Ознакомительная версия. Доступно 8 страниц из 36
have long learns how to measure the quantitative results of a project: number of jobs, services provided, number of trained beneficiaries, etc. But for a full-fledged evaluation covering the full range of impact outcomes, a standardized and universally accepted methodology is needed. A first step in creating such a methodology was the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) metric sets, the GIIN Impact Investing and Reporting Standards (IRIS) and the Impact Management Project.
Source: GIIN. The State of Impact Measurement and Management Practice.
The first systematic methodology demonstrating a new approach to impact measurement was proposed by Global Impact Investing Network (GIIN). The organization was established in 2009 and is a large association of social investors around the world. It has over 2,000 members. The idea of creating a network capable of coordinating the efforts of social investors was first proposed by the Rockefeller Foundation. After a series of discussions, the idea evolved into GIIN. The founding members of GIIN now include: Oxfam and Shell Foundation, Royal Bank of Canada, UK Department for International Development, Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Big Society Capital, BNP Paribas, Credit Suisse, Deutsche Bank, JPMorgan Chase, Morgan Stanley, National Australia Bank, Standard Chartered Bank, UBS, International Finance Corporation, Omidyar Network, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Rockefeller Foundation, Skoll Foundation, Ford Foundation, Our Future Fund, Accion, Acumen, Gray Ghost Ventures, Oikocredit, Root Capital, Triodos and others. Global Impact Investing Network is headquartered in New York, USA. The organization is primarily funded by the Rockefeller Foundation, but there is support from other investors as well.
GIIN's main areas of focus are:
• Advocacy for social impact investment.
• Networking of social impact investment market players.
• Creation of a knowledge base on the ImpactBase social impact investment market.
• Developing a methodology for social impact investing and impact assessment and standards (Impact Reporting and Investment Standards, IRIS).
The social impact assessment methodology proposed by the Global Impact Investing Network (GIIN) is modeled on the methodology for measuring financial performance in business investments. The development of this methodology involved communities of investors, academics, monitoring and evaluation specialists and others seeking to advance the practice of investing for social or environmental goals. The methodology has been officially published by GIIN and is open for discussion and additions. The proponents believe that further discussions can expand and strengthen the principles of the methodology.
Social impact assessment in the GIIN methodology is based on measuring different types of outcomes, from intermediate outcomes to final outcomes (table 1).
The methodology considers project outputs in the concept of “stock” and “flow”, which is commonly used in economic theory and accounting theory.
“Stocks”: the amount of a particular outcome achieved by a certain point in time (t1), reflecting the scale, depth and nature of that impact. By analyzing the results of the impact achieved by a certain point in time, investors can understand the relative performance of investment opportunities at a particular point in time, estimate the baseline level of performance before making the investment, and set performance expectations accordingly to the baseline level.
"Flows”: the change in impact outcomes over a period of time (t1–0). This approach allows investors to compare the amount of change achieved as a result of a particular tranche of investment capital or set of activities involving the products, services or activities of the investee. In this way, investors can better compare the performance of their investment and portfolio with that of similar portfolios over the same time period, and with the rate of change required to achieve given social or environmental objectives.
In some cases, the performance of the "stock” at a given point in time may imply greater performance or potential for a given investment.
Consider three projects: A, B, C. By a certain point in time t1 each project has achieved results — At1, Bt1, Ct1. Let the ratio of results be as shown in the picture above, where At0, Bt0, Ct0 are the values of the indicators at the start of the projects. We can see that Bt1 is larger than At1, but smaller than Ct1, and at the "stock” level this indicates greater potential for project C. However, if we estimate the "flows” or changes in indicators, we see a different relative position of things: AB is greater than AC, but less than AA. This means that project a has a larger effect on its indicator over time. This also allows us to assess the directionality of the results: although At1 remains negative, AA indicates a positive impact, given that At1 moves in a positive direction relative to At0. For example, greenhouse gas emissions are a negative impact, but reducing these emissions represents a positive outcome. We see the opposite situation for the result of project C: its "flux” is negative, which means that we should expect the indicator to decrease over time.
Depending on the purpose of the impact performance analysis, this methodology can be applied to understand "stocks” or "flows'”.
THE PRINCIPLES OF THE GIIN METHODOLOGY:
1. Rigor. The methodology should generate statistically valid, context-sensitive conclusions about the positive and negative social and environmental outcomes associated with impact investments.
2. Independence. Methodological choice and analysis will be based on third-party data and statistics, to the extent that such data are available.
3. Reproducibility. Given the same input data, any organization using the methodology will arrive at the same results and conclusions.
4. Transparency. All methodological decisions and assumptions will be documented and made publicly available; the document will also be open for public discussion and comment.
5. Awareness of incentives. Any analytical methodology will incentivize a defined set of behavioral changes; all known incentives must be documented and freely shared, and the design of the methodology must aim to minimize any potential unintended negative consequences that may arise from the application and use of the analytical approach.
COMPONENTS OF THE GIIN METHODOLOGY: FOUR STEPS FOR DECISION-MAKING
Ознакомительная версия. Доступно 8 страниц из 36
