Позитивные изменения. Том 2, №4 (2022). Positive changes. Volume 2, Issue 4 (2022)

https://goo.su/fh26

6. INVESTING IN A SOCIAL VENTURE TO GENERATE SOCIAL IMPACT OR FINANCIAL RETURN

B. Urban, Odifentse Mapula-e Lehasa

Article, 11 November 2022, Business Perspectives and Research

Recognizing that the current literature provides a fragmented depiction of impact investor decisions, this article empirically examines if impact investors are focused on financial returns or instead on the social impact generated by social enterprises. To address this research objective a sample of impact investors are surveyed in South Africa, where there is an increasing demand for impact investors to fund initiatives that address the country's many underlying structural deficits and wicked problems. Findings, based on correlational and regression analyses, indicate that variation in the impact investment decision is explained by the financial return motive. This finding resonates with the argument that investors are primarily focused on financial competitiveness and return on their investment. Developing a strong body of evidence that validates the effectiveness of policy in supporting impact investing is pivotal, particularly when given the lack of sustainability of many social enterprises in African and emerging economies.

https://goo.su/deoz9

7. THE ENTREPRENEURIAL PERSPECTIVE IN IMPACT INVESTING RESEARCH: A RESEARCH AGENDA

Christin Eckerle, Sarah Manthey, O. Terzidis

Published 7 September 2022, European Conference on Innovation and Entrepreneurship

The Covid-19 pandemic, climate crises, and regulatory changes are only a few reasons for the growing public alertness regarding environmental and social problems. This has caused a shift in the mindset of companies and investors in terms of sustainability and the long-term impact of innovation. Thus, sustainable investments, particularly impact investments, have continued to grow in importance and momentum to shift the focus on rebuilding the economy more sustainable and future-oriented. The current state of research in this field indicates that most academic contributions are mainly about theoretical considerations and deal with various areas. There is no aggregated state of the art in academia with a focus point on impact investment for entrepreneurship. Yet, entrepreneurs are seen as key actors to drive sustainable innovation. Compared to the current growing impact investment practices and the necessity of a strategy to get financing, the topic is still relatively unexplored scientifically. In this research, a systematic literature review is conducted to further review, evaluate, and analyze the current research agenda on impact investment and show how it relates to entrepreneurship research. In particular, impact investment-related decision criteria, as well as challenges associated with this, will be presented. This contributes to the nascent literature on impact investing by documenting how impact investors stand in relation to entrepreneurial ventures and what measurement frameworks and models are already scientifically analyzed, which has practical implications for both impact investors and entrepreneurs.

https://clck.ru/32udYa

8. GIVING AS “DE-RISKING”: PHILANTHROPY, IMPACT INVESTMENT AND THE PANDEMIC RESPONSE

Jessica Sklair, P. Gilbert

Article, 2022, Public Anthropologist

This article examines the role played by philanthrocapitalist foundations in impact investing for international development, focusing on the covid-19 Vaccines Global Access Initiative (covax) as a response to the current pandemic. Philanthrocapitalists and development institutions are increasingly turning to “blended finance” and “social bonds” to address the gaps in funding required to meet global development agendas, particularly in the arena of global health. These impact investing mechanisms deploy public or philanthropic money to leverage for-profit investment in development, by “de-risking” (providing guarantees for) interventions that might otherwise put private capital at risk. Via covax, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has platformed a pandemic response centred on this approach, resisting alternative responses – such as the proposal for a temporary waiver to pharmaceutical patent rights – that seek to challenge the prevailing trade architecture. The global policy response to covid-19 thus accelerates the “financialization” of development and cements the role of philanthropy in “de-risking” for-profit impact investment.

https://goo.su/rIuiyB

9. FRAMEWORK FOR ASSESSING THE INTEGRATION OF ETHICS IN THE DESIGN OF IMPACT INVESTMENT VENTURES

A. Dedeke

Article, Summer 2022, Business and Professional Ethics Journal

Impact investment ventures are growing in the modern economy. However, the recent failures of some impact investment ventures are a cause for concern. Unfortunately, our concern about the ethicality of these kinds of social exchanges seem to emerge when it is too late. Namely, we become concerned about lack of ethics when a venture has failed or is collapsing. A better approach would be for us to have a means to proactively assess and improve the degree to which the arrangements and practices of a social exchange meet ethical standards. Whereas much work has been done to equip social ventures to evaluate their impacts, little work has been done to create frameworks that could be used to assess the degree to which social exchanges integrate ethical practices in their designs. This paper proposes such a framework. For illustration purposes, the proposed framework would also be used to evaluate the One Acre Farm, an impact investment venture in Africa.

