MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038331781 · doi:10.1163/2211906x-00102001

Sovereign Wealth Funds and Socially Responsible Investing: An Emerging Public Fiduciary

2012· article· en· W2038331781 on OpenAlex
Benjamin J. Richardson

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Journal of Comparative Law · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicState Capitalism and Financial Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSovereign wealth fundFiduciaryProsperityCorporate governanceEconomicsFinancial marketFinanceMarket economyPolitical economyBusinessPolitical scienceEconomic growthLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The dramatic growth of sovereign wealth funds (SWFs) in recent decades has made them a significant phenomenon in global financial markets and raised the prospect of more enlightened investing that respects the environmental underpinnings of economic prosperity. Until the Global Financial Crisis of 2008, the movement for socially responsible investing (SRI) had been the only noteworthy dissenting voice to the traditional complacency about the financial economy’s wider impacts. That financial calamity not only unveiled a systemic malaise in the financial alchemy of the global economy but also highlighted its social and environmental sequelae. The rise of SWFs, several of which are legally mandated to practice SRI, gives hope that states may reclaim some public oversight over finance capitalism. The purpose of this article is to investigate the governance of some SWFs with a view to assessing their capacity to contribute to environmental sustainability. As public financial institutions empowered by a broader conception of investment that takes account of social and environmental factors, SWFs have the incipient markings of ‘public fiduciaries’. SWFs could provide a novel way to interpolate the public trust environmental responsibilities of the state into the governance of the financial economy. This article focuses on the French and Norwegian SWFs, which arguably have the most comprehensive SRI practices of all SWFs. Both, however, have struggled to reconcile their ethical and financial mandates into a coherent investment philosophy. But their putative fiduciary responsibilities to society through an increasingly long-term investing perspective suggest a new normative direction to reconcile these tensions and to thereby help institutionalize the principles of intergenerational equity and sustainable development in the context of financial markets.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.483
Threshold uncertainty score0.644

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.004
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.076
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.236 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it