Beate Sjåfjell

Mange av Beate Sjåfjells engelske artikler er fritt tilgjengelig på SSRN. En oversikt over publikasjoner, med muligheter for gratis nedlasting også av nyere norske arbeider, er tilgjengelig via denne siden.

• Sjåfjell, Beate Kristine (2018). Dismantling the Legal Myth of Shareholder Primacy: The Corporation as a Sustainable Market Actor, In Nina Boeger & Charlotte Villiers (ed.),  Shaping the Corporate Landscape.  Hart Publishing Ltd.  ISBN 9781509914326.  4. Vis sammendrag

  The convergence of crises that we face as a global society, with its grand challenge of how to achieve social progress for all without destroying the very basis of our existence, emphasises the importance of discussing the role of the market actors. We cannot achieve environmental, social and economic sustainability of our societies without the contribution of the market actors (businesses, investors, consumers and the public sector in its many roles as market actor). With many difficult questions ahead, there is one thing we know for sure: the ‘business as usual’ path market actors in aggregate are on is not an option for sustainability; it is a very certain path towards a very uncertain future. A fundamental transition away from ‘business as usual’ and onto a sustainable path is necessary. Such a fundamental transition requires sustainable market actors. The paper focuses on what this means for business and more specifically, for the dominant business form of the corporation. In a time where social entrepreneurship in various shapes and sizes receives much (and undoubtedly warranted) attention, whether and how the dominant business form of the corporation fits into a sustainable future also needs to be discussed. This can be rephrased as a question of how to achieve corporate sustainability. The paper begins by discussing the role of the corporation in the unsustainable ‘business as usual’, based on the results of the Sustainable Companies Project (Section II), which shows that the main barrier to corporate sustainability is the social norm of shareholder primacy. This norm has become so dominant that it has turned into a legal myth, and corporate sustainability requires a dismantling of this myth. Section III presents a summary of the tentative reform proposal with this aim, while Section IV concludes with reflections on the work that needs to be done, where the mitigation of the legal myth of shareholder primacy is placed in the broader context of the ongoing research project Sustainable Market Actors for Responsible Trade (SMART).

• Sjåfjell, Beate Kristine (2018). Redefining the corporation for a sustainable new economy. Journal of law and society (Print).  ISSN 0263-323X.  45(1), s 29- 45 . doi: 10.1111/jols.12077
• Sjåfjell, Beate; Nilsen, Heidi Rapp & Richardson, Benjamin R. (2018). Investing in Sustainability or Feeding on Stranded Assets? The Norwegian Government Pension Fund Global. Wake Forest Law Review.  ISSN 0043-003X.  52(4), s 949- 979
• Russell, Roseanne & Sjåfjell, Beate Kristine (2017). Introducing Daughters of Themis: International Network of Female Business Scholars. International and comparative corporate law journal.  ISSN 1388-7084.  12(2), s 7- 12 Vis sammendrag

  This paper introduces a special issue of the International and Comparative Corporate Law Journal resulting from the inaugural workshop of Daughters of Themis: International Network of Female Business Scholars in June 2015. The network fosters a strong sense of collegiality motivated by the sincere belief that our research and ultimately the broader academic endeavour is so much richer and enjoyable when we work together to help resolve society’s great challenges. At its heart is its annual workshop where a small number of participants can enjoy sustained discussion of their papers in an inclusive and collegiate atmosphere, genuine collaboration across disciplines is fostered, and informal support and mentoring of junior scholars by more senior participants can take place. This special issue contributes to the understanding of the relationship between women and business and how their contribution and representation is valued. Uniting these contributions, drawn from different disciplinary perspectives and with the articles covering a range of issues, is an appreciation that the current business model and culture is problematic for a sustainable future. Indeed the grand challenge of sustainability lies in securing the social foundation for humanity now and in the future, while staying within the planetary boundaries. Business contribution to meeting this grand challenge is vital, and the questions concerning the role of gender in achieving sustainability are many. This special issue engages with some of these questions and should be perceived as the beginning of a larger discourse to which Daughters of Themis wishes to contribute.

