Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Impact Investments Measurement: Bridging Research and Practice

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Contemporary Issues in Sustainable Finance

Part of the book series: Palgrave Studies in Impact Finance ((SIF))

  • 550 Accesses

Abstract

Intentionality and measurable impact are the key characteristics that allow the differentiation of impact investing from conventional forms of investment. Over the past decade, impact measurement has become a common method for evaluating the financial and social return generated by impact investments, and it is relevant for all impact stakeholders, such as impact investors and intermediaries, investees and social enterprises, public administrations and governments. This study was performed to provide an empirical analysis of some practices useful for improving the consistency, effectiveness and applicability of impact measurement. Using a qualitative approach based on a case study analysis, the paper investigates two measurement tools: Social Return on Investment (SROI) and balanced scorecard (BSC). The analysis performed uses various perspectives and concepts, and based on the evidence found, it opens interesting future research directions into the impact measurement field. The findings of this study add to the existing body of knowledge with “insights” for bridging the gap between theory and practice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Arvidson, M., Lyon, F., McKay, S., & Moro, D. (2013). Valuing the social? The nature and controversies of measuring social return on investment (SROI). Voluntary Sector Review, 4(1), 3–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Asiaei, K., & Bontis, N. (2019). Using a balanced scorecard to manage corporate social responsibility. Knowledge and Process Management, 26(4), 371–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolis, M., Sahan, E., West, C., Irani, I., & Nash, R. (2017). Impact investing: Who are we serving? A case of mismatch between supply and demand.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyd, J. (2004). Measuring social impact: The foundation of social return on investment (SROI). New Economics Foundation/London Business School.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caseau, C., & Grolleau, G. (2020). Impact investing: Killing two birds with one stone? Financial Analysts Journal, 76(4), 40–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, S., & Harrison, R. (2020). Beyond profit vs. purpose: Transactional-relational practices in impact investing. Journal of Business Venturing Insights, 14, e00182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chmelik, E., Musteen, M., & Ahsan, M. (2016). Measures of performance in the context of international social ventures: An exploratory study. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 7(1), 74–100. https://doi.org/10.1080/19420676.2014.997781

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costa, E. (2021). Challenges for social impact measurement in the non-profit sector. In A research agenda for social finance (pp. 127–152). Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies, L. E., Taylor, P., Ramchandani, G., & Christy, E. (2019). Social return on investment (SROI) in sport: A model for measuring the value of participation in England. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, 11(4), 585–605.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, M. J., & Yuthas, K. (2017). Measuring and improving social impacts: A guide for nonprofits, companies, and impact investors. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gębczyńska, A., & Brajer-Marczak, R. (2020). Review of selected performance measurement models used in public administration. Administrative Sciences, 10(4), 99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gianoncelli, A., & Gaggiotti, G. (2021). Managing for impact: The role of investors’ networks in enhancing appropriate impact measurement and management practices. In Generation Impact (pp. 219–233). Emerald Publishing Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbon, J., & Dey, C. (2011). Developments in social impact measurement in the third sector: Scaling up or dumbing down? Social and Environmental Accountability Journal, 31(1), 63–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • GIIN. (2019). Global impact investing network’s core characteristics of impact investing establish definitive baseline expectations for impact investing. Available on https://thegiin.org/assets/Core%20Characteristics%20of%20Impact%20Investing_Press%20Release.pdf

  • Grieco, C. (2015). Assessing social impact of social enterprises: Does one size really fit all? (pp. 13–15). Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hoque, Z. (2014). 20 years of studies on the balanced scorecard: Trends, accomplishments, gaps and opportunities for future research. The British Accounting Review, 46(1), 33–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Incofin. (2020). Impact report 2019–2020. Available at https://incofin.com/wp-content/uploads/Impact-Report-2020.pdf

  • Incofin. (2021). Impact report 2021. Available at https://calvertimpactcapital.org/resources/2021-impact-report

  • Islam, S. M. (2021). Impact investing in social sector organisations: A systematic review and research agenda. Accounting & Finance.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kah, S., & Akenroye, T. (2020). Evaluation of social impact measurement tools and techniques: A systematic review of the literature. Social Enterprise Journal.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kamaludin, M. F., Xavier, J. A., & Amin, M. (2021). Social entrepreneurship and sustainability: A conceptual framework. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/19420676.2021.1900339

  • Kaplan, R. S. (2001). Strategic performance measurement and management in nonprofit organisations. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 11(3), 353–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, R. S., & McMillan, D. (2020). Updating the balanced scorecard for triple bottom line strategies (Harvard Business School Accounting & Management Unit Working Paper), 21–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1996). The balanced scorecard: Translating strategy into action. Harvard Business Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (2001). The strategy-focused organisation: How balanced scorecard companies thrive in the new business environment. Harvard Business Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (2015). Balanced scorecard success: The Kaplan-Norton Collection (4 Books). Harvard Business Review Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kročil, O., & Pospíšil, R. (2018). Comprehensive measurement of social enterprise impact. Ekonomski Pregled, 69(5), 571–593.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lall, S. (2017). Measuring to improve versus measuring to prove: Understanding the adoption of social performance measurement practices in nascent social enterprises. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organisations, 28(6), 2633–2657.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lall, S. A. (2019). From Legitimacy to learning: how impact measurement perceptions and practices evolve in social enterprise–social finance organisation relationships. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Non profit Organisations, 30(3), 562–577.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackenzie, S., & Nicholls, J. (2004). Getting out to work Merseyside: A social return on investment analysis. New Economic Foundation. Available at https://efc.issuelab.org/resource/getting-out-to-work-merseyside-a-social-return-on-investment-analysis.html

