Позитивные изменения. Том 2, №4 (2022). Positive changes. Volume 2, Issue 4 (2022) - Редакция журнала «Позитивные изменения»

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