• Sjåfjell, Beate Kristine (2017). Achieving Corporate Sustainability: What is the Role of the Shareholder?, In Hanne Birkmose (ed.),  Shareholders' Duties.  Kluwer Law International.  ISBN 9789041166708.  Chapter 18. Vis sammendrag

  We cannot achieve environmental, social and economic sustainability of our societies without the contribution of business and finance. A fundamental transition away from ‘business as usual’ and onto a sustainable path is necessary. The dominant business form is the company, and the role of shareholders, the investors in this business form, is therefore highly topical. Concentrating in this chapter on the influence of the shareholders through the general meeting of European listed companies, we see that while the focus of the mainstream corporate governance debate for a long time has been on strengthening shareholder rights, an emerging and important debate is that on whether shareholders also have duties. This chapter contributes to that debate with a discussion of the potential role of shareholders in achieving corporate sustainability, including whether shareholders have or should have any duties to contribute towards such a goal. Corporate sustainability is here defined as when businesses (or more broadly, economic actors) in aggregate create value in a manner that is (a) environmentally sustainable in the sense that it ensures the long-term stability and resilience of the ecosystems that support human life, (b) socially sustainable in the sense that it facilitates the respect and promotion of human rights, and (c) economically sustainable in the sense that it satisfies the economic needs necessary for stable and resilient societies. In the European Union (EU), we see a tentative recognition of the broader role of shareholders, especially as regards economic sustainability. We also see a rising recognition of the significance of shareholders’ role in promoting environmental and social aspects of sustainability, in part inspired by the debate on ‘stewardship’ originating in Europe with the UK Stewardship Code. We see a reflection of this in the European Parliament’s revisions to the Commission’s proposal to changes in the Shareholders’ Rights Directive, which suggest to broaden the scope to include societal issues. Similarly, the so-called non-financial reporting requirements introduced in 2014 aim to ensure that the largest listed companies disclose ‘the impact of [their] activity, relating to, as a minimum, environmental, social and employee matters, respect for human rights, anti-corruption and bribery matters’, also with the view to facilitating responsible investment. These are examples that illustrate a growing EU interest in encouraging shareholders to contribute to long-term successful business, environmentally, socially and economically. After the introduction of the topic in section 1, this chapter outlines in section 2 the research findings that indicate a strong negative impact of shareholders, in aggregate, on corporate sustainability. Section 3 discusses the role of shareholders in the general meeting as a matter of law. After a short overview of the competence the controlling shareholder has in a general meeting, this focuses on the possibilities for and likelihood of shareholder influence in the general meeting being used to promote corporate sustainability. Section 3 concludes with a brief discussion of shareholder influence outside the general meeting. This is a trend that is encouraged by corporate governance codes and stewardship codes alike, without – as I will argue in this chapter – proper appreciation of the potential negative impacts of this approach. Section 4 discusses shareholders’ emerging and potential duties towards corporate sustainability, including a brief discussion of the stewardship codes, while section 5 outlines tentative ideas on how to reform the role of shareholders in company law as an intrinsic part of a tentative reform proposal.

• Sjåfjell, Beate Kristine (2017). Regulating for Corporate Sustainability: Why the Public-Private Divide Misses the Point, In Barnali Choudhury & Martin Petrin (ed.),  Understanding the Company: Corporate Governance and Theory.  Cambridge University Press.  ISBN 9781316536384.  Chapter 6.  s 117 - 144 Vis sammendrag

  The intellectually interesting debate on whether the company is a public or private entity may serve as a deflection device, keeping bright academic minds occupied with discussing the nature of the company. Going into the debate risks exacerbating unnecessarily entrenched positions on the nature, purpose and responsibility of the company. It also risks enforcing an impression of a more hard-lined dichotomy between public and private, shareholders and other stakeholders, social responsibility and corporate governance, than there actually is a basis for. Accordingly, it may not help, but rather make more difficult, the discussion of the more important question: How do we regulate for corporate sustainability? A fundamental barrier for businesses shifting voluntarily away from business as usual and onto a path of corporate sustainability is the social norm of shareholder primacy, as has been argued by several commentators and substantiated further through the comparative company law research of the Sustainable Companies Project. This provides the basis for the conclusion that legal reform is necessary. The company law debate we need to have is what such a legal reform should look like and how we can show businesses, policy-makers and legislators that such reform needs to be adopted. This chapter briefly summarizes the comparative company law research on barriers to sustainability and the basis for the argument that company law reform is necessary. Thereafter, a tentative reform proposal for a first step towards corporate sustainability on EU level is presented. The chapter closes with some reflections on what future research should look into and on the hope for achieving sustainable policies.

