Impact Investing

Asia is facing simultaneously huge growth potential and increasing inequalities, with often weak national solutions to the social issues at hand. Social purpose organisations (SPOs) – which includes but are not limited to non-profit organisations, charities and social enterprises - are seen to solve these issues sustainably. Social incubation is seen as a tool to help SPOs grow and potentially build a pipeline for social investors. Yet, how does social incubation in Asia work?
The insights presented here are the first insights from surveying 15 social incubators in Indonesia, Thailand, India, Japan, China, Taiwan, Hong Kong and Singapore which have existed for at least two years. Four incubators supported idea-stage SPOs, while seven focused on entrants with prototypes.
Two had SPOs in all stages and another two served post-revenue organisations.

So are they effective? The strongest indicator was that seven out of ten incubators reported that their graduating SPOs had progressed by at least one to three stages between idea-, prototype-, postrevenue and growth-stage from their status at entry to the incubator...

Social enterprises (SE) emerge where there are opportunities to find new ways to balance otherwise competing interests and to achieve social purposes in ways that are better than and distinct from traditional approaches. Understanding whether the zoo and its elements are achieving these purposes, making progress, or causing harm is complicated and difficult. The challenges begin with assessing essential things that cannot be measured easily or well. They continue with how SE simultaneously has social impact at so many levels: individual, organizational, communal, within and among parts of the zoo, and society as a whole. They are exacerbated by the need to account for gains in one social impact area possibly being accompanied by harm in another. Of course, being complicated or challenging or even presently unprovable is no excuse for not trying. In that spirit this chapter approaches assessing the social impact of SE, its potential, and its distinguishing character at three key leve...

This report, prepared by consultancy Mōhio, examines climate finance in New Zealand. It includes a snapshot of key existing climate finance flows and a look at the instruments available to the Government and private sector such as grants, debt and bonds.

The report also outlines the enabling environment required to better facilitate the flows of finance toward low emissions and climate-resilient outcomes. This includes considerations such as information flows, tracking, regulations, organisational forms, and wider alignment across innovation, research and development and other environmental and social outcomes.

The article focuses on corporate social bonds, which are commonly defined as debt securities whose proceeds are used to finance projects or ventures at favourable conditions, in order to achieve positive social outcomes or to address specific social issues. Social bonds belong to the family of sustainable finance currently developing on international financial markets, especially in the European Union, and where a recent interest has also emerged at the political level. Although in March 2018 the European Commission published its Action Plan on Financing Sustainable Growth, at the moment of writing there is no specific EU legal framework for social bonds. The absence of a precise definition of social bonds and the uncertainty around the remedies for non-compliance of promised 'social' obligations entail serious risks of 'socialwashing' (i.e., the misappropriation of an increasingly attractive label).Through an analysis of the contractual design of social bonds, and the identification of different types of social bonds, the article identifies potential legal 'Achilles heels' of social bonds and suggests possible contractual remedies to ensure that both issuers and beneficiaries comply with their duties in terms of social impact achievement. Finally, the article suggests a European Union intervention in developing a 'goal-oriented' definition for social bonds.

Remittances from the Kenyan diaspora in the US represent a $15-60M impact investing opportunity
The enabling environment in both countries is conducive to promoting investment and transfer of funds
High transaction costs and a lack of organization among the diaspora present challenges
Potential solutions include a crowdfunding platform or use of blockchain

IMPACT INVESTING STRATEGY
Focus on equity capital providers, investing in profit with purpose companies.
Paper Presentation
ISIRC Milan 2021
ENABLING THE CHANGE! SOCIAL INNOVATION AND ENTERPRISES FOR A BETTER FUTURE
Stream 5 – Financing social impact

The paper aims to identify key topics that an equity capital provider with an investment focus on for-profit businesses shall consider while defining an impact investing strategy.

L’evoluzione del Terzo Settore, dalle modalità di finanziamento e affidamento al campo d’azione oggi ampliato, richiama la necessità di un’adozione diffusa di pratiche puntuali di valutazione di impatto sociale. Al fine di misurare l’efficienza del progetto di promozione dell’imprenditoria migrante “BITE”, e di esprimerla con trasparenza, è stato scelto il metodo SROI, l’indice del Ritorno Sociale sull’Investimento. Analogamente al ROI, si stima il valore attuale netto generato dal progetto e lo si divide per la somma degli input. La dissertazione ripercorre le fasi del calcolo e presenta i risultati, che evidenziano come il progetto riveli la propria forza non nel breve, ma nel medio-lungo termine.

