IFSWF Report on Compliance with the Santiago Principles: Admirable but Flawed Transparency
Sarah Bagnall and Edwin M. Truman examine the International Forum of Sovereign Wealth Funds (IFSWF) report, which claims to be "a solid, initial step toward a better understanding of the IFSWF and of the Santiago Principles," and find this to be largely true, with a few limitations. The report, released July 7, 2011, is a self-assessment of the voluntary compliance of 21 member sovereign wealth funds (SWFs) with the Generally Accepted Principles and Practices of SWFs, issued in October 2008. Bagnall and Truman find that the extent of compliance with the Santiago Principles is somewhat exaggerated. In addition, some of the 21 funds have substantially lower rates of compliance than others, which is not reported. However, the report is frank about many of the issues that arise with respect to the interpretation of its results, for example regarding the application of the principles on investment policies and on nonfinancial restrictions on SWF investment decisions. Ultimately, presentation may obscure some results in the IFSWF report, but Bagnall and Truman find the report credible and admirable.
The Sovereign Wealth Fund Discount: Evidence from Public Equity Investments
We document that announcement-period abnormal returns of sovereign wealth fund (SWF) equity investments in publicly traded firms are positive but lower than those of comparable private investments. Further, SWF investment targets suffer from declining return on assets and sales growth over the following three years. Our results are robust to controls for target and deal characteristics and are not driven by SWF target selection criteria. Larger discounts are associated with SWFs taking seats on boards of directors and with SWFs under strict government control acquiring greater stakes, supporting the hypothesis that political influence negatively affects firm value and performance.
Monte Carlo properties of spatial dependence LM tests
This paper compares the power and size of both spatial one-directional and robust to local misspecification LM test using Monte Carlo techniques under different set ups. Confirming the results found in Anselin et al . (1996), under local misspecification the robust LM test improves its size and power of tests. However, under no misspecification, the robust LM test is severely penalized and the usual one-directional LM test has a much better performance.