https://clck.ru/32udAH

10. CLAIMING LEGITIMACY: IMPACT VS. ESG INVESTING

T. Cojoianu, A. Hoepner, Yanan Lin, F. Schneider

Research paper, 15 September 2022, SSRN Electronic Journal

Impact investment firms pursue both the achievement of positive impact and the delivery of financial returns. They are thus distinct from investment firms which only follow commercial objectives and consider environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors from the perspective of financial risks and opportunities. While ESG investing has become mainstream, impact investment and the underlying double materiality has yet to be institutionalised and legitimized. Using private market data from Preqin in combination with statements made by private market investment firms on their websites, we investigate how impact investment firms claim legitimacy compared to their ESG peers. Given that impact investment is still a nascent field it suffers from a heavier burden of proof and legitimacy has been recognised as a strategy to overcome the liability of newness. We find impact investment firms distinct themselves from philanthropy, which is more likely to be claimed to be undertaken by ESG investing firms, in addition to their core ESG risk management approach. Additionally, we find that impact investment firms are more likely to claim to be involved in partnerships, in particular with academia and corporations. We explain this as complimentary sources of legitimacy for both objectives in the dual goal of impact investment firms: Corporations can give legitimacy to the commercial angle while academia can aid legitimizing the measurement of positive impact. Relatedly, we find that impact investment firms lay more emphasis on expertise and being data driven on their websites than ESG firms. Lastly, we investigate whether impact investment firms seek legitimacy through claiming investment in certain fields and find significant results for investment themes such as Green Technology, Biodiversity, Education, Agriculture, and Water.

https://goo.su/ha2n

11. WHO HAS A SEAT AT THE TABLE IN IMPACT INVESTING? ADDRESSING INEQUALITY BY GIVING VOICE

Guillermo Casasnovas, J. Jones

Article, 11 June 2022, Journal of Business Ethics

Despite recognizing the importance of impact investing in combating complex societal challenges, researchers have yet to examine the capacity of the field to address systemic inequality. While impact investments are intended to benefit vulnerable stakeholders, the voices of those stakeholders are generally overlooked in the design and implementation of such investments. To resolve this oversight, we theorize how the fields' design – through its tools, organizations, and field-level bodies – influences its capacity to address inequality by focusing on the concept of giving voice, which we define as the inclusive participation of vulnerable stakeholders in decision-making processes. We build from stakeholder engagement research to show how the design of impact investing can address inequality using three illustrative cases: social impact bonds, impact investing funds, and national advisory boards. We conclude with a discussion of how the ethical decision of giving voice to vulnerable stakeholders will determine the capacity of the field to address inequality, as well as provide implications for future research and practice.

https://goo.su/AUUN

12. IMPACT RISK MANAGEMENT IN IMPACT INVESTING: HOW IMPACT INVESTING ORGANIZATIONS ADOPT CONTROL MECHANISMS TO MANAGE THEIR IMPACT RISK

Syrus M. Islam

Research paper, 20 October 2022,

Journal of Management Accounting Research

In impact investing, impact risk encompasses the probability that investment projects may fail to achieve the expected positive impact (i.e., positive impact risk) and/or may have a negative impact (i.e., negative impact risk). Using an inductive research approach, this study examines how impact investing organizations adopt control mechanisms to manage impact risk. It finds that impact investors adopt a wide range of input, behavior, and output control mechanisms to manage impact risk that may arise from investee-level, investor-level, and system-level operations. Also, to manage impact risk, investors establish control mechanisms to influence relevant actors not only within a firm's boundary but also outside its boundary. Given the inherent complexity and ambiguity in managing impact risk in impact investing, control mechanisms appear to rely heavily on judgment and experience and adhere more to the “satisficing” principle. Furthermore, investors tend to focus more on managing positive impact risk than negative impact risk.

https://goo.su/h2VBYMo

13. GIINSIGHT: SIZING THE IMPACT INVESTING MARKET 2022

Dean Hand, Ben Ringel and Alexander Danel

Report, October 12, 2022, Global Impact Investing Network

The GIIN estimates the size of the worldwide impact investing market to be USD 1.164 trillion, marking the first time that the organization's widely-cited estimate has topped the USD 1 trillion mark. The figure, which is the central finding of the GIIN's 2022: Sizing the Impact Investing Market report, reflects an increasingly comprehensive measurement of impact assets under management globally. The report, which was produced with the financial support of Nuveen, also spotlights two areas of development in the market that are becoming increasingly prevalent: green bonds and corporate impact investing.