• Sjåfjell, Beate Kristine (2017). When the Solution Becomes the Problem: The Triple Failure of Corporate Governance Codes, In Jean Jacques du Plessis & C.K. Low (ed.),  Corporate Governance Codes for the 21st Century: International Perspectives and Critical Analyse.  Springer.  ISBN 978-3-319-51868-8.  Chapter 2.  s 23 - 55 Vis sammendrag

  Corporate governance codes appear to be regarded as the ultimate sign of a modern and efficient market economy. By-passing the slow machinery of legislation, corporate governance codes are a possibility for corporations and shareholders to signal what they perceive as best practice and nudge the governance of corporations in the desired direction. Symptomatically, when corporate legislation in a country is amended, the corporate governance code is too, to always be one step ahead. But in what direction are these steps taking us? And who is choosing the means and the goals? Already in 2006, Steen Thomsen criticised the codes for lacking ‘theoretical or empirical rationale’, to the extent that they are ‘unlikely to do much good (and if so only by accident)’. Since then, corporate social responsibility language has made its way into ever more codes, without this necessarily resolving any problematic issues with the codes. This chapter discusses corporate governance codes in a critical perspective. Drawing on examples of corporate governance codes from selected jurisdictions from around the world, the chapter concludes that corporate governance codes, generally speaking, are a triple failure. While recognising that there are positive exceptions, corporate governance codes are on a whole informed by and support the shareholder primacy drive, with its negative effects for society, for business and for all shareholders with anything but an extremely short-term perspective. The corporate governance codes facilitate and support a system that is based on externalisation of environmental and social costs of business. Attempts at introducing corporate social responsibility language are generally superficial and not designed to achieve the internalisation of externalities that is required if business and finance is to be sustainable, in the economic, environmental and social sense. Moving from so-called soft-law to hard-law will not rectify the problems that this chapter identifies if this merely involves codifying the detrimental aspects of the codes. The chapter does not take the stance that reform of business and financial law is not required; quite the opposite, reform is urgently needed. However, the chapter addresses the terms of such reform and argues that a fundamentally new approach is required, based on a truly modern and systemic understanding of the role of business and finance and its regulatory ecology in achieving a safe and just operating space for humanity. In Section 2, this chapter introduces the context for the critical analysis including the significance of business and finance in meeting the convergence of crises we are facing globally, and the state-of-the-art research on important barriers to corporate sustainability. The triple failure of the corporate governance codes is the topic of Section 3. The three interlinked aspects of this failure consists of the way the corporate governance codes are informed by and promote the destructive shareholder primacy drive, how that leads to an externalisation especially of social and environmental costs, and how the current tendency to rectify the latter are characterised by superficial attempts at including broader societal interests, which are insufficient in their incremental approach to mitigate the deeply entrenched nature of the shareholder primacy drive. Section 4 presents tentative ideas on the kind of legal reform that is necessary.

• Sjåfjell, Beate Kristine; Heidi, Rapp Nilsen & Richardson, Benjamin J. (2017). Investing in Sustainability or Feeding on Stranded Assets? The Norwegian Government Pension Fund Global. Wake Forest Law Review.  ISSN 0043-003X. Vis sammendrag

  We know that access to finance is crucial if we are to achieve the fundamental transition necessary to meet the grand challenge of our time: securing a safe and just operating within the planetary boundaries. In the era of global market capitalism and deregulation, Sovereign Wealth Funds (SWFs) offer one of the few public economic institutions capable of injecting ecological and social values into global markets. This paper undertakes a case study of the world’s largest SWF, the Norwegian Government Pension Global. The Norwegian Fund is well-known for its ethical profile. This includes exclusion of companies based on products (tobacco, certain weapons, and most recently also coal), and observation and potential exclusion based on conduct (including severe violations of human rights, severe environmental damage, gross corruption and other particularly severe violations of fundamental ethical norms), as well as the Fund’s public statements when withdrawing from companies based on conduct in the cases when its attempts at influencing the companies have failed. The principal thesis of the article is that a misleading dichotomy between ethics and economics has held the Norwegian Fund back from contributing to sustainability, leaving the majority of the Fund’s investments on an unsustainable path of ‘business as usual’. Although there are positive indications, major changes are necessary to realise the Fund’s potential to invest in sustainability.

• Anker-Sørensen, Linn & Sjåfjell, Beate Kristine (2016). Vår europeiske selskapsrett, 3. utgave. Selskapsrettstidsskriftet. Tidsskriftet for selskaper, markeder, samfunn og miljø.  ISSN 2387-337X.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2016). Sustainable public procurement as a driver for sustainable companies? The interface between company law and public procurement law, In Beate Sjåfjell & Wiesbrock Anja (ed.),  Sustainable Public Procurement under EU Law. New Perspectives on the State as Stakeholder.  Cambridge University Press.  ISBN 9781107129641.  Chapter 9.  s 182 - 205
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2016). The Courts as Environmental Champions: The Norwegian Hempel Cases. European Company Law.  ISSN 1572-4999.  13(5), s 199- 206 Vis sammendrag

  This article presents the Hempel cases from the Norwegian courts, where a Danish parent company (Hempel AS) first was ordered to pay the costs for investigating the extent of pollution in ground previously owned by its Norwegian subsidiary, and then to pay the costs for cleaning up the pollution. The article argues that these decisions, although formally based on provisions in the Norwegian Pollution Control Act, de facto are innovative examples of case-law based liability, where society’s interest in environmental protection is prioritised over society’s and shareholders’ interest in protecting shareholders’ limited liability. Enhanced due diligence may be the result.