The purpose of this article is to present a brief synthesis of the impact investment market as it relates to barriers to the full development of this market. We examine some developments that have emerged to address these barriers. We include a brief overview of the impact investing field and the current landscape of social enterprises, the vast majority of which are nonprofit organizations increasingly engaged in business activity. We address the lack of liquidity in this market and the need for secondary markets that enable investor exit. We present a preliminary summary of findings on a few exchange platforms – primary and secondary – that have emerged very recently to coordinate this market in several countries.

This paper aims to understand how Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) accountability metrics influence 1) firm’s profits and 2) value.  The study is a cross-sectional analysis of S&P 500 companies in the US. This study specifically studies 1) the relationship between ESG metrics and Free Cash Flow and 2) the relationship between ESG metrics and Market Capitalization. I find that ESG accountability, specifically Environmental and Employee accountability is correlated with profit creation in the form of free cash flow, while, a significantly negatively correlation is found between the “Community” factor and profit creation.  Meanwhile, the value equation yields no such significant results between ESG metrics and market capitalization. Therefore, I conclude that while ESG factors drive profits in large US firms, ESG metrics fail to be accounted for in market performance measures as evident in the market capitalization equation. These findings have two main implications. First, a failure to account for value creating ESG assets will continue to result in the eroding value of firms in the US. Second, the inability of the market to price ESG factors results in imperfect information that creates problems for decision-making for investors and company leaders alike. Therefore, the study concludes that while ESG factors have been an important step in quantifying sustainability accountability in the market system, they nevertheless fall short in providing key sustainability data needed for decision making and are not reflected in market-based measures of firm performance. Therefore, in order for sustainability initiatives to be accounted for, they must be integrated within existing accounting systems and must require material disclosure of sustainability information.

This paper focuses on the potential opportunities that disruptive innovation may bring to the healthcare sector of emerging and developing economies, and in particular to the one of the leading Sub-Saharan Africa’s country, Nigeria. The author examines the possibility of using advancements in the innovation of Technology 4.0 to bridge the gap in access to what could be defined as “good enough” healthcare services for poorer regions of the world while also aiming to potentially reduce healthcare costs and making the local healthcare systems more sustainable, productive, and accessible. Nigerian health industry is used as an exploratory case study to examine the feasibility of implementing Mobile Health and Telehealth Systems, and more in general, to assess the potential benefits of disruptive innovations in the healthcare industry for the lower income patients of emerging and developing economies. This analysis on disruptive innovation, industry competitiveness, and sustainability of the healthcare models is inspired by Michael Porter’s Creating Shared Value (CSV) strategic framework (Porter et al., 2011; 2018) and by Clayton Christensen’s Disruptive Innovation Theory (Christensen et al., 1997; 2000; 2004; 2006; 2013; 2015, 2017). This study also aims to provide a compelling argument supporting the thesis that disruptive innovations in the healthcare system can help grant access to critical basic healthcare services in poor regions of the world while also achieving multiple goals such as, sustainability, efficiency, shared-value creation, and corporate profitability for forward-looking firms with scalable and disruptive business models. Ultimately, the paper aims to contribute to the body of knowledge in the field of disruptive innovation, sustainability, and creating shared-value strategies, assessing the feasibility of solutions that may drive to improved competitiveness, social progress, social inclusion, and sustainability of the healthcare industry in one of the developing economies. The results of this study aim to prove that, in the coming years, disruptive innovations are likely to redefine the competitive environment of the healthcare industry and improve the healthcare conditions of the poorer, underserved, and underreached population of developing and emerging economies like Nigeria, thus increasing their life expectancy rates.

This paper analyses (corporate) social and green bonds, which are commonly defined as debt securities whose proceeds are used to finance projects or ventures aiming to achieve positive social or environmental outcomes. The paper examines market practices and international guidelines to identify the main characteristics of social and green bonds, given that there are neither a legal definition nor specific rules for social and green bonds. It then analyses how these financial instruments can be regulated within the Italian legal framework and which enforcement mechanisms apply in case of non-compliance with non-financial obligations.

