| Chapter 9 | |
| Table 9.1. | The Six Strategies Used to Create Financial Return |
| Table 9.2. | Mandate Differences between Different Types of Investor |
| Table 9.3. | Predictive Role versus Mandate Role of Various Factors |
| Chapter 15 | |
| Table 15.1. | Social Policy and Its Assessment in Japan |
| Table 15.2. | Social Policy and Its Assessment in South Korea |
| Table 15.3. | Social Policy and Its Assessment in Taiwan |
| Table 15.4. | Social Policy and Its Assessment in China |
| Table 15.5. | Social Policy and Its Assessment in Hong Kong |
| Table 15.6. | Comparison of Social Policy Assessment Approaches |
| Chapter 21 | |
| Table 21.1. | A Framework of Organisational Social Impact Archetypes and Associated Impact Behaviour |
| Chapter 1 | |
| Figure 1.1. | Impact – The Missing Dimension |
| Figure 1.2. | Results Chain – From Inputs to Impact |
| Chapter 3 | |
| Figure 3.1. | The New Aspects of Impact Valuation: From Traditional Reporting to Impact Valuation |
| Chapter 4 | |
| Figure 4.1. | Civil Society Organizations' Perception and Practice of Social Impact Measurement |
| Figure 4.2. | How Often Stakeholders are Consulted while Designing a Project |
| Chapter 5 | |
| Figure 5.1. | Constituent Voice: Turning Feedback Into Data, Voice and Solutions |
| Figure 5.2. | Example of a Summary Graph From the Data Explorer Tool |
| Figure 5.3. | Results From a Survey Question Segmented by Sex of Respondent |
| Chapter 7 | |
| Figure 7.1. | Integral Data Flowchart for Evaluating System Value Creation |
| Figure 7.2. | Thresholds-free Reporting |
| Figure 7.3. | Progression Performance in the MultiCapital Scorecard |
| Figure 7.4. | A Sample MultiCapital Scorecard with Consolidation across Areas of Impact |
| Chapter 8 | |
| Figure 8.1. | IIX Sustainability Pyramid |
| Chapter 9 | |
| Figure 9.1. | Financial Assets under Management |
| Figure 9.2. | The Process of Investing Institutional Capital |
| Figure 9.3. | The Current Structure of Impact Investing Does Not Align with Portfolio Management |
| Figure 9.4. | The General Theory of Impact |
| Figure 9.5. | Example of Value Bridge Analysis |
| Figure 9.6. | Effect of Including Impact as a Third Objective in Portfolio Optimisation |
| Chapter 10 | |
| Figure 10.1. | Map of Afram Plains District |
| Chapter 14 | |
| Figure 14.1. | Whānau Ora Commissioning Model |
| Figure 14.2. | WOCA Commissioning in Whānau Ora Value Chain |
| Chapter 17 | |
| Figure 17.1. | The Drift Transition Pathways X-Curve |
| Chapter 20 | |
| Figure 20.1. | The Impact Ecosystem Spectrum |
| Figure 20.2. | Investing for Impact and Investing with Impact – Key Characteristics of the Two Impact Strategies |
| Figure 20.3. | Charter of Investors for Impact |
| Figure 20.4. | Charter of Investors for Impact: Principles 1, 3 and 5 |
| Figure 20.5. | Live Poll Results from EVPA 15th Annual Conference in the Hague, n = 50 |
| Figure 20.6. | Objectives of Impact Measurement by Percentage (%) of Investors for Impact in FYs 2015, 2017 –Subsample n = 53 |
| Figure 20.7. | Nonfinancial Support Provided by Investors for Impact Linked to Social Impact Measurement and Management in FYs 2011, 2013, 2015 and 2017 |
| Figure 20.8. | The Five-step Impact Measurement and Management Process |
| Figure 20.9. | The Impact Management Principles |
| Figure 20.10. | Investor for Impact Card – Karuna NL Foundation |
| Figure 20.11. | Investor for Impact Card – Ferd Social Entrepreneurs |
