Editorial

Dear reader,
At the Dovenschmidt Quarterly (DQ), we believe that corporate scandals, the financial crisis and other market and corporate failures have necessitated a reconsideration of the desirability of “business as usual” approaches to corporate and economic policies. Sustainability considerations and rapidly shifting social dynamics reveal the need for a multidisciplinary analysis of corporate structures and their significance in relation to social, economic and environmental issues. The first two issues of DQ have focused on this need, and discussed a wide range of interdisciplinary topics, including, but not limited to, new perspectives on EU, public and private regulation, the nature of China’s economic growth and insights from its alternative regulatory framework, options for sustainable governance, critical analyses of rating agencies and legal challenges presented by climate change.
Continuing our mission to provide alternative perspectives on old approaches and new developments, it is with great pleasure that we present to you the newest issue of DQ.
The first article in this new issue is written by Dorenbos and Pacces, who question whether reforms favouring independent remuneration committees and greater shareholder involvement will reduce risk-taking in banks. They reason that government protection of banks in cases of insolvency renders it unlikely that shareholders will be troubled by excessive risk-taking. With the depositor safety net in place, they argue that increased shareholder involvement in bank governance will actually exacerbate rather than reduce risk-taking in banks.
Hunt uncovers in the second article the dreams and reality of microfinance developments. In addition to granting an overview of international microfinance developments, the author adopts a law and economics perspective to evaluate the effectiveness of the microfinance contributions to economic growth. This enables an analysis of the role of law and institutions in promoting the effectiveness of microfinance institutions.
The third article by Arnaudo emphasizes the importance of a cognitive, behavioural approach to law and economics. Using specific arguments related to antitrust, Arnaudo stresses the inclusion of psychological insights related to subjective and irrational behaviour when seeking to understand business conduct to design more accurate legal theories and practice.
Van der Zanden and Van der Zanden provide an international perspective on the historical development of auditors and auditing firms in relation to standard setting and regulations. This contribution provides a contextual understanding of contemporary legal reform surrounding the auditing profession and concludes with specific criticisms and suggestions for improvement.
The final piece by Weemaels notes that the days of credit rating agency (CRA) self-regulation are over and looks at the emerging regulatory framework for rating agencies in Europe. The author provides an interesting overview of contemporary and future reform developments related to credit rating agencies (CRAs) in the European Union as well as a critical analysis of the new provisions in this respect.
We hope that the collective insights from the articles in this issue of the Dovenschmidt Quarterly inform and assist our readers in outlining, analysing and developing policies for sustainable corporate and economic structures.

The Editorial Board