公共财富最大化:公共基金信托责任的新框架

Paul Rose
{"title":"公共财富最大化:公共基金信托责任的新框架","authors":"Paul Rose","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2805427","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article challenges the commonly evoked fiduciary obligation to strictly maximize fund value by asking a foundational question: who are the proper beneficiaries of public fund trustees’ fiduciary duties? The article makes a pivotal claim: public funds, including public pension funds and sovereign wealth funds, owe their duties to the government and current and future citizens collectively, and not to individual benefits claimants. This analysis is driven by the fact that in practice individual claimants function more like senior creditors than the residual claimants that are the typical recipients of fiduciary duties. This reframing of fiduciary duties in public funds has dramatic consequences for the investment policies of the funds. Most importantly, a shift in the locus of fiduciary duties to the government and current and future generations requires fund managers to more fully consider the externalities accompanying their investments, which should serve to help them fully and accurately price their investments. Private investors might ignore certain effects, such as uncompensated harms from pollution or depleted natural resources, because the government absorbs the costs of such externalities. A strict fiduciary duty to act in the interests of the fund would obligate a private investor to ignore such externalities, so long as they do not negatively affect the returns of the fund’s investments. The government that absorbs the cost of these externalities, however, should view investments differently, with a view to minimizing negative externalities, particularly those that are significantly more expensive to remediate than to prevent. As a result of this analysis, it follows that public funds should benefit from less constrained fiduciary standards that would encourage more investment in sustainable enterprises and long-term projects.","PeriodicalId":76903,"journal":{"name":"Employee benefits journal","volume":"85 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Public Wealth Maximization: A New Framework for Public Fund Fiduciary Duties\",\"authors\":\"Paul Rose\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.2805427\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article challenges the commonly evoked fiduciary obligation to strictly maximize fund value by asking a foundational question: who are the proper beneficiaries of public fund trustees’ fiduciary duties? The article makes a pivotal claim: public funds, including public pension funds and sovereign wealth funds, owe their duties to the government and current and future citizens collectively, and not to individual benefits claimants. This analysis is driven by the fact that in practice individual claimants function more like senior creditors than the residual claimants that are the typical recipients of fiduciary duties. This reframing of fiduciary duties in public funds has dramatic consequences for the investment policies of the funds. Most importantly, a shift in the locus of fiduciary duties to the government and current and future generations requires fund managers to more fully consider the externalities accompanying their investments, which should serve to help them fully and accurately price their investments. Private investors might ignore certain effects, such as uncompensated harms from pollution or depleted natural resources, because the government absorbs the costs of such externalities. A strict fiduciary duty to act in the interests of the fund would obligate a private investor to ignore such externalities, so long as they do not negatively affect the returns of the fund’s investments. The government that absorbs the cost of these externalities, however, should view investments differently, with a view to minimizing negative externalities, particularly those that are significantly more expensive to remediate than to prevent. As a result of this analysis, it follows that public funds should benefit from less constrained fiduciary standards that would encourage more investment in sustainable enterprises and long-term projects.\",\"PeriodicalId\":76903,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Employee benefits journal\",\"volume\":\"85 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-07-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Employee benefits journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2805427\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Employee benefits journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2805427","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

本文通过提出公共基金受托人信托义务的适当受益人是谁这一基本问题,对普遍唤起的严格实现基金价值最大化的信托义务提出了挑战。这篇文章提出了一个关键的主张:公共基金,包括公共养老基金和主权财富基金,对政府、现在和未来的公民负有集体责任,而不是对个人福利申领者负有责任。这种分析是由这样一个事实所驱动的,即在实践中,个人索赔人的功能更像高级债权人,而不是作为信托义务的典型接受者的剩余索赔人。公共基金信托责任的重构对基金的投资政策产生了巨大影响。最重要的是,信托责任的重心向政府、当代人和后代转移,要求基金经理更充分地考虑伴随其投资的外部性,这应有助于他们全面、准确地为其投资定价。私人投资者可能会忽略某些影响,比如污染或自然资源枯竭带来的未补偿损害,因为政府会吸收这些外部性的成本。严格的信托责任是为了基金的利益行事,这将迫使私人投资者忽视这些外部性,只要它们不对基金的投资回报产生负面影响。然而,承担这些外部性成本的政府应该以不同的方式看待投资,以期最大限度地减少负面外部性,特别是那些补救成本明显高于预防成本的外部性。根据这一分析,公共基金应受益于约束较少的信托标准,这将鼓励更多地投资于可持续企业和长期项目。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Public Wealth Maximization: A New Framework for Public Fund Fiduciary Duties
This article challenges the commonly evoked fiduciary obligation to strictly maximize fund value by asking a foundational question: who are the proper beneficiaries of public fund trustees’ fiduciary duties? The article makes a pivotal claim: public funds, including public pension funds and sovereign wealth funds, owe their duties to the government and current and future citizens collectively, and not to individual benefits claimants. This analysis is driven by the fact that in practice individual claimants function more like senior creditors than the residual claimants that are the typical recipients of fiduciary duties. This reframing of fiduciary duties in public funds has dramatic consequences for the investment policies of the funds. Most importantly, a shift in the locus of fiduciary duties to the government and current and future generations requires fund managers to more fully consider the externalities accompanying their investments, which should serve to help them fully and accurately price their investments. Private investors might ignore certain effects, such as uncompensated harms from pollution or depleted natural resources, because the government absorbs the costs of such externalities. A strict fiduciary duty to act in the interests of the fund would obligate a private investor to ignore such externalities, so long as they do not negatively affect the returns of the fund’s investments. The government that absorbs the cost of these externalities, however, should view investments differently, with a view to minimizing negative externalities, particularly those that are significantly more expensive to remediate than to prevent. As a result of this analysis, it follows that public funds should benefit from less constrained fiduciary standards that would encourage more investment in sustainable enterprises and long-term projects.
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
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信