的在地實踐:論合作經濟與花蓮案例可行性,國立台灣大學政治學系碩士論文。
1. 陳菽芊(2008),論研究發展之稅捐優惠,國立臺灣大學法律學院碩士論文。
23. 曾宛如(2013)。<影子董事與關係企業—多數股東權行使界限之另一面向>,政大法學評論,第132卷,頁1-70。
6. 周振鋒(2013)。<公司捐贈與相關代理成本問題之研究>,台大法學論叢,第42卷第2期,頁259-315。
30. 蔡英欣(2008)。<論公司社會責任之規範模式:以日本法之經驗為例,台大法學論叢,第37卷第3期,頁188-243。

被引用紀錄


江永楨(2017)。從營利到共益的公司法典範轉移-建構適合社會企業發展之法制〔碩士論文,國立臺灣大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://doi.org/10.6342%2fNTU201702919
洪永男(2017)。高齡產業商業模式創新之分類、發展與驗證-服務設計取向〔碩士論文,長榮大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=U0015-0907201722504800

延伸閱讀