GUBERNA Yearly Event Public Governance 2025 Summary
On 20 May, GUBERNA organised its yearly event public governance around a topic that, if you open the newspapers, is not only topical, but also of great importance for the future of good governance of state owned enterprises (SOEs): the adoption of a n ownership policy of the Belgian state as a shareholder with regard to its SOE’s. In this article, you will read a summary of the main insights. A more comprehensive article will be published later.
During the introduction Ewout Görtz emphasised that an ownership policy goes beyond a mere policy document. It is about how the State can define its role as a shareholder. It is about responsibility, transparency and strategy. By treating the State as a shareholder, we formulate clear expectations that address financial, social and environmental aspects. This ensures high governance standards and a clear divide between ownership and political influence. By establishing such transparency, the State gives companies stability and room to operate, while remaining accountable to the public interest.
Yet a formal ownership policy is lacking to date. Different SOEs are managed in different ways. Expectations differ. Political interference sometimes clouds long-term vision.
A formal, consolidated ownership policy offers a number of tangible benefits:
Clarity of objectives
Better governance practices
Increased public confidence
Subsequently, Sandra Gobert reviewed the evolution of SOEs as a policy instrument: from SOEs as a political tool for national economic and industrial development after WW2 through active criticism of state interventions in 1980s – early 2000s up to the current phase of growing acceptability of SOE’s in general. The drivers behind this renewed interest in SOEs comprise a mix of social, economic and strategic interests. This shift requires all the more a robust ownership policy.
Defining an ownership policy is no easy task. The OECD guidelines outline its key elements as follows:
- Clear objectives (for example, strategic objectives versus financial objectives)
- Expectations in terms of governance (for example, the independence of the board of directors)
- The roles and capacities of the State in relation to SOEs
Further inspiration can be found from countries that have already established shareholder views. For example, Norway relies on 10 principles of good public governance. The Dutch ownership policy clearly explains in detail how participations are managed and how the State exercises its control.
A clear shareholder vision is not a luxury, it is necessary if public ownership is to be coherent and forward-looking. It is necessary for 4 reasons in particular:
Strategic clarity
Improving governance
Strengthening public value creation
Credibility and trust
Åsa Mitsell and Daniel Johansson presented the concrete case of the ownership policy of Sweden.
The Swedish ownership policy consists of two parts. Part I, State ownership of companies, describes the government's goals, rationale for ownership and view of the purpose of the companies' operations.
The Swedish state owns enterprises for 2 reasons:
National interest: the State wants to own certain assets for a strategic purpose
Market interest, e.g. a market failure that the State wants to handle
Thus, the purpose for SOEs is either to generate profit for shareholders unless parliament decides otherwise. Or to fulfil public service obligations/PPOs – usually aimed at achieving some social benefit.
The overall vision is that SOEs shall act commercially, sustainably and in an exemplary manner in a way that maintains public trust.
Part II, The Government's principles for the management and governance of SOEs, describes expectations, requirements and guidelines for the SOEs' governance, management, development and transparency. More concretely, the 7 principles that guide Swedish SOEs are:
Act on a commercial basis
Have good corporate governance
Generate sustainable value creation
Have long-term ambitions and good transitioning capacity
Characterized by security awareness and contribute to the country's preparedness for crisis and war
Pay reasonable and well-considered remuneration
Act transparently in relation to their stakeholders
The Government expects that companies’ business operations are conducted in an exemplary manner, that they rely on these overarching principles and that Government’s management also follows these principles.
A vivid discussion followed the presentation.
The second part of the event hosted a panel discussion that was moderated by Jeroen Delvoie, Partner at Eubelius and Professor at VUB. It included:
Lutgart Van den Berghe, Belfius’ Board Member,
Lionel Desclee, Board Member at Bpost,
Michaël Vanloubbeeck, CFAO at SFPIM,
Ann Caluwaerts, Board Member at Bpost, and
Ewout Görtz, Researcher from GUBERNA
The key ideas formulated during the Panel Discussion were:
SOEs lack a clear vision of the State
For effective business it is important to take a distance from political engagement, not to depend on political constellations of a government in a specific moment of time.
Through the SFPIM important steps have already been taken in strengthening the governance of SOEs (e.g. the selection process of board members)
Governments want to avoid surprises. The relationship agreement serves as a tool for effective communication
It is important to define the different roles from the very beginning
Sandra Gobert summarised the key takeaways of the event.
Currently, there is no Belgian ownership policy, although it is necessary. Belgium is far from the Swedish example. Besides, the Belgian State holds a highly diversified portfolio compared to Sweden.
The tools to frame the interaction between the State and SOEs are useful developments, e.g. Relationship Agreements.
There is a shift towards higher transparency in relations between the State and SOEs, which is warmly welcome. The glass is getting half full.
In essence, a Belgian ownership policy enables
long term investment.
It ensures clarity of roles of all parties involved.
Even if it could limit strategic autonomy, it enables management autonomy
State ownership has multiple facets, and States can play different roles in SOEs. Both SOEs and their partners need a clear understanding of what to expect. Clear communication of expectations contributes to transparency, which is essential to building trust among society, international investors, and strategic partners.
