Social Impact Investing at the Intersection of Health and Community Development

2013 ◽  
Vol 102 (4) ◽  
pp. 67-71 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa Richter
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (5) ◽  
pp. 2852
Author(s):  
Irene Bengo ◽  
Alice Borrello ◽  
Veronica Chiodo

Social impact investing (SII) is a strategy of asset allocation that aims to generate social and environmental impact alongside a financial return. Compared to other approaches of sustainable finance it holds an enormous potential of generating solutions to societal challenges. However, scholars have claimed that social impact often just employs logic upheld by the mainstream investment approach. Therefore, the paper investigates the assumption that SII has not developed a distinctive implementation strategy able to translate the prioritization of social impact into practice and how to overcome this issue. The thematic analysis of data collected through 105 interviews with Italian SII financiers and the top managers of social ventures allowed us to identify three features of an SII tailored practice: promoting a cultural shift of intermediaries, adopting a coopetition approach, and integrating the social impact in the terms of the financial transaction. Lastly, the paper drafts a research agenda to enhance the proper theorization of SII focusing on the definition of social risk, social return, and governance mechanisms. The key contribution of this article is confirming the lack of an SII-specific practice able to endogenize the intent of prioritizing social impact and providing suggestions to prevent the risk of impact washing.


2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (10) ◽  
pp. 2831
Author(s):  
Michael Chak Sham Wong ◽  
Richard Chin Yee Yap

This paper documents three business cases of social impact investing (SII) for marginalized communities in Hong Kong. Target stakeholders of the cases include displaced old tailors, elderly and wheelchair-bound people, and single-parent families. They are all privately-owned and profit-driven entities with their own social missions. Information on the cases is collected from structured interviews and meetings with their founders and stakeholders. The paper further discusses general issues of SII in Hong Kong and possible mechanisms to support SII development. Tax exemption for investors and donors, related government subsidy schemes, certification on social impacts, and establishment of social impact funds would help SII business thrive in the future.


2020 ◽  
pp. 0308518X2094152
Author(s):  
Jacob Broom

Social impact bonds (SIBs) are attracting an increasing amount of critical scholarly attention. As an outcomes-based mechanism for financing social services, SIBs financialize social policy through the logic of impact investing. Responding to calls for attention to the politics of SIBs’ development, and breaking with the literature’s focus on cases from the UK and USA, this article explores the emergence of SIBs in Australia. It employs the concept of “fast policy,” which theorizes why and how policies move across borders, and describes the contemporary conditions that enable them to do so. Using document analysis, the article explores the discursive devices and practices used to justify the “pulling in” of SIBs to states in Australia. It finds that key actors in the Australian social impact world justified SIBs’ adoption using their synergy with powerful, popular policy discourses and practices, rather than engaging in political debates about their desirability. The Australian experience illuminates the power of intermediaries and the investors they represent over the design and proliferation of SIBs, as well as the roles played by austerity politics, policy experimentalism, and fast policy infrastructures in producing a context in which SIBs could be made real.


2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 75-88 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abigail Borron ◽  
Kevan Lamm ◽  
Carolina Darbisi ◽  
Nekeisha Randall

Measuring program impact is continually placed in the forefront of discussions, efforts, and reporting when it comes to outreach and engagement efforts related to Cooperative Extension. However, the diversity of programs represented through program areas, as well as the complexities of local infrastructures present ongoing challenges to effectively addressing needs in community development and vitality. One of the greater hurdles in these efforts is addressing areas of social impact. This article argues for a deliberate attempt to parse out efforts that address social impact, while looking for ways to bring such impact full circle with existing efforts in economic impact. This article answers the following questions: (1) How is program impact defined as it relates to the land-grant university? and (2) How is social impact defined, and what are the common approaches to examining/measuring social impact? Based on this review of the literature, we describe and justify a proposed model approach for overall community diagnostics, directly supporting social impact assessment efforts. Such a proposed model would then have the capacity to lead to two very distinct and applicable outcomes that ultimately lead to measuring and examining program impact. The first is an immediate snapshot of a given community for diagnostic purposes; and the second would create a framework by which longitudinal data could be collected, which can then demonstrate changes and shifts over time. Such data can then provide a more holistic approach to program planning, development, and overall evaluation. Keywords: community development; Extension; needs assessment; program evaluation; social impact


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document