| Chapter 21 | |
| Figure 21.1. | A Framework of Social Impact Archetypes |
| Table 9.1. | The Six Strategies Used to Create Financial Return |
| Table 9.2. | Mandate Differences between Different Types of Investor |
| Table 9.3. | Predictive Role versus Mandate Role of Various Factors |
| Table 15.1. | Social Policy and Its Assessment in Japan |
| Table 15.2. | Social Policy and Its Assessment in South Korea |
| Table 15.3. | Social Policy and Its Assessment in Taiwan |
| Table 15.4. | Social Policy and Its Assessment in China |
| Table 15.5. | Social Policy and Its Assessment in Hong Kong |
| Table 15.6. | Comparison of Social Policy Assessment Approaches |
| Table 21.1. | A Framework of Organisational Social Impact Archetypes and Associated Impact Behaviour |
| Figure 1.1. | Impact – The Missing Dimension |
| Figure 1.2. | Results Chain – From Inputs to Impact |
| Figure 3.1. | The New Aspects of Impact Valuation: From Traditional Reporting to Impact Valuation |
| Figure 4.1. | Civil Society Organizations' Perception and Practice of Social Impact Measurement |
| Figure 4.2. | How Often Stakeholders are Consulted while Designing a Project |
| Figure 5.1. | Constituent Voice: Turning Feedback Into Data, Voice and Solutions |
| Figure 5.2. | Example of a Summary Graph From the Data Explorer Tool |
| Figure 5.3. | Results From a Survey Question Segmented by Sex of Respondent |
| Figure 7.1. | Integral Data Flowchart for Evaluating System Value Creation |
| Figure 7.2. | Thresholds-free Reporting |
| Figure 7.3. | Progression Performance in the MultiCapital Scorecard |
| Figure 7.4. | A Sample MultiCapital Scorecard with Consolidation across Areas of Impact |
| Figure 8.1. | IIX Sustainability Pyramid |
| Figure 9.1. | Financial Assets under Management |
| Figure 9.2. | The Process of Investing Institutional Capital |
| Figure 9.3. | The Current Structure of Impact Investing Does Not Align with Portfolio Management |
| Figure 9.4. | The General Theory of Impact |
| Figure 9.5. | Example of Value Bridge Analysis |
| Figure 9.6. | Effect of Including Impact as a Third Objective in Portfolio Optimisation |
| Figure 10.1. | Map of Afram Plains District |
| Figure 14.1. | Whānau Ora Commissioning Model |
| Figure 14.2. | WOCA Commissioning in Whānau Ora Value Chain |
| Figure 17.1. | The Drift Transition Pathways X-Curve |
| Figure 20.1. | The Impact Ecosystem Spectrum |
| Figure 20.2. | Investing for Impact and Investing with Impact – Key Characteristics of the Two Impact Strategies |
| Figure 20.3. | Charter of Investors for Impact |
| Figure 20.4. | Charter of Investors for Impact: Principles 1, 3 and 5 |
| Figure 20.5. | Live Poll Results from EVPA 15th Annual Conference in the Hague, |
| Figure 20.6. | Objectives of Impact Measurement by Percentage (%) of Investors for Impact in FYs 2015, 2017 –Subsample |
| Figure 20.7. | Nonfinancial Support Provided by Investors for Impact Linked to Social Impact Measurement and Management in FYs 2011, 2013, 2015 and 2017 |
| Figure 20.8. | The Five-step Impact Measurement and Management Process |
| Figure 20.9. | The Impact Management Principles |
| Figure 20.10. | Investor for Impact Card – Karuna NL Foundation |
| Figure 20.11. | Investor for Impact Card – Ferd Social Entrepreneurs |
| Figure 21.1. | A Framework of Social Impact Archetypes |
Sharing content requires targeting cookies to be enabled. Please update your cookie preferences to use this feature.