Social impact investing (SII) is transforming the availability of private capital for nonprofits and social enterprises, but
demand is not yet meeting supply. This paper analyzes the perceived barriers faced by nonprofits in engaging with SII,
arguing the need to assess differences using a policy field framework. Four parameters of a subsector are conceptualized
as shaping participation in SII: the scale of investment required, embeddedness in place, the need for radical innovation,
and the configuration of intermediaries (such as loan funds and market brokers). Based on 25 interviews with leaders of
nonprofits and intermediaries in affordable housing and community economic development in Canada, the study finds that
significant barriers are a lack of knowledge of the market, inadequate financial literacy, and the challenges of measuring and
valuing social impacts. In addition, nonprofits report that, in spite of the inherent importance of social impact in this form of
investing, they currently make limited use of evaluation and impact metrics, and perceive that intermediaries and investors,
particularly in affordable housing, still put a greater emphasis on financial over social returns.

Over the past ten years, 'The Girl Effect'–the discourse and practice of investing in third world girls' education—has ascended to the top of the international development agenda as the 'highest return investment strategy' to end poverty. This paper interrogates the trend by investigating the genealogy of 'The Girl Effect' as The Nike Foundation's flagship corporate social responsibility campaign and the theory of change it is based on. A literature analysis of The Nike Foundation's most recent intervention projects— " The Girl Effect Accelerator " and 'Girl Hub' pilot projects in Ethiopia, Nigeria, and Rwanda—will elucidate the underlying investment logic and serve as a representative sample of the broader emerging practice. While claiming to advance " gender equality " and " women's empowerment " , I argue that The Girl Effect accomplishes the opposite by reinforcing gender inequity on both the micro and macro levels. Feminist grammars are instrumentalized as window dressing to exploit third world females as prospective (1) debtors in the expansion of credit markets, (2) exploits in the expansion of consumer markets, and (3) the 'untapped resource' for cheap labor. An epochal look at second wave feminism will show how 'The Girl Effect Paradigm' is a second wave of neoliberal exploitation—a parallel of its first female-led development era (1980s-1990s). This paper warns that as this phenomenon grows in hegemony it is insidiously displacing feminism as a political project and neutralizing the need for a truly transformational agenda. Without a counterbalance of vigilant public scrutiny and debate, we risk letting it crystallize Western-patriarchal-capitalism even more deeply in an unyielding global glass ceiling.

Microfinance and its impact on poverty elevation is especially important for developing and emerging economies. This paper describes a brief overview of the origin and development of modern microfinance industry, its historical context and evolution.

The main intent of this paper was to bring clarity on the subject of the financial performance of impact investing by investigating performance differentials between impact investing funds and traditional funds. The study took into consideration financial data from roughly 5,000 PE and VC funds across a 30-year period (1985-2014). The analysis revealed that on average impact investing funds underperform non-impact funds by 4.01 pps. The finding was drawn from a comparison of 105 impact funds versus 4874 traditional funds and was substantiated through a one-tailed Student’s t-test at a confidence level of 95%.
The paper also intended to establish the impact of certain characteristics, such as fund size, fund status (liquidated or closed) and investment focus (both geographical and sectoral), on the financial performance of impact investing funds. In-depth analyses and various statistical tools (ANOVAs, Student’s and Welch’s t-tests) were used to draw conclusions. The paper first sought to confirm whether financial performance decreases with fund size. Yet, no evidence of a statistically relevant correlation between financial return and fund size was found. The study also aimed to validate the thesis that closed funds report higher financial performance when compared to funds which are already liquidated. However, no statistically significant difference in adjusted financial returns was detected between liquidated and closed funds. Additionally, the research investigated the thesis that geographical focus has an impact on fund performance. Despite the presence of mean differences, limited sample sizes did not allow for the establishment of a concrete nexus beyond reasonable doubts. Finally, the analysis essayed to verify if any sectorial focus yield excess return. Strong evidence was found that funds specialized in financial services achieve higher returns compared to their peers investing in other sectors.

