Alma Cohen

Professor of Empirical Practice

Griswold 305

617-496-7353

Assistant: Marina Apostol / 617-496-1670

Alma Cohen & Crystal S. Yang, Judicial Politics and Sentencing Decisions, Am. Econ. J.: Econ. Pol’y (forthcoming 2018).
Categories:
Discrimination & Civil Rights
,
Government & Politics
,
Disciplinary Perspectives & Law
,
Criminal Law & Procedure
Sub-Categories:
Sentencing & Punishment
,
Discrimination
,
Gender & Sexuality
,
Race & Ethnicity
,
Empirical Legal Studies
,
Judges & Jurisprudence
,
Courts
,
Politics & Political Theory
Type: Article
Abstract
Racial and gender disparities are prevalent in the criminal justice system, but the sources of these disparities remain largely unknown. This paper investigates whether judge political affiliation contributes to these disparities using data on over 500,000 federal defendants linked to sentencing judge. Exploiting random case assignment, we find that Republican appointed judges sentence black defendants to 3.0 more months than similar non-blacks and female defendants to 2.1 fewer months than similar males, compared to Democratic appointed judges. Disparities by judge political affiliation cannot be explained by other judge characteristics and grow substantially larger when judges are granted more discretion.
Alma Cohen & Charles C.Y. Wang, Reexamining Staggered Boards and Shareholder Value 125 J. Fin. Econ. 637 (2017).
Categories:
Corporate Law & Securities
Sub-Categories:
Corporate Governance
,
Shareholders
Type: Article
Abstract
Cohen and Wang (2013) (CW2013) provide evidence consistent with market participants perceiving staggered boards to be value reducing. Amihud and Stoyanov (2016) (AS2016) contests these findings, reporting some specifications under which the results are not statistically significant. We show that the results retain their significance under a wide array of robustness tests that address the concerns expressed by AS2016. Our empirical findings reinforce the conclusions of CW2013.
Lucian A. Bebchuk, Alma Cohen & Scott Hirst, The Agency Problems of Institutional Investors, 31 J. Econ. Persp. 89 (2017).
Categories:
Corporate Law & Securities
Sub-Categories:
Shareholders
,
Corporate Governance
Type: Article
Abstract
We analyze how the rise of institutional investors has transformed the governance landscape. While corporate ownership is now concentrated in the hands of institutional investors that can exercise stewardship of those corporations that would be impossible for dispersed shareholders, the investment managers of these institutional investors have agency problems vis-à-vis their own investors. We develop an analytical framework for examining these agency problems and apply it to study several key types of investment managers. We analyze how the investment managers of mutual funds - both index funds and actively managed funds - have incentives to under-spend on stewardship and to side excessively with managers of corporations. We show that these incentives are especially acute for managers of index funds, and that the rise of such funds has system-wide adverse consequences for corporate governance. Activist hedge funds have substantially better incentives than managers of index funds or active mutual funds, but their activities do not provide a complete solution for the agency problems of institutional investors. Our analysis provides a framework for future work on institutional investors and their agency problems, and generates insights on a wide range of policy questions. We discuss implications for disclosure by institutional investors; regulation of their fees; stewardship codes; the rise of index investing; proxy advisors; hedge funds; wolf pack activism; and the allocation of power between corporate managers and shareholders.

Education History

Current Courses

Course Catalog View

Griswold 305

617-496-7353

Assistant: Marina Apostol / 617-496-1670