• Sjåfjell, Beate & Halvorssen, Anita M. (2016). The Legal Status of Oil and Gas Exploitation in the Arctic: The Case of Norway. Oil, Gas and Energy Law (OGEL).  ISSN 1875-418X.  2 . doi: www.ogel.org/article.asp?key=3610 Vis sammendrag

  The rates of warming in the Arctic are double the average increase on the rest of the planet. The Arctic is especially vulnerable and climate change is already affecting this region. The melting of polar ice and land ice due to climate change, especially in Greenland, also exacerbates climate change amounting to a positive feedback loop. Oil and gas exploitation in the Arctic has additional environmental impacts affecting the marine environment and the atmosphere in the form of pollution in the oceans and a haze in the air space in the lower atmosphere affecting Arctic populations. The Arctic also has an indigenous population of 400,000, many of whom depend on the land and marine resources to uphold their subsistence livelihoods. The environmental and social impacts for these indigenous groups should be integrated into any energy development project in the Arctic. According to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), fossil fuel production will not be able to continue as it is now if we are to stay below the two-degree Celsius increase in temperature relative to pre-industrial levels. A fundamental shift from fossil fuels to renewables is necessary, with the majority of known fossil fuel reserves needing to remain in the ground. With this backdrop, the article's main question is whether new and large-scale oil and gas exploitation in the Arctic is lawful under international law and domestic law. The article focuses especially on the case of Norway as one of the Arctic states. Starting on the level of international law, the article argues that oil and gas exploitation in the Arctic on a large scale, although not expressly prohibited, would defeat the object and purpose of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), general legal principles relating to climate change, UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the Biodiversity Convention and international human rights agreements and declarations, including the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. It also breaches the spirit of the EU Treaties' goal of sustainable development. On the national level, Norway's constitutional provision on environmental rights was amended in May 2014. With this amended provision the people of Norway on their own behalf and for future generations have a stronger possibility of enforcing their right to a liveable environment. At a minimum, a right to a liveable environment includes safe-guarding critical environmental processes that regulate the stability of the life-support systems on Earth. The planetary boundaries framework defines nine parameters of the earth system to indicate a safe operating space for humanity, including climate. The June 2015 victories in the Dutch Urgenda case and the U.S. Our Children's Trust case are inspiring indications of an emerging international trend of using the courts as the guardians of this aspect of the very basis of our existence.