This essay provides an outline of the regulatory framework of impact invest- ment. The first part focuses on the impact investing techniques, underlining the incompatibility with an antagonistic view on the forms of wealth enhancement («doing well» in terms of financial profits, or «doing good» in terms of improving social well-being). The second part deepens into the applicative solutions related to the functional complexity of these operations, which requires a reasonable bal- ancing of the different values involved (social utility, financial stability and in- vestor’s interest in financial returns). The essay conclusively draws the hermeneu- tical guidelines ensuring investor’s confidence and the functionalization of impact investment market to human well-being.

The Sustainable Development Goals make it imperative to link economic growth with social and environmental priorities. The current status of social development perspective and the role of government, corporate and social enterprises in delivering social sustainability in India are examined. Constraints such as fiscal procyclicality and vulnerability, lack of access to finance for social enterprises, and biases in corporate social responsibility activities lead to dismal performances in social development. There is a need to engage in non-concessional finances with public and private funds for financing social sustainability. Impact investment is an emerging asset class, which lies at the intersection of private finance and purpose-driven finance.

Today, technological advances are threatening the world economy with three major challenges: climate change, energy crisis, and fiscal constraints. Due to human pressure on earth's surface natural resources are depleting. Increased environmental pollution, depletion of natural resources, and the impact of global environmental issues will cause significant economic stress and costs. For all these reasons, business organisations have begun to change their activities and strategies to ensure protection of our natural resources and the environment. If there is a need to provide a cleaner and greener environment for future generations, this is a time when economies around the world should take immediate precautionary measures. In this present scenario, the financial sector could play a predominant role in boosting environmental sustainability. Sustainability is one of the most important factors driving the business fraternisation strategy development process. In the financial sector, the various services that have adopted green business are banks, securities firms, credit card companies, and companies related to consumer finance. Concerns about environmental sustainability have raised the concept of corporate social responsibility extensively. The potential benefits of this concept include the attention of regulators, society, NGOs, employees, customers and international organisations on this issue. To address these challenges, a new ecologically sustainable development strategy that will lead to improved economic growth and social equity while maintaining the environment and addressing the rapidly increasing issues associated with climate change must be employed. Therefore, there is a strong need to support green growth strategies that will trigger the necessary revolutionary processes towards a low-carbon and resource-efficient economy.

The chapter examines innovative financial funding mechanisms that can spur private-sector investment in urban heritage regeneration projects. In recent years, the scope of urban heritage interventions has broadened to address both natural and cultural heritage; therefore, the definition of “brownfield” must be extended to include not only natural brownfields, such as contaminated sites, but also areas with cultural heritage assets, as for example, underutilized historic districts. Given the public good characteristics of brownfield investment, the private sector may undervalue the commercial returns and overvalue the related costs of projects, thereby leading to market failures and the undersupply of urban heritage redevelopment projects. The public sector must act as a catalyst to foster private investment in heritage brownfi eld regeneration by creating financial solutions,
such as debt leveraging, local revolving funds, and tax abatements/credits to create continuous stimulus and incentives that can help diminish the incidence of market failure in these types of investments. This is especially critical in developing countries. While private-sector funding for urban brownfield projects (especially natural heritage sites) is increasing, these actors need to assume a greater role in investing in urban cultural brownfield projects. Against this background, this chapter analyzes four models of financing urban heritage brownfields: (1) public-private partnerships, (2) land value finance mechanisms, (3) urban development funds, and (4) impact investment funds. Various case studies to corroborate the statements are presented.

Purpose: Impact investing, a type of values-based investing that combines financial investment with philanthropic goals, is receiving heightened scholarly and practitioner attention. The geography of impact investing, however, is largely unexamined and it is not clear why some impact investing communities are more vibrant than other regional communities. Regional differences in entrepreneurial activities are increasingly explained by differences in the vitality of entrepreneurial ecosystems, the set of interconnected forces that promote and sustain regional entrepreneurship. Yet scholars have not leveraged the insights from entrepreneurial ecosystems studies to understand the dynamics of communities that encourage and support impact investing.

Design/methodology/approach: To explain inter-regional differences in the prevalence and intensity of impact investing, this conceptual paper draws from research on entrepreneurial ecosystems and impact investment to theorize about the ecosystem attributes and components that drive vibrant impact investing communities.

