In a longer perspective, openness can also be vital to create a political pressure for change in individual countries. In the same way, openness with regard to current imbalances lends support to change in different countries and for considerations in the financial markets. I myself would very much like to see more transparent application and assignment procedures for posts at all levels within the IMF. The best candidate should get the job regardless of the applicant’s country of origin. 2. For the IMF to have enough weight, it is necessary that the key issues for the world economy really are discussed at the IMF’s table and not at others. Those who wishes to strengthen the IMF – and are serious about it – could therefore not create new forums outside the IMF with a view to discussing matters that fall within the IMF’s mandate. If this is done, the organisation will, in practice, be undermined. 3. One way of reducing the need for creating new fora, and, at the same time, in a pragmatic way approach issues of representation, would be to work more actively in the Executive Board with various (small) committees/subcommittees (similar to those in many national parliaments and in the Executive Board at the World Bank).
In 2016, the Executive Board’s capacity was strengthened by the appointment of a second deputy governor and an increase in the number of board members. At the end of 2016, the cumulative value of transfers to the GPFG was approximately equal to the cumulative return on the fund, reflecting the fund’s solid performance over time. Last year, the return on the GPFG was 6.9 percent.1 Over the period since inception, the return has averaged 5.7 percent. Adjusting for inflation and management costs, this gives an average real return of 3.8 percent. Developments in international financial markets and the growth outlook for the global economy suggest that the expected real return ahead will be somewhat lower than has been the case in recent years. The GPFG closely tracks the benchmark index; it is invested across a broad range of countries and markets. This strategy has so far generated a solid return within the defined risk limits. Restrictions imposed on the fund’s scope for investment, or instructions that disregard the tradeoff between return and risk, will limit the fund’s potential to achieve solid performance over time. In the execution of our management assignment, it is important that Norges Bank’s role is that of financial investor. It is crucial to the GPFG’s reputation in investee countries that the fund is not perceived as a political instrument. Norges Bank aims to be at the forefront of global efforts in the area of responsible investment.