• Sjåfjell, Beate & Wiesbrock, Anja (2016). Why should public procurement be about sustainability?, In Beate Sjåfjell & Wiesbrock Anja (ed.),  Sustainable Public Procurement under EU Law. New Perspectives on the State as Stakeholder.  Cambridge University Press.  ISBN 9781107129641.  Chapter 1.  s 1 - 22
• Wiesbrock, Anja & Sjåfjell, Beate (2016). Public procurement’s potential for sustainability, In Beate Sjåfjell & Wiesbrock Anja (ed.),  Sustainable Public Procurement under EU Law. New Perspectives on the State as Stakeholder.  Cambridge University Press.  ISBN 9781107129641.  Chapter 11.  s 230 - 242
• Anker-Sørensen, Linn & Sjåfjell, Beate (2015). Vår europeiske selskapsrett, 2. utgave. Selskapsrettstidsskriftet. Tidsskriftet for selskaper, markeder, samfunn og miljø.  ISSN 2387-337X.
• Richardson, Benjamin J. & Sjåfjell, Beate (2015). Capitalism, the Sustainability Crisis and the Limitations of Current Business Governance, In Beate Sjåfjell & Benjamin J. Richardson (ed.),  Company Law and Sustainability: Legal Barriers and Opportunities.  Cambridge University Press.  ISBN 978-1-107-04327-5.  Chapter 1.  s 1 - 34
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2015). Corporate governance for sustainability. The necessary reform of EU company law, In Beate Sjåfjell & Anja Wiesbrock (ed.),  The Greening of European Business under EU Law. Taking Article 11 TFEU Seriously.  Routledge.  ISBN 978-1-13-801956-0.  Chapter 6.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2015). Gender Diversity in the Board Room & Its Impacts: Is the Example of Norway a Way Forward?. Deakin Law Review.  ISSN 1321-3660.  20(1), s 25- 51
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2015). The Legal Significance of Article 11 TFEU for EU Institutions and Member States, In Beate Sjåfjell & Anja Wiesbrock (ed.),  The Greening of European Business under EU Law. Taking Article 11 TFEU Seriously.  Routledge.  ISBN 978-1-13-801956-0.  Chapter 4.
• Sjåfjell, Beate; Johnston, Andrew; Anker-Sørensen, Linn Cecilie; Millon, David & Richardson, Bejamin (2015). Shareholder Primacy: the Main Barrier to Sustainable Companies, In Beate Sjåfjell & Benjamin J. Richardson (ed.),  Company Law and Sustainability: Legal Barriers and Opportunities.  Cambridge University Press.  ISBN 978-1-107-04327-5.  Chapter 3.  s 79 - 147
• Sjåfjell, Beate & Richardson, Benjamin J. (2015). The Future for Company Law and Sustainability, In Beate Sjåfjell & Benjamin J. Richardson (ed.),  Company Law and Sustainability: Legal Barriers and Opportunities.  Cambridge University Press.  ISBN 978-1-107-04327-5.  Chapter 8.  s 312 - 340
• Wiesbrock, Anja & Sjåfjell, Beate (2015). The Jigsaw Puzzle of Sustainability, In Beate Sjåfjell & Anja Wiesbrock (ed.),  The Greening of European Business under EU Law. Taking Article 11 TFEU Seriously.  Routledge.  ISBN 978-1-13-801956-0.  Chapter 10.
• Wiesbrock, Anja & Sjåfjell, Beate (2015). The importance of Article 11 TFEU for regulating business in the EU: Securing the very basis of our existence, In Beate Sjåfjell & Anja Wiesbrock (ed.),  The Greening of European Business under EU Law. Taking Article 11 TFEU Seriously.  Routledge.  ISBN 978-1-13-801956-0.  Chapter 1.
• Anker-Sørensen, Linn Cecilie & Sjåfjell, Beate (2014). Vår europeiske selskapsrett. Selskapsrettstidsskriftet. Tidsskriftet for selskaper, markeder, samfunn og miljø.  ISSN 2387-337X.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2014). Sustainable Companies: Possibilities and Barriers in Norwegian Company Law. International and comparative corporate law journal.  ISSN 1388-7084. Vis sammendrag

  Climate change is a case in point for the necessity of working towards a sustainable development; towards achieving economic development and social justice within the non-negotiable limits of our planet, as is the biodiversity crisis. Norway, home of Gro Harlem Brundtland, chair of the UN-appointed Commission that through its report “Our Common Future” put sustainable development on the global agenda, prides itself on being an environmentally-friendly nation. Although Norway does have a good international repute, its oil-based economy makes the challenge of achieving a smooth transition to a sustainable economy (in the environmental and social sense as well as the economic) no less for Norway than for other countries. In such a transition, business will inevitably need to play an important role. The vast impact that the operations of companies today, on an aggregated level, have on the global economy, on society in general and on the biosphere and the atmosphere, means that a critical analysis of the purpose of companies and the regulatory framework within which they operate is crucial to a deeper understanding of the correlation between society and sustainable development. The company is the most important private legal vehicle to gather capital, generate profits and redistribute income in the world. Companies are also the main contributors to anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions through their choices concerning research and development, their use of resources, their production and transportation, and their – and the end users' – use and recycling or discharge of products. In other words, companies are a major contributor to the problem. They can also become a key factor in finding the solution. The discussion of how to resolve this should rise above and go beyond the corporate social responsibility (CSR) debate. As a part of the work in the Oslo-based research project Sustainable Companies, this paper therefore maps the possibilities and barriers in the Norwegian legal framework for companies for promoting sustainable companies in the environmental sense. The aim of the project is to find out how to better integrate environmental concerns into the decision-making in companies. The core focus of the papers, as of the project itself, is the hither-to to a great extent ignored area of company law. This first section of the paper goes on to set out the backdrop: the Norwegian corporate scene and the legal sources and their inherent methodological challenges, for the guidance of the international reader. Section 2 analyses core company law issues relevant to the integration of environmental concerns in companies, including the purpose of the company and the company interest, and the competences of the various company organs. Section 3 analyses the important supportive area of reporting, accounting and auditing, which is the current compromise solution for those wishing companies to act more responsibly. Section 4 discusses liability and enforcement related to these rules and other means of promoting environmental sustainability in companies, while Section 5 briefly assesses other potential incentives and disincentives. Section 6 and 7 assesses the potential barriers and possibilities in the Norwegian regulation of groups of companies, while Section 8 concludes.

