Global investment giant Norway’s Sovereign Wealth Fund is taking an unexpected turn. In 2025, it will conduct a comprehensive review of its investments, focusing on sectors such as footwear, cryptocurrencies and gambling. This decision could mark a turning point in the fund’s investment strategy and generate repercussions throughout the market.
By the way, the Norwegian Global Pension Fund, or Norwegian Sovereign Wealth Fund, is the largest sovereign wealth fund in the world. It is a state-owned investment fund managed by Norway's central bank, Norges Bank.
Incidentally, the world's largest sovereign wealth fund, which owns 1.5% of the listed shares of 8,700 companies worldwide, operates under ethical guidelines set by the Norwegian Parliament.
Interestingly, the $1.8 billion fund's Ethics Council investigates companies in which it has invested money to ensure that its rules are being respected. If not, the ethics watchdog recommends that the fund divest from them or put them on a public watch list.
2025: Year of ethics for shoe and crypto manufacturers in Norway
In fact, the decision to review shoe manufacturers, crypto companies and gambling is part of the Fund's efforts to ensure irresponsible investment practices.
The review will assess the ethical and financial implications of maintaining investments in these sectors, taking into account factors such as environmental impact, social responsibility and governance standards.
In this regard, the document outlining the plan for 2025 specifies: “ Companies have direct responsibility for working conditions within their own operations and serious and systematic violations of workers’ rights may lead to exclusions from the Fund. These are issues that the Council will examine. It is not possible for the Council to predict the outcome of investigations .”
Is there a before and after in the investment?
In addition, the decision by Norway’s sovereign wealth fund to review its investments in sectors such as footwear, cryptocurrencies and gambling could trigger a chain reaction in the financial industry. If the fund decides to divest from companies that do not meet its ethical criteria, other institutions could follow suit, putting significant pressure on these industries to adopt more sustainable and transparent practices.
Finally, the decision by Norway's sovereign wealth fund raises questions about the future of these industries. What ethical criteria will the fund use to evaluate these companies? What are the implications of a possible divestment for these companies and for consumers? And, above all, what message does this decision send to other investors worldwide?