主权财富基金的定义:挑战与担忧

Zeineb Ouni, P. Bernard, M. Plaisent
{"title":"主权财富基金的定义:挑战与担忧","authors":"Zeineb Ouni, P. Bernard, M. Plaisent","doi":"10.13189/aeb.2020.080605","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The main purpose of this paper is to bring a better understanding of the phenomenon of sovereign wealth funds (SWFs) by dealing with their definitional issues. Our objective is to understand why it would be difficult to have a standard and common definition of SWFs and how this definition concern could present a problem, especially for academic research. We analyzed the history of SWFs, their creation objectives, their sources of funding, the performance of their investments and their governance structure and compared them with other types of funds. We find that the lack of a common definition stems mainly from their: i) hybrid nature: SWFs are created and controlled by governments, but their investment strategies are similar to private funds; ii) high heterogeneity: SWFs have different structures, sources of funding and other creation objectives; iii) lack of transparency. Despite the establishment of Generally Accepted Principles and Practices for SWFs know as Santiago Principles, SWFs remain opaque structure and iv) similarities with other sovereign and private investors, especially in their investment strategies. These definitional problems could explain the lack of consensus on empirical studies about SWFs and the issues about the regulation of their activities. Otherwise, this study targets to contribute to the global debate on the regulation of their transactions, essentially by clarifying their subtle differences with other investment vehicles.","PeriodicalId":91438,"journal":{"name":"Advances in economics and business","volume":"8 1","pages":"362-376"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sovereign Wealth Funds Definition: Challenges and Concerns\",\"authors\":\"Zeineb Ouni, P. Bernard, M. Plaisent\",\"doi\":\"10.13189/aeb.2020.080605\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The main purpose of this paper is to bring a better understanding of the phenomenon of sovereign wealth funds (SWFs) by dealing with their definitional issues. Our objective is to understand why it would be difficult to have a standard and common definition of SWFs and how this definition concern could present a problem, especially for academic research. We analyzed the history of SWFs, their creation objectives, their sources of funding, the performance of their investments and their governance structure and compared them with other types of funds. We find that the lack of a common definition stems mainly from their: i) hybrid nature: SWFs are created and controlled by governments, but their investment strategies are similar to private funds; ii) high heterogeneity: SWFs have different structures, sources of funding and other creation objectives; iii) lack of transparency. Despite the establishment of Generally Accepted Principles and Practices for SWFs know as Santiago Principles, SWFs remain opaque structure and iv) similarities with other sovereign and private investors, especially in their investment strategies. These definitional problems could explain the lack of consensus on empirical studies about SWFs and the issues about the regulation of their activities. Otherwise, this study targets to contribute to the global debate on the regulation of their transactions, essentially by clarifying their subtle differences with other investment vehicles.\",\"PeriodicalId\":91438,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advances in economics and business\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"362-376\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advances in economics and business\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.13189/aeb.2020.080605\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in economics and business","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.13189/aeb.2020.080605","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文的主要目的是通过处理主权财富基金的定义问题,更好地理解主权财富基金现象。我们的目标是了解为什么很难对主权财富基金有一个标准和通用的定义,以及这种定义问题如何会带来问题,尤其是对学术研究来说。我们分析了主权财富基金的历史、创建目标、资金来源、投资业绩和治理结构,并将其与其他类型的基金进行了比较。我们发现,缺乏共同的定义主要源于它们的混合性质:主权财富基金由政府创建和控制,但其投资策略与私人基金相似;ii)高度异质性:主权财富基金有不同的结构、资金来源和其他创建目标;iii)缺乏透明度。尽管制定了被称为圣地亚哥原则的主权财富基金公认原则和实践,但主权财富基金仍然是不透明的结构,iv)与其他主权和私人投资者相似,尤其是在投资策略方面。这些定义问题可以解释对主权财富基金的实证研究以及对其活动的监管问题缺乏共识的原因。除此之外,本研究旨在通过澄清其与其他投资工具的细微差异,为全球关于其交易监管的辩论做出贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Sovereign Wealth Funds Definition: Challenges and Concerns
The main purpose of this paper is to bring a better understanding of the phenomenon of sovereign wealth funds (SWFs) by dealing with their definitional issues. Our objective is to understand why it would be difficult to have a standard and common definition of SWFs and how this definition concern could present a problem, especially for academic research. We analyzed the history of SWFs, their creation objectives, their sources of funding, the performance of their investments and their governance structure and compared them with other types of funds. We find that the lack of a common definition stems mainly from their: i) hybrid nature: SWFs are created and controlled by governments, but their investment strategies are similar to private funds; ii) high heterogeneity: SWFs have different structures, sources of funding and other creation objectives; iii) lack of transparency. Despite the establishment of Generally Accepted Principles and Practices for SWFs know as Santiago Principles, SWFs remain opaque structure and iv) similarities with other sovereign and private investors, especially in their investment strategies. These definitional problems could explain the lack of consensus on empirical studies about SWFs and the issues about the regulation of their activities. Otherwise, this study targets to contribute to the global debate on the regulation of their transactions, essentially by clarifying their subtle differences with other investment vehicles.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Estimation of Individual Claims Reserves Using K Modes Cluster and Reserving by Detailed Conditioning Research on the Impact of an Immature Market on the Entrepreneurial Orientation and Success of SMEs from the Private Health Sector in the Republic of North Macedonia Exploring Informal Cross-Border Trade and Its Impact on Security Challenges in Nigeria: A Case Study of the Nigeria-Benin Border A New Framework for Fujian's "Double Carbon" Strategy Based on Digital Finance Theory A Study on Pandemic COVID-19 on Indonesia's Consumer Preferences: Input for Business and Government Policies in Indonesia
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1