• Sjåfjell, Beate & Mähönen, Jukka (2014). Upgrading the Nordic Corporate Governance Model for Sustainable Companies. European Company Law.  ISSN 1572-4999.  11(2), s 58- 62 Vis sammendrag

  Business as usual is no longer an option. How can the competitive advantage be given to countries and their companies that wish to pursue sustainable profit? This article presents the core of a legal reform proposal in a Nordic context, introducing planetary boundaries as a company law concept, with a redefined purpose for companies and a corresponding reform of the duties of the board.

• Sjåfjell, Beate & Anker-Sørensen, Linn Cecilie (2013). Directors’ Duties and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), In Hanne Birkmose; Mette Neville & Karsten Engsig Sørensen (ed.),  Boards of directors in European companies – reshaping and harmonising their organisation and duties.  Kluwer Law International.  ISBN 9789041141415.  Chapter 7. Vis sammendrag

  While the exact impact of run-away climate change, continued biodiversity destruction and unchecked social impacts of the current financial challenges we see is unknown, we know one thing for certain: Business as usual is not an alternative. To shift over to a sustainable path, we need companies to contribute. Clearly, our governments, even if they were brave and progressive enough, cannot single-handedly adopt sustainability. The contribution of business is needed. And if business shifts in the right direction, customers, employees and indeed whole societies may shift with them. The pressing question then is whether CSR is an answer. Some interesting developments, including the paradigm shift in the EU Commission’s definition of CSR, open up for a revisit of the potential of the CSR concept. We put forward that CSR can play an important part in facilitating such a necessary contribution from companies, if the following three conditions are met: Firstly, the promotion of CSR must encompass both the level of legal compliance and of action beyond compliance. The well-known business capture of CSR that we have seen as voluntary, as a case of ‘don’t regulate us and we can talk about how we behave’ does not suffice. This tends to lead to delimitation against legal obligations and an unwarranted Corporate Governance/CSR dichotomy. The implicit support of shareholder primacy entails that sustainable business, in the environmental and social sense, quickly will hit a ceiling. Secondly, CSR must be true or core CSR, dealing with the business of the company, how that is conducted and the impacts of that business. Thirdly, CSR must entail an integration of environmental and social concerns in the decision-making of the company in such a way as to lead to an internalisation of externalities. In the second section of this chapter, we discuss the role of the board in a CSR context, while the third section investigates the recent developments at EU level, where we find that despite a paradigm shift in the definition of CSR, little is done to integrate CSR concerns into the duties of the board. The fourth section therefore poses the question what role the EU has in this context, concluding that the contribution of the EU most likely is a necessary prerequisite to achieving the shift away from business as usual and onto a sustainable path.

• Sjåfjell, Beate & Anker-Sørensen, Linn Cecilie (2013). Directors duties' and corporate social responsibility (CSR). Social Science Research Network.  ISSN 1556-5068.
• Sjåfjell, Beate & Kjelland, Cecilie (2013). Norway : corporate governance on the outskirts of the EU, In Andreas M. Fleckner & Klaus J. Hopt (ed.),  Comparative corporate governance : a functional and international analysis.  Cambridge University Press.  ISBN 978-1-107-02511-0.  Chapter 16.  s 702 - 752
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2012). Quo vadis, Europe? The significance of sustainable development as objective, principle and rule of EU law, In Cecilia Marcela Bailliet (ed.),  Non-State Actors, Soft Law and Protective Regimes: From the Margins.  Cambridge University Press.  ISBN 978-1-107-02185-3.  12.  s 254 - 280

Se alle arbeider i Cristin

• Sjåfjell, Beate & Anja, Wiesbrock (ed.) (2016). Sustainable Public Procurement under EU Law. New Perspectives on the State as Stakeholder. Cambridge University Press.  ISBN 9781107129641.  268 s.
• Sjåfjell, Beate & Richardson, Benjamin J. (ed.) (2015). Company Law and Sustainability: Legal Barriers and Opportunities. Cambridge University Press.  ISBN 978-1-107-04327-5.  350 s.
• Sjåfjell, Beate & Stubhaug, Arild (red.) (2015). Fra ord til handling - Om Grunnlovens miljøparagraf 112. Institutt for privatrett.  ISBN 9788272362491.  147 s.
• Sjåfjell, Beate & Wiesbrock, Anja (ed.) (2015). The Greening of European Business under EU Law. Taking Article 11 TFEU Seriously. Routledge.  ISBN 978-1-13-801956-0.  212 s. Vis sammendrag