https://goo.su/6mhtFa

14. DEFINING AND CONCEPTUALIZING IMPACT INVESTING: ATTRACTIVE NUISANCE OR CATALYST?

Kai Hockerts, Lisa K. Hehenberger, S. Schaltegger, V. Farber

Article, 26 July 2022, Journal of Business Ethics

This introduction to the special issue on impact investing applies the attractive nuisance notion to impact investing. Social sector actors ‘trespassing' on the playing field of conventional investment markets may not appreciate the risks. We apply the framework of essentially contested concepts to foster fruitful diverse research in this emerging research field. We advance six dimensions (intentionality, additionality, contribution, materiality, measurability and attribution), which we propose allow to describe different sub-clusters of how the term is used in research and practice. For each dimension we identify risks and opportunities stemming from the contested nature and highlight an ambitious research agenda for how future business ethics scholars can help address and foster impact investing. We conclude by illustrating how the papers in this special issue address these challenges.

https://goo.su/BFciym9

15. FINTECH FOR SOCIAL GOOD: A RESEARCH AGENDA FROM NLP PERSPECTIVE

Chung-Chi Chen, Hiroya Takamura, Hsin-Hsi Chen

Article, 13 November 2022, ArXiv

Making our research results positively impact on society and environment is one of the goals our community has been pursuing recently. Although financial technology (FinTech) is one of the popular application fields, we notice that there is no discussion on how NLP can help in FinTech for the social good. When mentioning FinTech for social good, people are talking about financial inclusion and green finance. However, the role of NLP in these directions only gets limited discussions. To fill this gap, this paper shares our idea of how we can use NLP in FinTech for social good. We hope readers can rethink the relationship between finance and NLP based on our sharing, and further join us in improving the financial literacy of individual investors and improving the supports for impact investment.

https://clck.ru/32udLy

16. DISSECTING THE “DO GOOD AND DO WELL” PHENOMENON: THE CASE OF THE UK'S MARKET FOR SOCIAL INVESTMENT

Jess Daggers

Article, 2022, The British journal of sociology

The developing discourse around social investment and impact investing makes strong claims regarding the possibility of both furthering one's own interests while simultaneously acting for the benefit of others – ”doing good and doing well.” Such claims are central to UK – and US-centric attempts to reform capitalism in the face of multiple global crises. This article uses Foucault's writing on (neo)liberal governmentality to analyze a particular manifestation of the logic of “doing good and doing well”: the attempt to build a market for social investment in the UK between 2010 and 2016, a project closely related to the development of the broader impact investment movement. Building on a close reading of Foucault's writing on the role of self-interest, it is argued that two incompatible versions of social investment are present within the development of the market: one (the “innovative version”) that assumes purpose and profit are fully compatible, and one (the “principled version”) that assumes it is important to maintain a boundary between them. The relevance of these findings and the approach used is discussed in relation to the social studies of market, and ongoing efforts to develop a critique of “doing good and doing well.”

https://goo.su/XEvcn

17. MECHANISMS OF IMPACT INVESTING – FROM A LITERATURE REVIEW TO A MULTISTAGE AND MULTILEVEL MODEL

Deike Schluetter, Lena Schätzlein, Rüdiger Hahn

Article, 1 August 2022, Academy of Management Proceedings

Impact investing (II) aims at achieving an intentional social impact next to a financial return, thus embracing a high level of hybridity and potentially conflicting goals of different actors. We find that a growing academic literature on II is currently scattered across a variety of disciplines, topics, and levels of analysis with inconsistencies in terminology and concepts and a lack of theoretical explanations and frameworks. Our systematic and integrative literature review of 99 articles clarifies conceptual ambiguities by developing a typology of II differentiating a weak and strong interpretation. We analyze research based on antecedents, management and outcomes of II to provide an overview of common research areas and point to inconsistencies in the overall scholarly contribution. We develop a mechanisms-based multistage and multilevel model of the II market to link diverse current theoretical contributions and elaborate future research avenues.

https://clck.ru/33Hfqp

18. THE IMPACT OF FRAMING ON IMPACT INVESTING

Fatima Harvey, Kerrin Myres, Gavin Price

Article, 28 June 2022, African Journal of Business and Economic Research

Impact investors are faced with the issue of risk and return evaluation on both the scale of financial performance and social performance. The study extends the understanding of the relationships between investor perception of risk, sense of understanding, and financial decision-making into the inherently dichotomous context of impact investment. Through the lens of prospect theory, an instrument for data collection was designed to evaluate the effects of finance outcome dominant, social outcome dominant, and hybrid outcome framing on an investor's perception of risk, sense of understanding, and capital allocation decisions. This research found that variability in outcome framing influences an investor's capital allocation decision but does not affect the perception of risk or sense of understanding. These findings contribute to the understanding of how the framing of compound outcomes with both financial and moral implications affects the decision-making choice process of individuals.

