Oxford SWF Project

Ashby Monk

After the financial roller coaster of the past two years, many SWFs had simply decided to withdraw and regroup; their risk appetites disappearing in the face of considerable losses. There are indications that this is now changing, and SWFs’ appetite for risk may be resurfacing. Nevertheless, asset management policies within this funds may have been permanently altered:

“It is more than likely that the targets they will choose eventually would have specific strategic significance for their own economies,” said Mirtchev, who is also a senior economic adviser to the Kazakh prime minister.”

I agree. On the one hand, these funds are increasingly inward looking; contributing to the domestic stimulus packages in various countries. On the other hand, having been burned in the financial sector, it looks as if some SWFs will shift their focus towards strategic resources.

“Singapore’s Temasek, like other Asian and Middle Eastern sovereign wealth funds, is digging for deals in mining and oil, as it licks its wounds from financial sector investments that have soured in a global crisis.”

These two trends–domestic aid and strategic investing–are revealing of the relationship between SWFs and their sponsoring governments. Rather than being independent institutions with a clear mandate to ‘generate returns’, many SWFs look very much a part governments’ broader domestic and geopolitical tool kit. Indeed, the SWFs’ mandates appear much more complex than simply investing assets for profit…