  The relationship between environmentally sustainable development and company and business law has emerged in recent years as a matter of major concern for many scholars, policy-makers, businesses and nongovernmental organisations. This book offers a conceptual analysis of the principles of sustainable development and environmental integration in the EU legal system. It particularly focuses on Article 11 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), which states that EU activities must integrate environmental protection requirements and emphasise the promotion of sustainable development. The book gives an overview of the role played by the environmental integration principle in EU law, both at the level of European legislation and at the level of Member State practice. Contributors to the volume identify and analyse the main legal issues related to the importance of Article 11 TFEU in various policy areas of EU law affecting European businesses, such as company law, insurance and state aid. In drawing together these strands the book sets out the requirements of environmental integration and examines its impact on the regulation of business in the EU. The book will be of great use and interest to students and researchers of business law, environment law, and EU law.

Se alle arbeider i Cristin

• Nilsen, Heidi Rapp & Sjåfjell, Beate (2018). Svar på Høring – NOU 2018: 12 Energiaksjer i Statens pensjonsfond utland.
• Fisher, Aled Dilwyn & Sjåfjell, Beate (2015). Hvor langt rekker lovens lange arm? Juss og politikk i klimakampen, I: Andreas Ytterstad (red.),  Broen til framtiden.  Gyldendal Akademisk.  ISBN 978-82-05-48777-2.  7.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2015). The Role of Business Law in the Jigsaw Puzzle of Sustainability. Building Sustainable Legacies: The New Frontier of Societal Value Co-Creation.  ISSN 2053-8898.  (5), s 42- 56
• Foss, Håkon Frede & Sjåfjell, Beate (2014, 01. august). Refser retten for «ansvarspulverisering».  Dagens Næringsliv.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2014). Bærekraftige selskaper. Nytt i privatretten : nyhetsbrev for informasjon på det privatret.  ISSN 1501-9594.  16(3), s 23- 24
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2014). Deltakelse i plenumsdebatten: Hva kan vi gjøre i Norge for å fremme grønn vekst og klimarobuste samfunn?.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2014). Elefantene i aksjerommet. Dagens næringsliv.  ISSN 0803-9372.  s 3
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2014). Gender Diversity in the Board Room & Its Impacts Is the Example of Norway a Way Forward?.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2014). Gi de gode selskapene konkurransefordelen: En ny rettslig infrastruktur for bærekraftige selskaper.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2014). Gi de gode selskapene konkurransefordelen: Rettslig infrastruktur for bærekraftige selskaper.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2014). Grunnlovens klima- og miljøkrav. UiO web.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2014). Hvilke krav stiller Grl. § 110b til statens miljø- og klimapolitikk?.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2014). Hvordan kan selskapsretten bidra til bærekraftig utvikling? Et tentativt forslag til en ny rettslig infrastruktur for bærekraftige selskaper.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2014, 14. mai). Liker det ikke, men lar Statoil holde på. [Internett].  NRK Rogaland.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2014, 01. august). Refser retten for «ansvarspulverisering».  Dagens Næringsliv.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2014). Staten som majoritetsaksjonær i et globalt Statoil - juridiske utfordringer og muligheter.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2014). Statlig aksjonærs virkemiddel for bærekraftige selskaper.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2014). Sustainable Companies: A Contribution to the Jigsaw Puzzle of Sustainability.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2014). Symptomet Transocean. Dagens næringsliv.  ISSN 0803-9372.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2014, 10. april). «Uinteressant» å diskutere oljesponset forskning.  Morgenbladet.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2014, 20. juni). Vil selge seg ned i ti selskaper.  Bergensavisen.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2014, 16. mai). Åpner for flere klimasøksmål.  Vårt Land.
• Sjåfjell, Beate; Haugan, Peter M. & Fisher, Aled Dilwyn (2014). UiO-ledelsens troverdighet er svekket. Morgenbladet.  ISSN 0805-3847.
• Kalstad, Lise Marit & Sjåfjell, Beate (2013, 16. mai). Professor gir SV-statsråd etikkrefs.  Vårt Land.