https://goo.su/7FD2zd

19. FROM FIDUCIARY DUTY TO IMPACT FIDELITY: MANAGERIAL COMPENSATION IN IMPACT INVESTING

Isaline Thirion, P. Reichert, V. Xhauflair, Jonathan De Jonck

Article, 31 May 2022, Journal of Business Ethics

Investors with standard monetary preferences will give a fund manager incentives to increase firm profits, which can be achieved through a share in profits via carried interest. When investors have social preferences, it is not clear which incentives the manager should receive. We explore this puzzle by applying an agency theory perspective to impact investing, a practice where investors seek both financial returns and a measurable social or environmental impact. Using an inductive, qualitative approach, we identify and describe the ethical tensions and challenges faced by fund managers to structure and implement impact-based variable compensation schemes. Our results indicate that economic incentives tied to non-financial objectives are useful to alleviate goal incongruity between principals and agents during fund creation but have the potential to lead to perverse effects during the fund lifecycle, where managers may exploit subjective non-financial metrics to maximize personal wealth. We introduce the concept of impact fidelity, a conceptual equivalent of fiduciary duty, to ensure that investment decisions reflect the asset owner's impact preferences.

https://goo.su/JpTB

20. MAPPING IMPACT INVESTING: A BIBLIOMETRIC ANALYSIS

M. Migliavacca, Ritesh Patel, A. Paltrinieri, John W. Goodell

Article, 1 October 2022, Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money

Impact investing, as the furthest form of sustainable finance, has gained in research attention. However, there is no complete bibliometric review on this topic. We map the academic contributions to impact investing, highlighting the most influential research streams and trends by conducting a bibliometric review based on a keyword search analysis of the Elsevier Scopus database. The final sample consists of 115 academic papers published in ABS 3+ journals between 2009 and October 2021. We identify the most influential articles in the field, map the different streams of impact investing research, visualise focus areas and trends, and pinpoint areas for further research. These findings will help academics focus their research on under-investigated areas within this heterogeneous niche.

https://goo.su/REo2

21. MAKING IMPACT INVESTING MORE THAN JUST WELL-MEANING CAPITAL

F. Casalini, V. Vecchi

Article, 25 July 2022, Business & Society

Impact investing is progressively losing focus in ensuring investments really do make a difference; therefore, the growth of the market may not make real social and environmental change. We propose three ways to put the “impact” back into the heart of impact investment.

https://goo.su/9XuSk

«Зеленый» менеджмент человеческих ресурсов. Оценка влияния на экологическую устойчивость банков (на примере Нигерии)

Холо Мэтью Акер, Абубакар Садик Сулейман

DOI 10.55140/2782–5817–2022–2–4–82–95

С развитием ESG-повестки во всем мире компании все больше внимания уделяют ответственному отношению к окружающей среде, пытаясь сократить ущерб, который наносится экологии. Частью стратегий компаний становится «зеленая» практика управления человеческими ресурсами. Например, это означает электронный документооборот, начиная с объявления о вакансии в режиме онлайн до обучения персонала рациональному использованию ресурсов и энергосбережению. Как «зеленый» HR влияет на экологическую устойчивость банков в штате Кацине (Нигерия), пойдет речь в этой статье.

Холо Мэтью Акер

Факультет управления бизнесом, Федеральный университет Дуцин-ма, штат Кацина, Нигерия

Абубакар Садик Сулейман

Доктор философии, доцент, Факультет управления бизнесом, Федеральный университет Дуцин-ма, штат Кацина, Нигерия

ПОСТАНОВКА ПРОБЛЕМЫ ИССЛЕДОВАНИЯ

Озабоченность экологической ситуацией растет во всем мире. Это связано с ростом угрозы изменения климата и глобального потепления, а также другими экологическими проблемами, которые заставляют отдельных людей, организации и правительства более внимательно относиться к окружающей среде. Экологические проблемы ставят перед менеджментом современных организаций многогранные управленческие задачи и фундаментально влияют на деятельность, стратегии, политику и культуру корпораций во всем мире (Cohen et al., 2014). Данное явление обусловило необходимость интеграции практики экологического менеджмента и практики управления человеческими ресурсами в организациях (Ali & Wael, 2018; Briggs, 2017; Renwick, et al., 2012).