Search

Begin New Search Topic Sovereign Wealth Funds Author Edwin M. Truman

1. Sovereign wealth funds are growing more slowly, and governance issues remain

Author:
Julien Maire, Adnan Mazarei, and Edwin M. Truman
Publication Date:
02-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE)
Abstract:
In the last two decades, sovereign wealth funds (SWFs)—funds accumulated by a government that are invested in whole or in part abroad to benefit the country in the future—have faced increased public scrutiny over their investment patterns, financial results, and governance. This Policy Brief updates and expands a prototype scoreboard rating the transparency and accountability of SWFs, which Truman established in 2007. This fifth edition of the scoreboard shows that the average scores continued to improve for the 64 SWFs examined, but governance issues remain. New funds have emerged—many of them government holding companies or strategic investment funds—but the growth of assets under management by SWFs has slowed, in some cases partly because of withdrawals to help finance expenses related to the COVID-19 pandemic, raising questions about their future role.
Topic:
Government, Markets, Sovereign Wealth Funds, Governance, Regulation, and Capital
Political Geography:
Global Focus

2. Progress on Sovereign Wealth Fund Transparency and Accountability: An Updated SWF Scoreboard

Author:
Edwin M. Truman and Allie E. Bagnall
Publication Date:
08-2013
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE)
Abstract:
The term sovereign wealth fund (SWF) had not been coined a decade ago. By 2007, economists and the financial world were alternatively excited about or alarmed by the growing influence of these institutions, though in fact many of them had been around for decades. Politicians in countries in which the funds invested generally welcomed the additional financial resources from abroad while expressing concern about the motivations of investors and what they feared could be threats to political, economic, and financial security. The general public in the countries in which the funds were based realized at the same time that political leaders were investing large amounts of national wealth at home and abroad with limited disclosure, and they wanted to know more.
Topic:
Economics, Globalization, International Trade and Finance, Foreign Direct Investment, and Sovereign Wealth Funds

3. Implementation of the Santiago Principles for Sovereign Wealth Funds: A Progress Report

Author:
Edwin M. Truman
Publication Date:
12-2013
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE)
Abstract:
At the annual meeting of the International Forum of Sovereign Wealth Funds (IFSWF) held in Oslo, Norway on October 2-3, 2013, the forum reviewed and subsequently released its second report on members' experiences in the application of the Santiago Principles for sovereign wealth funds (SWFs). The Santiago Principles were adopted by a group of countries with such funds in September 2008 in response to concerns about threats to political, economic, and financial security in countries receiving SWF investments. The objective was to promote the transparency and accountability of SWFs for the countries of origin as well as the countries in which the funds were investing.
Topic:
Economics, International Trade and Finance, and Sovereign Wealth Funds
Political Geography:
Norway, Latin America, and Santiago

4. IFSWF Report on Compliance with the Santiago Principles: Admirable but Flawed Transparency

Author:
Edwin M. Truman and Sarah Bagnall
Publication Date:
08-2011
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE)
Abstract:
On July 7, 2011 the International Forum of Sovereign Wealth Funds (IFSWF) released a report on IFSWF Members' Experience in the Application of the Santiago Principles. The report is a self-assessment of the voluntary compliance of 21 member sovereign wealth funds (SWFs) with the Generally Accepted Principles and Practices of SWFs, issued in October 2008. We commend the IFSWF for undertaking the surveys on which the report is based, for the later decision to publish the results, and for the detail included in the report. However, as with many self-assessments, the report has some flaws. The principal flaw is that the characterization of the extent of compliance with the Santiago Principles is exaggerated.
Topic:
Economics, International Trade and Finance, Markets, and Sovereign Wealth Funds
Political Geography:
Santiago