Findings: It is theorized that vibrant impact investing ecosystems have three system-level attributes – diversity, cohesion, and coordination – that are influenced by the core components of the ecosystems, including the characteristics of investors, the presence of social impact support organizations, and cultural values that support blending logics.

Originality/value: The theoretical model contributes to research on impact investing and hybrid forms of organizing, produces concrete implications for ecosystem builders, and sets an agenda for future research.

This review examines the qualitative and quantitative properties of the hazardous waste stream in Ghana as well as current associated management practices. As an emerging market, Ghana is experiencing a continuous increase in industrial activity and growth, which consequentially will result in an increase in generation of hazardous waste as well as its associated management challenges. Understanding this waste stream in the country would equip policy makers and organizations in developing critical policies and management practices that address hazardous waste generation and management in the country. Various stakeholders were engaged to take into account the professional opinions of persons and organizations involved in hazardous waste generation and management. This report discuss issues on current policies regulating the generation and management of hazardous waste, management practices identified in the country, qualitative and quantitative properties of this waste stream and finally challenges and opportunities associated with the generation and management of hazardous waste in Ghana.

As the economy continues to struggle, and solutions at either side of the spectrum appears to have their respective challenges, attention are now being directed towards the promise of The Hybrid Model. This study examines through an action research approach the pros and cons of The Hybrid Model in comparison with other organizational structures, with focus on accessibility to resources, longevity,innovation capabilities and benefits to the society. Data collection is conducted through Nevara, an Urban Farming Platform, a Social Venture focused on healthy food by offering services to Farmers and Farmers’ Markets.Traditionally, innovation has been thought of a something that relates to new technology, but as accessibility to information and competition intensifies - so is also the need to innovate throughout the whole organization. Focus on sustainable solutions has also gained importance, which is important to keep in mind when building organizational culture and a brand which both can thrive in the short-term and long-term life stages of the organization. Hybrids, in particular those structured as a non-profit with earned income, might gain competitive advantages through the ability of attracting talent willing to work for a lower salary due to alignment with the mission. As it is increasingly difficult to secure traditional funding as a for-profit startup, founders whom are passionate about a specific cause might learn that doing a Hybrid Model better fit their growth opportunities, in particular those who have plans to leverage crowd funding. This study covers in detail Social Entrepreneurship and The Hybrid Model, and how the triple bottom line approach can improve impact on social and environmental causes.

This Edited Book contains 9 best papers selected from 78 papers submitted which come from various countries. The best papers are divided into three categories namely Islamic Economic Development, Islamic Financial Instruments and Technology, and Islamic Social Finance.

Chapter
Understanding Ethics and Responsibilities in a Globalizing World

Volume 5 of the series The International Society of Business, Economics, and Ethics Book Series pp 201-225

The top priority for a far-sighted developing society in the current global interconnected world is addressing the issues of poverty and economic inequality. Economic inequality has been a common threat throughout the history of mankind and particularly occurs in contemporary societies as the obstacle to sustainable global development. The important role of smart governance and partnership between corporations, international institutions, and state authorities toward resolution of the negative externalities of the liberal market economy is considered to be implemented through the countries’ transformation into the socially oriented market economy, enabling both economic growth and social progress

Chapter 7, IDFC India Infrastructure Report 2013 | 2014, The Road to Universal health Coverage, Orient BlackSwan

At 1.2% of GDP, public spending on healthcare in India is one of the lowest in the world. To compensate, private spending by Indians on healthcare, at 2.9% of GDP, is one of the highest in the world.  Poor incentive structures in the public healthcare sector have resulted in a lack of viable alternatives for the poor: going to the government hospital means they may not get adequate diagnosis and treatment, while the rapidly growing private sector has not been meeting its minimum legal obligations of providing free care to poor patients, in return for concessions and benefits that it gets from the government. Even for those who pay, the principal-agent problem arising out of information asymmetry results in patients spending on far more diagnostics and medicines or procedures than warranted. A related issue in the private sector is of a higher thrust on tertiary care, at the cost of primary care. The problems are therefore of health inequity, inadequate availability, unequal access, and poor quality and costly health care services across small cities and rural India. High out-of-pocket expenses and ancillary costs have increased household indebtedness for the rural population which uses a larger share of consumption spending on healthcare than urban.