• Pileberg, Silje; Solli, Jøran & Sjåfjell, Beate (2013, 27. februar). Slik blir norske selskaper miljøvennlige. [Internett].  www.forskningsradet.no.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2013, 28. november). - Å endre styrers ansvar kan løse klimakrisen. [Internett].  jus.uio.no/ifp.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2013). Brist i skattelogikk. Dagens næringsliv.  ISSN 0803-9372.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2013). Common Nordic Principles or Nordic Regulatory Competition?.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2013). Comparative analysis of barriers and possibilities for Sustainable companies in core company law.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2013). Dette handler eierskapsmytedebatten om. Finansavisen.  ISSN 0803-9518.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2013). EU Corporate Governance and Corporate Social Responsibility: Bridging the Dichotomy or Greenwashing the EU?.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2013). Eierskapsmyten.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2013). Eierskapsmyten. Dagens næringsliv.  ISSN 0803-9372.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2013). Eierskapsmyten II. Dagens næringsliv.  ISSN 0803-9372.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2013, 08. desember). Full krangel mellom Røkke og staten.  Aftenbladet.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2013). Gi konkurransefordelene til de gode bedriftene.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2013). Goals, methods and crossjurisdictional research.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2013). Goals, methods and crossjurisdictional research.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2013). Greening European companies and financial markets. Article 11 TFEU as the key to unlock the EU’s sustainability potential.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2013). Grunnlovens klima- og miljøkrav.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2013). How do board members think?.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2013). Hva handler eierskapsmytedebatten om?. Finansavisen.  ISSN 0803-9518.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2013). Hvem eier Trygve Hegnar. Finansavisen.  ISSN 0803-9518.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2013, 11. november). Mener Røkke-transaksjon er ulovlig.  Dagens Næringsliv.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2013). More than Meets the Eye: The Potential Contribution of Law and Economics in Company and Financial Market Law.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2013). Myten om aksjonæren som eier av selskapet. Finansavisen.  ISSN 0803-9518.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2013). Myter, jus og politikk. Finansavisen.  ISSN 0803-9518.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2013). Om forutinntatthet i eierskapsmytedebatten. Advokatbladet.  ISSN 0801-3020.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2013). Sustainable Companies: Company Law’s Contribution to Preserving Europe’s Wealth in the 21st Century.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2013). The overarching objectives of EU treaty law and the objectives of EU company and financial market law. Why harmonise? And how? Status and challenges.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2013, 01. april). Til kamp mot eierskapsmyten. [Fagblad].  Advokatbladet.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2013). Upgrading the Nordic Model to the Sustainable Model. Defining the purpose of the Company and the duties of the board.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2013, 03. oktober). Ønsker ny klimalov. [Fagblad].  Miljømagasinet Putsj.
• Sjåfjell, Beate & Myklebust, Trude (2013). Norwegian Company and Financial Market Law: Status and Remaining Challenges.
• Kvåle, Gunnar; Wiik, Halfdan & Sjåfjell, Beate (2012). Hodet i sanden - igjen. Aftenposten (morgenutg. : trykt utg.).  ISSN 0804-3116.
• Kvåle, Gunnar; Wiik, Halfdan & Sjåfjell, Beate (2012). Klimasjef tilslører. Bærekraftig helse - Tidsskrift for Norsk Nettverk for Klima og Helse.  (9), s 14- 15 . doi: http://nettverkforklimaoghelse.wordpress.com/tidsskriftet-barekraftig-helse/
• Kvåle, Gunnar; Wiik, Halfdan & Sjåfjell, Beate (2012). Lettvint fra oljeministeren. Klima.  ISSN 1504-8594.  (4)
• Kvåle, Gunnar; Wiik, Halfdan & Sjåfjell, Beate (2012). Når oljeministeren villeder. Aftenposten (morgenutg. : trykt utg.).  ISSN 0804-3116.
• Kvåle, Gunnar; Wiik, Halfdan & Sjåfjell, Beate (2012). Oljeministerens farlige visjoner. Bærekraftig helse - Tidsskrift for Norsk Nettverk for Klima og Helse.  (9), s 16- 17 . doi: http://nettverkforklimaoghelse.wordpress.com/tidsskriftet-barekraftig-helse/
• Kvåle, Gunnar; Wiik, Halfdan & Sjåfjell, Beate (2012). Villeder videre. Aftenposten (morgenutg. : trykt utg.).  ISSN 0804-3116.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2012). A Sustainable Takeover Regime? The Potential Reform of the Takeover Directive in a Sustainable Development Perspective.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2012). Female Company Law Scholars in Male-Dominated Academia – Does Gender Matter?.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2012). Greenwashing: A necessary reform?.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2012, 27. mars). Intervju i NRK Dagsnytt. [TV].  NRK Dagsnytt.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2012, 30. april). Juss for bærekraftige selskaper.  Advokatbladet.
• Sjåfjell, Beate (2012). Plikter å stanse Statoil. Dagens næringsliv.  ISSN 0803-9372.

Se alle arbeider i Cristin