SWF Radar

GAPP 19 states that investment decisions by SWFs should be based on economic and financial grounds:

GAPP 19. Principle

The SWF’s investment decisions should aim to maximize risk-adjusted financial returns in a manner consistent with its investment policy, and based on economic and financial grounds.

And Subprinciple 19.2 states that SWFs should follow standard asset management principles:

GAPP 19.2 Subprinciple The management of an SWF's assets should be consistent with what is generally accepted as sound asset management principles.

Subprinciple 19.1, however, makes it clear that the “based on economic and financial grounds” does not mean “exclusively based on economic and financial grounds”:

GAPP 19.1 Subprinciple If investment decisions are subject to other than economic and financial considerations, these should be clearly set out in the investment policy and be publicly disclosed.

This certainly leaves the door open for some use of non-financial investment criteria – no doubt so as not to rule out the kind of SRI of which Norway’s Government Pension Fund–Global is very keen. But the demand for transparency and the demand that all investments must be based [also] on financial criteria makes it unlikely that an SWF could adhere to GAPP, make a substantial politically-influenced investment (other than for relatively benign social or environmental reasons), and still fail to provoke an outcry.

(Update a couple of minutes after initial post: The full report makes clear that this is indeed targeted at SRI-type investments (page 22 of the report, 29 of the PDF): “Some SWFs may exclude certain investments for various reasons, including legally binding international sanctions and social, ethical, or religious reasons (e.g., Kuwait, New Zealand, and Norway). More broadly, some SWFs may address social, environmental, or other factors in their investment policy. If so, these reasons and factors should be publicly disclosed.”)

Meanwhile, GAPP 20 states that SWFs must keep their distance from their respective governments:

GAPP 20. Principle

The SWF should not seek or take advantage of privileged information or inappropriate influence by the broader government in competing with private entities.

And other protections against the kind of political investing that many lawmakers and commentators fear from SWFs are contained in GAPP 21, which rules out any kind of value-eroding shareholder activism on the part of an SWF:

GAPP 21. Principle

SWFs view shareholder ownership rights as a fundamental element of their equity investments’ value. If an SWF chooses to exercise its ownership rights, it should do so in a manner that is consistent with its investment policy and protects the financial value of its investments. The SWF should publicly disclose its general approach to voting securities of listed entities, including the key factors guiding its exercise of ownership rights.