Article
Sven Behrendt
Source: Getty
Sovereign Wealth Funds and the Santiago Principles: Where Do They Stand?
The Santiago Principles and the commitment of their sponsors—some of the biggest sovereign wealth funds—are an important test for the viability of new forms of global governance.
Published on May 5, 2010
Managers of Sovereign Wealth Funds (SWFs) gathering for their annual meeting in Sydney this week will likely note real progress on implementing the Santiago Principles—a voluntary code of conduct for SWFs designed to promote good governance, transparency, and accountability. In fact however implementation is highly uneven. There is still far to go if SWFs are to be responsible members of the global economy, concludes a paper by Sven Behrendt.
Key Conclusions:
- Only four of the 26 SWFs which signed the Santiago Principles are close to fully implementing all principles. As a voluntary agreement, it is at risk of failing if it does not gain wider support.
- A country’s level of democracy correlates significantly with how fully its SWF has adopted the principles. But there is no strong correlation between a country’s level of economic development and its overall adherence.
- At the upcoming G20 Summit in Toronto, leaders should acknowledge progress but urge SWFs to more aggressively comply with the Santiago Principles.
“The G20 wants to make progress on financial regulatory reform. The Santiago Principles are a test case for how broad the commitment to reforms in global finance is,” writes Behrendt. “The G20 should urge all signatories to the Santiago Principles to fully comply with them.”
About the Author
Sven Behrendt
Former Visiting Scholar, Middle East Center
Behrendt is an expert in global issues, international negotiations, conflict resolution, and corporate strategy. He previously served at the World Economic Forum in various management positions.
- Sovereign Wealth Funds: The Governance Challenge
- The G20 and Saudi Arabia’s Changing Foreign Policy AgendaArticle
Sven Behrendt
Recent Work
More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- The Iran War’s Global ReachCollection
As the war between the United States, Israel, and Iran continues, Carnegie scholars contribute cutting-edge analysis on the events of the war and their wide-reaching implications. From the impact on Iran and its immediate neighbors to the responses from Gulf states to fuel and fertilizer shortages caused by the effective shutdown of the Strait of Hormuz, the war is reshaping Middle East alliances and creating shockwaves around the world. Carnegie experts analyze it all.
- “It’s Not Like Turning a Switch On and Off”Commentary
Why the Iran ceasefire isn’t a quick fix to the Strait of Hormuz energy crisis.
Helima Croft, Aaron David Miller
- Southeast Asia’s Agency Amid the New Oil CrisisCommentary
There is no better time for the countries of Southeast Asia to reconsider their energy security than during this latest crisis.
Gita Wirjawan
- Fuel Crisis Forces Politically Perilous Trade-Offs in IndonesiaCommentary
As conflict in the Middle East drives up fuel costs across Asia, Indonesia faces difficult policy trade-offs over subsidies, inflation, and fiscal credibility. President Prabowo’s personalized governance style may make these hard choices even harder to navigate.
Sana Jaffrey
- In Its Iran War Debate, Washington Has Lost the Plot in AsiaCommentary
The United States ignores the region’s lived experience—and the tough political and social trade-offs the war has produced—at its peril.
Evan A. Feigenbaum
