The Ph.D. thesis is a collection of four papers that aims to make a unique addition to the theory and practice of the impact investing ecosystem. Impact investing (II) refers to all of the investments made in organizations, funds, and/or projects which have the scope of generating measurable social impact in addition to traditional financial returns (Clarkin & Cangioni, 2015; Hehenberger, Mair, & Metz, 2019; Barber, Morse & Yasuda, 2021). Impact investing and other forms of sustainable finance have grown in popularity in recent years, with the goal being to bring societal and environmental benefits (Reeder & Colantonio, 2013). It is now time for academics and practitioners to agree on a definitive conceptualization of an impact investing approach (Daggers & Nicholls, 2016) to distinguish it from other kinds of sustainable financing. Impact investing emerged as a practice primarily as a result of a series of significant pioneering initiatives by professionals and innovators. The development of an impact investing theory was largely preceded by its practice. This resulted in a lack of understanding of the nature itself, a significant conceptualization, and a robust theory (Kölbel, Heeb, Paetzold & Busch, 2020; Busch et al., 2021). Furthermore, there is evidence that some financial institutions adopt the impact investing rationale merely for marketing or reputational reasons in order to make profits from its success. This behavior is known as impact washing, which is defined as an organization's deceptive conveyance of a social or environmental issue-related image in order to promote its reputation while having no demonstrated positive social impact and causing a dilution of the term impact investment (Harji & Jackson, 2012; Findlay & Moran, 2019). Considering its popularity and these gaps, the objective of this Ph.D. research is to gain a better understanding of the core characteristics of impact investing in order to ensure impact integrity and to avoid impact washing behaviors. The research problem is examined in the context of the impact investing ecosystems in Europe, Italy, and Australia. Due to the exploratory nature of the topic, a combined qualitative and quantitative methodology is used to analyze the data. The purpose of Paper 1 is to show how modern impact investing lacks in a specific implementation strategy capable of translating the key concepts of this approach into the capital allocation process. Paper 2 focuses on the assessment of impact investing qualifying elements, which differentiate it from other sustainable finance initiatives, to address its lack of conceptual and practical clarity. The goal of Paper 3 is to investigate the interdependencies between impact risks, financial risks, impact returns, and financial returns as well as to comprehend the new shape of the portfolio efficiency change frontier when we take into account the impact return and impact risk dimensions. Finally, Paper 4 analyses and compares the investment approaches of two countries, Italy and Australia, in terms of impact investing funds (IIFs) and it defines the "ideal" impact investment practices that preserve impact integrity. The cover essay underlines the theoretical and practical contribution of the study in the field of impact investing. Finally, some limitations and future avenues of research are presented. Indeed, the hybrid logic that combines the social and the financial rationales, the cohabitation of players with diverse values and logic, and the diverse viewpoints of individuals, investors, and investees continue to make the impact investment setting appealing for further research.
La tesi di dottorato è una raccolta di quattro articoli che mira a contribuire alla teoria e alla pratica dell'impact investing. Con impact investing (II) ci si riferisce a tutti gli investimenti effettuati in organizzazioni, fondi e/o progetti che hanno lo scopo di generare un impatto sociale misurabile oltre ai tradizionali ritorni finanziari (Clarkin & Cangioni, 2015; Hehenberger, Mair, & Metz, 2019; Barber, Morse & Yasuda, 2021). L'impact investing e più in generale la finanza sostenibile hanno registrato un notevole incremento di popolarità negli ultimi anni (Reeder & Colantonio, 2013). È tuttavia necessario che gli accademici e professionisti convergano su una concettualizzazione definitiva di un approccio di impact investing (Daggers & Nicholls, 2016) per distinguerlo da altri tipi di finanziamento sostenibile. L'impact investing è emerso come pratica principalmente come risultato di una serie di significative iniziative pionieristiche di professionisti e innovatori. Lo sviluppo di una teoria dell'impact investing è stato ampiamente preceduto dalla sua pratica. Ciò ha comportato una mancanza di comprensione della natura stessa, una concettualizzazione significativa e una teoria robusta (Kölbel, Heeb, Paetzold & Busch, 2020; Busch et al., 2021). Inoltre, diverse istituzioni finanziarie adottano la logica dell'impact investing solo per ragioni di marketing o di reputazione, al fine di trarre profitti dal suo attuale successo. Questo comportamento è noto come impact washing, che è definito come la comunicazione ingannevole da parte di un'organizzazione di un'immagine legata a questioni sociali o ambientali al fine di promuovere la propria reputazione pur non avendo alcun impatto sociale positivo dimostrato e causando una diluizione del termine impact investment (Harji & Jackson, 2012; Findlay & Moran, 2019). Considerando questi fattori, l'obiettivo di questa ricerca di dottorato è quello di ottenere una migliore comprensione delle caratteristiche fondamentali dell'impact investing al fine di garantire l'integrità dell'impatto ed evitare comportamenti di impact washing. Il problema della ricerca è esaminato nel contesto degli ecosistemi di impact investing in Europa, Italia