Posts Tagged 'Kuwait'

Weekend Reading

Ashby Monk

The discovery of oil in Kuwait in 1938, and its subsequent production a decade later, altered that country’s fortunes forever. More to the point, the relationship between the people and the government permanently changed, as the latter no longer relied on taxes from the former to function.

In fact, the new resource rents were so bountiful that a sort of intergenerational savings fund was created in 1953. According to the KIA, this remarkable innovation was the brainchild of the forward thinking ruler at the time, Sheikh Abdullah Al-Salem Al-Sabah, who apparently decided that some resource wealth should be set aside for the long-term welfare of the people of Kuwait. As such, Kuwait is often credited with being the first country (albeit under British rule) to set up a SWF.

I think this is a fascinating story. And, if you agree, you’ll definitely enjoy this new paper by Laura El-Katiri, Bassam Fattouh and Paul Segal entitled “Anatomy of an oil-based welfare state: Rent distribution in Kuwait.” The authors chronicle the rise of the rentier state in Kuwait and offer a broad appreciation for how the discovery of oil literally changed everything. Here’s a blurb:

“Oil has made Kuwait rich. Oil is Kuwait’s largest productive sector by a long way, and oil rents are the foundation of even the non-oil economy. But wealth does not lead automatically to economic and social development. Kuwait’s achievement is that it has, for the most part, used its oil income to provide a high standard of living for full Kuwaiti citizens, while to a much lesser extent also benefiting non-Kuwaitis. Oil wealth has transformed the country within decades from a modest, trade-based desert emirate into a modern city-state. It has also created a relatively egalitarian economy based on an extensive distributive system that provides Kuwaiti citizens with essential services including free healthcare, education and social security. Therefore, the most important fact about Kuwait’s oil wealth is that it has been successfully used to benefit its citizens. This feat has been achieved through a broad distributive welfare state, developed over the decades since oil was discovered.

Nonetheless, Kuwait’s policies of rent distribution have developed in an ad hoc manner into an uncoordinated system with substantial distortions, inefficiencies and institutional deficiencies. These include the long-term use of subsidies to energy and other utilities that lead to inefficient use and misallocation of resources; a highly segmented labour market whose ability to absorb large numbers of young Kuwaitis outside the public sector remains in doubt; and an uncompetitive and deteriorating business environment that stifles private and foreign investment. In our analysis we also note, however, that given Kuwait’s extensive wealth, the structure of the economy and productive relations will necessarily look different from those in most countries. One therefore has to be careful to distinguish between policies and behaviours that are genuinely inefficient or distorting and those – such as low labour force participation – that may be a rational response to unearned wealth.”

The paper offers some fascinating insights into the various channels of rent distribution as well as discussing some of the challenges associated with managing a resource-rich economy. It’s worth a look. Have a nice weekend!

Who Deserves Credit for the Big SWF Idea?

Ashby Monk

If you follow me on Twitter, you’ll know that I’ve been playing some SWF word association games. Well I’ve got another one for you: If I say, ‘governments that kicked off the SWF era’ or, how about, ‘governments that deserve credit for the big SWF idea’, what would you say?

At first blush, I’d expect you to come out with “Kuwait” or “Abu Dhabi” or “Singapore” or (if you’re really good) even “Kiribati”. But I can pretty much guarantee that you wouldn’t say, “the UK” or “USA”. After all, SWFs aren’t Western, right? In fact, they represent challenges to Western hegemony, don’t they? They’re products of emerging market imbalances, aren’t they?

Well, maybe I’m late to the party here, but I think credit for the ‘big SWF idea’ actually resides with…the UK and the US. I know that seems odd and runs counter to our current notions about SWFs. But let me — a self-proclaimed history dimwit — give you a history lesson (or at least try to).

It’s widely noted (and accepted) that Kuwait was the first country, in 1953, to set up a SWF. In this case, the acclaim for this remarkable decision is often given to the forward thinking ruler of Kuwait at the time, Sheikh Abdullah Al-Salem Al-Sabah. In his wisdom, he apparently decided that the money should be set aside for the long-term welfare of the people of Kuwait. And I don’t doubt that. Rather, I’d simply note that this SWF, which was known at the time as the Kuwait Investment Board, was established eight years before the country attained independence from the UK. And, moreover, the fund was set up in London. So, at the very minimum, we can assume that the Brits had some influence over this decision (and may in fact have had the ‘big SWF idea’).

The second country to set up a SWF, in 1956, is widely accepted to be Kiribati. In this case, a fund was set up for phosphate mining revenue. The history buffs among you will recognize that Kiribati was still under British rule at the time (until 1971 actually). And it is known that the British administration was behind the levy on phosphate exports that ultimately led to the Kirabati Revenue Equalisation Reserve Fund. So, once again, the Brits were there at the beginning.

Now things start to get really interesting. Any guess as to what the third country was to set up a SWF in 1958? To be fair, that’s sort of a trick question, as it was sponsored by a sub-national government: the US state of New Mexico and the State Investment Council. And do you know who set up the fourth SWF in 1974? The US State of Wyoming and the Permanent Wyoming Mineral Trust Fund. And North America wasn’t done yet, as the next two SWFs to pop up were in Alaska and Alberta in 1976. In short, the Brit’s Anglo-American cousins in North America also played an important role in legitimizing SWFs in these early years.

Now, it’s true that Singapore set up Temasek in 1974, but, at the time, it was really just a holding company and not technically an international portfolio investor. (And, by the way, Singapore was also a British Colony until 1961, so there was probably some remaining British influence.) It’s also true that the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority was established in 1976, but, there again, it’s probably reasonable to suggest the Brits had some influence in that decision (as the UAE had a ‘special treaty’ with the UK until 1971).

All that being said, I don’t want to give the Brits too much credit here. After all, they didn’t bother to set up a SWF of their own when oil revenues came pouring in from the North Sea! (A decision that still irks Scotland something fierce). To be sure, this would be a very welcome pool of cash today.

I guess I just find it interesting that the first SWFs were set up under the purview of British and American governments. Over time, the West has come to see SWFs as “foreign” and “non-Western”. And yet, they were ultimately British and American creations; the idea and their legitimacy actually came from the West!

And, the more I think about it, the more it makes sense. Both countries were already home to global financial centers (New York and London) thanks to the financial capital flowing out of pre-funded pensions and into asset managers’ coffers. Let’s also not forget that Markowitz unveiled Modern Portfolio Theory in a 1952 Journal of Finance article. As such, these countries were clearly in a ‘financial state of mind’, which means it wouldn’t have been too far a leap for these governments to see an opportunity to use financial markets in innovative ways. Enter the SWF.

A Sense of Community

Ashby Monk

The International Working Group of Sovereign Wealth Funds continues to instil a sense of community among SWFs. Twelve participating funds will be getting together in Kuwait in early April to discuss investment mandates and the Santiago Principles.  According to The Edge:

“The meeting will be attended by funds from Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, China, Singapore, Australia, Norway, Chile, Azerbaijan, Russia, South Korea and the US.”

More than just an opportunity to commiserate with one another over huge financial losses, this will be a chance to further refine the Santiago Principles and, generally, inform one another on recent experiences. The unique nature of the financial crisis makes it a useful ‘stress test’ that could inform future SWF operations.


About

This website is a project of Professor Gordon L. Clark and Dr. Ashby Monk of the School of Geography and the Environment at the University of Oxford. Their research on sovereign wealth funds is funded by the Leverhulme Trust and The Rotman International Centre for Pension Management.

RSS Feed

 RSS

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 326 other followers

Latest SWF News

Visitors Since August 2010


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 326 other followers