Pension funds have been repeatedly called to provide "patient capital" (see Clark's "pension fund capitalism") but this has always failed to materialise. This is often blamed in asset managers' short-termism or tight regulation. But the problem is actually more structural.
A recent example is the 'pension infrastrcture platform', set up by the previous government as a way to get pension to invest in UK infrastructure. It raised 1bn and mostly invested in already existing infrastructure https://www.ft.com/content/b47e481e-2307-11e5-bd83-71cb60e8f08c
The reality is that pension funds in the current context are totally unsuited for long-term financing. They live in a financial world where liquidity is vital, and only some assets (eg Gilts) provide it. This is certainly compounded by mark-to-market accounting and regulation.
Moreover pension funds lack an institutional stabiliser (what @craigpberry calls a "temporal anchor" in his forthcoming book), that could allow a long-term investment horizon, as employers became unwilling to do so for DB funds and DC funds are only "backed" by invidividuals.
As @jenchurchill79 osays, we repeatedly call for pension funds to counter short-termism and fund long-term "good things", but this is an unrealistic request. Instead the opposite happened, as pension funds adapted to the reality of modern market-based finance. E.g. March 2020
TLDR I don't think pension funds can save modern capitalism.

With @anninak82 and @jenchurchill79 we have finished a working paper, roughly based around this argument. We will hopefully it circulate soon (and hopefully it will be published somwhere in the near future!).
@Powell_J_R thanks for the pointing me to the FT article.
You can follow @BBonizzi.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled:

By continuing to use the site, you are consenting to the use of cookies as explained in our Cookie Policy to improve your experience.