With the Government planning an increase in its health expenditure to 2.5% of GDP by the end of the 12th Plan (2012-17), the key challenge of efficient use of resources will need to be addressed. Higher public allocation can perhaps be best deployed if delivery is separated from funding-- and the advantage in public-private partnership (PPP) is that of combining core competencies of the private sector with the state’s capacities. Affordable healthcare is one of the relatively more robust social enterprise (SE) sectors growing in India, with a range of initiatives for building sustainable delivery models. It is evident that meaningful scale-up can be achieved through collaborations across the healthcare value chain and with the government, which is the largest network of rural healthcare delivery. The paper provides an overview of select innovative models and discusses associated challenges and policy and strategy issues for scaling up.

The South Africa SDG Investor Map 2020 identifies 30 investment opportunities across four priority investment sectors:

• infrastructure
• education • healthcare
• agriculture

designed to advance South Africa’s achievement of the UN Sustainable Development Goals.  The SDG Investor Map captures market-specific investment opportunities for SDG-aligned capital deployment.

The investment opportunities areas (IOAs) and the reports on the specific projects within each IOA are accompanied by a capital allocation map, which locates the opportunities across the risk-return spectrum.

The role of the third sector in the regeneration of economic and social well- being is crucial within the framework of «inclusive society» as drawn by the European agenda for sustainable growth. Nevertheless, such a role will be marginalized as long as funding comes mainly from public spending or do- nations by private individuals. Within a middle ground, between social purposes and business income, the authors analyze low-profit and social impact finance phenomena with a view to re-conceptualizing the functions of the different players operating in the three sectors of the economy, thus envisaging a system of interventions based on a new representation of financial interest.

La politica europea per una crescita sostenibile e inclusiva assegna al terzo settore un ruolo cruciale nella rigenerazione del benessere, sociale ed economico. Nondimeno tale ruolo resta marginale fintantoché il relativo finanziamento provenga prevalentemente dal denaro pubblico o dalle liberalità. Gli autori analizzano i fenomeni del low profit e della social impact finance, nella terra di mezzo, tra idealismo e lucratività, per riconcettualizzare la funzione degli operatori appartenenti ai tre settori dell’economia e delineare un sistema di interventi fondato su una nuova rappresentazione dell’interesse a finanziare.

This report focuses on the latent potential and essentials of impact investing. It is an emerging, innovative form of SDGs investment for realization of the SDGs in ASEAN. Impact investing is distinct in its intentionality in creating and measuring societal impact along with financial return, beyond mitigating risk and incorporating factors related to environment, society and governance (ESG). This report aims to further mobilize financial resources that can be measured in terms of both financial and societal performance to accelerate realization of the SDGs, as part of the “Decade of Action”.

The end of the commodity super cycle in 2014 hit Sub-Saharan economies hard, sending economic growth to a two-decade low by 2016 as prices of crude oil, commodities, and other African exports fell dramatically. In addition, global financial factors reduced the interest of international investors in the region. Despite the recent economic drag, Africa is a rapidly expanding market that represents significant economic opportunity for private enterprises and investors around the world. The region’s economic potential is about more than recovering commodity prices. Other forces are at work, including favorable demographic trends, economic reforms, infrastructure investment, buoyant services sectors, and strong agricultural production. Africa’s demographics are unique and brimming with potential. In an aging world, the region has a young and growing population. Rapid urbanization is expected to double the population of cities within 25 years, raising hopes for the productivity, innovation, and economic diversification that such trends have brought to other regions. The overall climate for business continues to improve, as African reforms tracked in the World Bank Group’s Doing Business annual survey continue to rise. The growth of local capital markets, though still nascent in most countries, continues apace across the region. All in all, private enterprises and investors that are prepared to take advantage of these trends and serve Africa’s burgeoning consumer classes stand poised to tap new markets and reap significant gains.