  • Mäkelä, H. (2021). Roles of accounting for the contested Terrain of social enterprises. Social and Environmental Accountability Journal, 1–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mamabolo, A., & Myres, K. (2020). Performance measurement in emerging market social enterprises using a balanced scorecard. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 11(1), 65–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moody, M., Littlepage, L., & Paydar, N. (2015). Measuring social return on investment: Lessons from organizational implementation of SROI in the Netherlands and the United States. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 26(1), 19–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Flynn, P., & Barnett, C. (2017). Evaluation and impact investing: A review of methodologies to assess social impact.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peetermans, G. (2021). Disclosure statement operating principles for impact management. Incofin Investment Management. Available at https://incofin.com/wp-content/uploads/Incofin-OPIM-disclosure-2021.pdf

  • Perrini, F., Costanzo, L. A., & Karatas-Ozkan, M. (2020). Measuring impact and creating change: A comparison of the main methods for social enterprises. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pineiro, A., Dithrich, H., & Dhar, A. (2018). Financing the sustainable development goals: Impact investing in action. GIIN. Available at https://thegiin.org/assets/Financing%20the%20SDGs_Impact%20Investing%20in%20Action_Final%20Webfile.pdf

  • Platform on Sustainable Finance. (2022). Final report on social taxonomy. Available at https://ec.europa.eu/info/files/280222-sustainable-finance-platform-finance-report-social-taxonomy_en

  • Reeder, N., Jones, G. R., Loder, J., & Colantonio, A. (2014). Measuring impact: preliminary insights from interviews with impact investors.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reisman, J., & Olazabal, V. (2016). Situating the next generation of impact measurement and evaluation for impact investing. Rockefeller Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rohm, H., Halbach, L., Giannetto, D. F., Cannon, T., Bowyer, S., Brown, M. G., & Allen, J. R. (2006). A balancing act: Sustaining new directions. Balanced Scorecard Institute, PERFORM Magazine, 2(3), 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruiz-Lozano, M., Tirado-Valencia, P., Sianes, A., Ariza-Montes, A., Fernández-Rodríguez, V., & López-Martín, M. (2020). SROI methodology for public administration decisions about financing with social criteria. A case study. Sustainability, 12(3), 1070.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, P. W., & Lyne, I. (2008). Social enterprise and the measurement of social value: Methodological issues with the calculation and application of the social return on investment. Education, Knowledge & Economy, 2(3), 223–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strano, E., Rizzello, A., & Trotta, A. (2022). Evaluation in impact investing: Where we are and where we are going. In Handbook of research on global aspects of sustainable finance in times of crises (pp. 46–76). IGI Global.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verrinder, N. B., Zwane, K., Vaca, S., & Nixon, D. (2018). Evaluative tools in impact investing: Three case studies on the use of theories of change. African Evaluation Journal, 6(2), 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watson, K. J., & Whitley, T. (2017). Applying Social Return on Investment (SROI) to the built environment. Building Research & Information, 45(8), 875–891.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods. SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The Authors express their gratitude to the Editors—Professors Mario La Torre and Sabrina Leo—for the opportunity to contribute to this book. The Authors would also like to thank the participants of the 5th Social Impact Investments International Conference (Rome, December 2 and 3, 2021) for their inspiring contributions.

NOTES This chapter is the result of a collaboration between the Authors. In particular, Prof. Dr. Annarita Trotta contributed to the sections ‘Impact Measurement Practices in the Impact Investing Field: Challenges, Critical Issues and Perspectives’ and ‘Method and Materials’; Dr. Eugenia Strano contributed to the sections ‘Deepening Practices of Impact Measurement Tools: An Exploration of SROI and BSC’ and ‘Case Analysis’; and Dr. Alessandro Rizzello contributed to the section ‘Discussion and Conclusions’.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Law, Economics and Sociology, University Magna Graecia of Catanzaro, Catanzaro, Italy

    Eugenia Strano, Alessandro Rizzello & Annarita Trotta

Authors
  1. Eugenia Strano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alessandro Rizzello
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Annarita Trotta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eugenia Strano .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Management Department, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy

    Mario La Torre

  2. Management Department, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy

    Sabrina Leo

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Strano, E., Rizzello, A., Trotta, A. (2023). Impact Investments Measurement: Bridging Research and Practice. In: La Torre, M., Leo, S. (eds) Contemporary Issues in Sustainable Finance. Palgrave Studies in Impact Finance. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-22539-0_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-22539-0_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-22538-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-22539-0

  • eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation