Norwegian oil fund’s stock dips

Sticking to a financial plan can be challenging, even if you are the world’s largest sovereign wealth fund.

So it seems, sometimes, for Norway’s Government Pension Fund Global and the handful of active traders at Norges Bank Investment Management — under fire for the loss of over 270 billion kroner (€35.91 billion) in equity value since June.

Braced now for “a worst ever year”, Norway’s Oil Fund (as Norwegians call it) is on course to lose nearly 10 percent of its June 2011 value, as a summer of volatility in worldwide stock indices hasn’t eased with autumn’s approach.  

Managers of the 3 trillion kroner fund had hoped to invest five percent, or 150 billion kroner, in real estate as soon as practicable. Competition from other funds, a dearth of real estate expertise and rules banning sovereign fund investment in places like the US meant much of the fund's value still rides the stock market.

Investor Riulf Rustad, who once managed 120 billion kroner, told Norwegian broadcaster NRK that he believes the 1.8 trillion kroner the Oil Fund has in worldwide stocks is akin to “playing at a casino”. He took aim at Norway’s Storting, or parliament, which long ago voted that 60 percent of the fund would hold stocks.

Rustad said more bonds ought to be in the mix: “The question is: is it more important to keep the money or to gamble on getting more money?”

Other fund economists and managers have warned this could be “one of those years” long warned about, where the fund’s share holdings could be cut in half.

Despite partnering in the past year with England’s Crown Estate to put 5.75 billion kroner into three of London’s priciest pedestrian malls and spending 5.5 billion kroner on Eiffel Tower estate, the rush to property and fixed income has been a crawl.   

Just as August 2008 marked the 3 trillion kroner fund’s worst year — a yearlong, 50 billion kroner plunge — so too has Summer 2011 gouged away value (although 53 billion kroner from state interests in oilfields will top the fund up again). Optimistically called a pension fund by Oslo, the sovereign fund is still battling increasingly bold Canadian pension funds and Arabian wealth keen on buying English ports and property.

Kept away from bargain US real estate by Washington’s rules on foreign ownership, the oil fund has just 0.1 percent of its value safely in real estate. Bonds and other fixed income account for 39 percent. Intended for “future generations”, the fund earned just 0.3 percent (4 billion kroner) between April and June 2011.

Making matters harder for the fund’s managers, a much-touted moral oversight board publicly frowns on hard-times havens like shares in Big Tobacco.

Member comments

Log in here to leave a comment.
Become a Member to leave a comment.


NGOs take Norway to European Court over Arctic oil exploration

Two NGOs and six young climate activists have decided to take Norway to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) to demand the cancellation of oil permits in the Arctic, Greenpeace announced on Tuesday.

NGOs take Norway to European Court over Arctic oil exploration
Northern Norway. Photo by Vidar Nordli-Mathisen on Unsplash.

It’s the latest turn in a legal tussle between environmental organisations Greenpeace and Young Friends of the Earth Norway on one side and the Norwegian state on the other.

The organisations are demanding the government cancel 10 oil exploration licenses in the Barents Sea awarded in 2016, arguing it was unconstitutional.

Referring to the Paris Agreement, which seeks to limit global warming to less than two degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels, the organisations claim that the oil licenses violated article 112 of Norway’s constitution, guaranteeing everyone the right to a healthy environment.”

The six activists, alongside Greenpeace Nordic and Young Friends of the Earth Norway, hope that the European Court of Human Rights will hear their case and find that Norway’s oil expansion is in breach of human rights,” Greenpeace said in a statement.

In December, Norway’s Supreme Court rejected the claim brought by the organisations, their third successive legal defeat.

READ MORE: Norway sees oil in its future despite IEA’s warnings 

While most of the judges on the court agreed that article 112 could be invoked if the state failed to meet its climate and environmental obligations– they did not think it was applicable in this case.

The court also held that the granting of oil permits was not contrary to the European Convention on Human Rights, in part because they did not represent “a real and immediate risk” to life and physical integrity.

“The young activists and the environmental organisations argue that this judgment was flawed, as it discounted the significance of their environmental constitutional rights and did not take into account an accurate assessment of the consequences of climate change for the coming generations,” Greenpeace said.

On Friday, the Norwegian government unveiled a white paper on the country’s energy future, which still includes oil exploration despite a warning from the International Energy Agency (IEA).

The IEA recently warned that all future fossil fuel projects must be scrapped if the world is to reach net-zero carbon emissions by 2050.

The Norwegian case is an example of a global trend in which climate activists are increasingly turning to courts to pursue their agenda.