On October 21, 2011, the White House Office of Social Innovation and Civic Participation and the Nonprofit Finance Fund convened a meeting, with support from the Rockefeller Foundation, attended by ninety-six representatives from government, nonprofits, philanthropic foundations and academia. The convening aimed to generate interest in “Pay for Success” (PFS) programs funded by “Social Impact Bonds” (SIBs), described by the White House as “A New Results-Oriented Federal Commitment for Underserved Americans.” By the end of 2014, twenty-three states and the District of Columbia had adopted or were considering Social Impact Bond programs or enabling legislation. This scale of interest and activity being directed at PFS and SIBs raises several questions. What is the logic underlying the Pay-for-Success approach and how is it unrolling in practice? Does the accelerating adoption of PFS and SIBs represent an innovative departure in the design and delivery of urban social programs or is it a continuation of longstanding practices? What explains the rapid emergence and diffusion of PFS at this particular historical moment? To what extent does the proliferation of PFS and SIBs reflect the subordination of urban and social policy to the financialization of the economy and with what short- and long-term consequences for the future? Replacing conventional ideas of governing in and through the state, the financialization of urban policy advances the practice of networked governance involving the finely calibrated interaction of multiple actors spanning the public, private and non-profit sectors and proceeds through the continuous and highly contested negotiation of the elusive boundaries between the market, state and civil society. Once achieved through the confluence of interests enacting the financialization of the economy, the dominance of finance in the sphere of social policy appears irreversible. The resulting reversal of ends and means mobilizes social policy on behalf of profitable investment outcomes and financialization is the process through which seeing like a state means enacting policy as a financial transaction. Most disadvantaged in the resulting policy practice are the client-recipients of the social-behavioral interventions funded through the policy mechanism, whose behavioral failures are targeted as the problem to be rectified while the underlying structural and institutional determinants of life chances in a financialized society remain intact.

This report is a follow-up study building on the previous Kukula Capital baseline study which was prepared in September 2019 for the Zambian National Advisory Board for Impact Investment (NABII).
This report addresses and analyses both the Private Asset Impact Funds (PAIFs), that is non-Development Finance Institutions (non-DFIs) self-identifying as impact investors albeit not necessarily in full accordance with the official definition of impact investment, and the DFIs.
❖ Study coverage: The study compiles data on 23 asset managers of which the headquarters of 4 are located in Zambia and the rest are located in 12 other countries. In terms of assets under management (AUM), the study survey covers 5 DFIs and another 18 non-DFIs which all
together are deploying capital into (impact) enterprises across the following 7 impact sectors: Financial Services; Renewable Energy; Real Estate; Agriculture; Food and Agro-Processing; Waste Management and Tourism.
❖ Market size: The study aggregates a total of USD 85.17 Mn of assets into 28 impact enterprises, which were split between DFIs: $47.17 Mn in AUM; Private Equity: $36.17 Mn in AUM; High Net Worth Individuals (HNWIs): $1.40 Mn in AUM and Crowdfunding: $0.43 Mn in AUM.
❖ When looking exclusively at DFIs’ 13 Impact Deals Flow into projects in the period 2019-2020 the total amount $706 Mn in AUM is invested by 8 different Multilateral and Bilateral DFIs.
The study brings the most comprehensive data set to date on this investment fund universe focusing on Zambia exclusively during the period 2019-2020 by providing a clear picture state of the size of the
impact investment market in Zambia. The study does this by:
i. Mapping all known 23 impact investors including by highlighting which Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) they all focus on and investment products they use;
ii. Estimating the Market size (i.e., the total value of impact investments) including highlighting the methodology used and assumptions made;
iii. Identifying existing and potential trends in the Zambian impact investing market and showing developments from the baseline period 2015-2018 to the follow-up up period from 2019-2020;
iv. Investigating the fund management landscape in Zambia and describing the impact measurement and management tools which these impact investors are using;
v. Identifying AUM by sector, instrument and organisation type;
vi. Investigating the investment performance and the risks of various instruments;
vii. Mapping the (impact) enterprises who received impact capital from both the 18 non-DFIs and 5 DFIs, and counting the actual number of transactions from 2019-2020;
viii. Finally, by identifying some of the major challenges the impact investors are confronted with and proposing what could be done to ensure that the opportunities associated with growing of the impact investment market size in Zambia eventually materialize within the newly Elected Zambian Government’s forthcoming 8th National Development Plan (2022-2026).