e Australia. A causa della natura esplorativa dell'argomento, viene utilizzata una metodologia combinata qualitativa e quantitativa per analizzare i dati. Lo scopo del Paper 1 è quello di mostrare come l’impact investing manchi di una specifica strategia di implementazione in grado di tradurre i concetti chiave di questo approccio nel processo di allocazione del capitale. Il Paper 2 si concentra sulla valutazione degli elementi qualificanti dell'impact investing, che lo differenziano da altre iniziative di finanza sostenibile, per affrontare la sua mancanza di chiarezza concettuale e pratica. L'obiettivo del Paper 3 è quello di indagare le interdipendenze tra i rischi di impatto, i rischi finanziari, i rendimenti di impatto e i rendimenti finanziari, nonché di comprendere la nuova forma della frontiera di efficienza del portafoglio quando vengono prese in considerazione le dimensioni del rendimento di impatto e del rischio di impatto. Infine, il Paper 4 analizza e confronta gli approcci di investimento di due paesi, Italia e Australia, in termini di fondi di investimento ad impatto (IIF) e definisce il processo di investimento ad impatto che preserva l'integrità dell'impatto. Il documento sottolinea inoltre il contributo teorico e pratico della tesi di dottorato nel campo dell'impact investing. Infine, vengono presentati alcuni limiti e line di ricerca future. Infatti, la logica ibrida che combina le razionalità sociali e finanziarie, la copresenza di attori con valori e logiche diverse, e i diversi punti di vista di individui, investitori e investitori continuano a rendere l'ambiente degli investimenti a impatto attraente per ulteriori ricerche.
Identity and ambiguity of impact investing
Borrello, Alice
2021/2022
Abstract
The Ph.D. thesis is a collection of four papers that aims to make a unique addition to the theory and practice of the impact investing ecosystem. Impact investing (II) refers to all of the investments made in organizations, funds, and/or projects which have the scope of generating measurable social impact in addition to traditional financial returns (Clarkin & Cangioni, 2015; Hehenberger, Mair, & Metz, 2019; Barber, Morse & Yasuda, 2021). Impact investing and other forms of sustainable finance have grown in popularity in recent years, with the goal being to bring societal and environmental benefits (Reeder & Colantonio, 2013). It is now time for academics and practitioners to agree on a definitive conceptualization of an impact investing approach (Daggers & Nicholls, 2016) to distinguish it from other kinds of sustainable financing. Impact investing emerged as a practice primarily as a result of a series of significant pioneering initiatives by professionals and innovators. The development of an impact investing theory was largely preceded by its practice. This resulted in a lack of understanding of the nature itself, a significant conceptualization, and a robust theory (Kölbel, Heeb, Paetzold & Busch, 2020; Busch et al., 2021). Furthermore, there is evidence that some financial institutions adopt the impact investing rationale merely for marketing or reputational reasons in order to make profits from its success. This behavior is known as impact washing, which is defined as an organization's deceptive conveyance of a social or environmental issue-related image in order to promote its reputation while having no demonstrated positive social impact and causing a dilution of the term impact investment (Harji & Jackson, 2012; Findlay & Moran, 2019). Considering its popularity and these gaps, the objective of this Ph.D. research is to gain a better understanding of the core characteristics of impact investing in order to ensure impact integrity and to avoid impact washing behaviors. The research problem is examined in the context of the impact investing ecosystems in Europe, Italy, and Australia. Due to the exploratory nature of the topic, a combined qualitative and quantitative methodology is used to analyze the data. The purpose of Paper 1 is to show how modern impact investing lacks in a specific implementation strategy capable of translating the key concepts of this approach into the capital allocation process. Paper 2 focuses on the assessment of impact investing qualifying elements, which differentiate it from other sustainable finance initiatives, to address its lack of conceptual and practical clarity. The goal of Paper 3 is to investigate the interdependencies between impact risks, financial risks, impact returns, and financial returns as well as to comprehend the new shape of the portfolio efficiency change frontier when we take into account the impact return and impact risk dimensions. Finally, Paper 4 analyses and compares the investment approaches of two countries, Italy and Australia, in terms of impact investing funds (IIFs) and it defines the "ideal" impact investment practices that preserve impact integrity. The cover essay underlines the theoretical and practical contribution of the study in the field of impact investing. Finally, some limitations and future avenues of research are presented. Indeed, the hybrid logic that combines the social and the financial rationales, the cohabitation of players with diverse values and logic, and the diverse viewpoints of individuals, investors, and investees continue to make the impact investment setting appealing for further research.| File | Dimensione | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
01.2022_Borrello_PhDthesis.pdf
accessibile in internet solo dagli utenti autorizzati
Descrizione: Identity and ambiguity of impact investing
Dimensione
2.06 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
2.06 MB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
I documenti in POLITesi sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
https://hdl.handle.net/10589/189706