Equbusiness book VERSION 28SEPT2023 - Flipbook - Page 87
devoid of fines or legal sanctions, did not achieve full success in reaching its objectives. However, it instigated a
transformative shift in the Spanish system. At the inception of the law, the representation of women on corporate
boards among listed companies was a mere 2%. This figure rose to 20% in 2016 and further increased to an
undisclosed percentage in 2022 (Gabaldon & Gimenez, 2017). It can be argued that by merely setting an aim
without a sanction or significant reward, Spanish legislators brought about substantial improvement in gender
diversity. Nonetheless, this approach is subject to criticism for choosing a prolonged route without assured
outcomes.
In addition to the legislation enacted in 2007, Spanish legislators adopted a renewed approach starting in 2013,
focusing on supporting companies in implementing gender-diverse practices (Gabaldon & Gimenez, 2017). The
new Corporate Governance Code, effective from 2015, is integral to this revised approach. According to the new
code, women should be represented with a minimum of 30% in listed companies9 corporate boards, showcasing a
sustained commitment by Spanish legislators. This commitment is underscored by the fact that in 2020, the
quota was further elevated to 40% as the Spanish government proposed a new mandate for gender diversity on
the boards of large companies. As a result, Spain has chosen soft law for implementation of gender diversity by
leaving the main decision to the willingness of the company (Verge & Lombardo, 2018).
7.4.1.5. THE NETHERLANDS
The Netherlands is another example of a country using gender quotas on corporate boards. However, unlike
other European countries, the history of gender diversity on Dutch corporate boards has known its ups and
downs.
Gender diversity arguments in the Netherlands started in 1996. In 1996 governmental grants started to be used
for a foundation that is aiming to advocate the diversity specially on businesses. After that, Ministries of social
Affairs and Employment and Economic Affairs set up an Ambassadors Network. The network which has annually
changed influential business leaders as ambassadors committed itself to promoting the appointment of women
to senior or top management (Lückerath-Rovers, 2015). However Dutch people had to wait till 2006 for an
effective governmental action. In 2006, the Dutch government started grasping the emancipation policy which
has six objectives, one of them being the involvement of more women at the workplace and better utilization of
their talents and skills (Lückerath-Rovers, 2015). According to that, reaching equal representation of men and
women in influential positions can be achieved by easing women to obtain these types of positions and helping
their career (Lambooy, 2012).
Ultimately the Netherland9s Fifth Periodic Report indicated that attention will be given to the object of adding
diversity values to the businesses and women in top positions (Lambooy, 2012). But interestingly at the end of
2012 while other European governments were embracing the different gender quotas for their corporate9s
boardrooms, the Dutch government has made it public that the Netherlands does not want the EU to regulate
the corporate board with quotas to reach gender diversity.
Although the Dutch government's strong rejection against the EU9s plan to regulate corporate boardrooms with
quotas in 2013, the Netherlands has satisfied the EU9s desire. With effect from 1st of January 2013, the
Netherlands has introduced a gender quota aiming at large public and private limited companies (Galle, 2016).
The rules have been regulated with the Dutch Civil Code (DCC) which is interesting because normally countries
used special acts or corporate related acts amendments for regulating the gender diversity on corporate boards.
According to the DCC large public or private limited company boards should be occupied % 30 by men and
women. As European understanding, although it was aimed at the participation of women, rules have adopted a
gender neutral perspective which indicates the same percentage both for men and women. The quota applied to
both supervisory and directors9 boards, mandating that at least 30% of seats be held by women and men
respectively.