Using the Hebrew Bible, this paper demonstrates that giving charity, as crucial as it is, is not sufficient because it deprives the receiver of dignity. Society has a greater responsibility than simply providing the underprivileged with donations of money or food to survive. Morality dictates that society find ways to generate jobs and provide employment for the poor so that they can escape their poverty with dignity. The purpose of many biblical laws such as leaving the gleanings, forgotten produce, and the corners of the field for the poor; debt forgiveness; return of land to its original owners during the Jubilee year; the precept of marrying the maidservant; the obligation to lend money to the destitute; was "raising the needy from the dust" (Psalms 113:7) and help empower the indigent. More than offering a safety net, the Bible obligates humankind to break the cycle of abuse and power and provide a ladder for the unfortunates of society to climb out of a cycle of misfortune.

Purpose: This contribution explains how socially responsible investing (SRI) has evolved in the last few decades and sheds light on its latest developments. It describes different forms of SRI in the financial markets; and deliberates on the rationale for the utilization of positive and negative screenings of listed businesses and public organizations. Design/methodology/approach: A comprehensive literature review suggests that the providers of financial capital are increasingly allocating funds toward positive impact and sustainable investments. Therefore, this descriptive paper provides a factual summary of the proliferation of SRI products in financial markets. Afterwards it presents the opportunities and challenges facing the stakeholders of SRI. Findings: This research presents a historic overview on the growth of SRI products in the financial services industry. It clarifies that the market for responsible investing has recently led to an increase in a number of stakeholders, including contractors, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and research firms who are involved in the scrutinization of the businesses' environmental, social and governance (ESG) behaviors. Originality/value: This discursive contribution raises awareness on the screenings of positive impact and sustainable investments. The researcher contends that today's socially responsible investors are increasingly analyzing the businesses' non-financial performance, including their ESG credentials. In conclusion this paper puts forward future research avenues in this promising field of study.

Una panoramica generale basata sulle principali fonti della letteratura in materia di impact investing. Definizione, storia, premesse al suo sviluppo, gli impact investing nel mondo, opportunità, criticità e sfide della nuova finanza sociale

Current Background and Context
Global Trends
The Case of Switzerland
The Zambian Landscape for Impact Investing
How Zambia can leverage impact investing in mitigating the negative socio-economic effects of Covid-19
My own Impact Investing Activities
6.1. Impact Investing Exchange (IIX) & IIX Chapter Lusaka
6.2.1. 4IP Group – Impact Investing Cluster
6.2.2. Impact Infrastructure Fund 1
6.2.3. Invisible Heart Impact Fund 1
6.3. Global Steering Group (GSGII) & National Advisory Board for Impact Investing
6.4. Swiss Impact Investing Association

Impact investing has great potential to contribute to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals by financing the growth of social sector organizations. This paper conducts a systematic literature review to develop cumulative insights into impact investing in social sector organizations. It identifies four streams of impact investing research: impact investment decision making, impact evaluation in impact investing, behavioral issues in impact investing, and impact investing ecosystem. This paper also identifies nine main research focus areas within these research streams and discusses key insights into each of them. Finally, building on prior research, this article offers a comprehensive future research agenda.

How does investor behaviour in impact investing differ from investor behaviour in mainstream investing? In impact investing, financial investors actively seek out not only financial returns in their investment projects, but also a measurable level of positive social and/or environmental impact.

This paper seeks to explain what is new about impact investing and specifically focuses on assessing which factors affect impact investor behaviour in regards to three key focus areas: social benefit, rates of return, and their prospective target market. Survey data from the GIIN and academic studies on investor attitudes and behaviour serve as the base collection of data for assessment.

The first part of the methodology involves building a structural model of impact investing and comparing this with the investment process in mainstream investing. The second part is a qualitative assessment of survey data on investor behaviour in impact investing and explains their behaviour in the context of differences identified between structural models. Due to the investment process in impact investing being structurally different, I argue that impact investing as a new asset class, ac- tually brings about a new “type” of investor behaviour. This is due to the inherent political nature of impact investing. The introduction of new standards for success, targets governance attitudes in investors, which other types of investing could previously not engage.