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

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