Defining and Conceptualizing Impact Investing: Attractive Nuisance or Catalyst?
Research output: Journal contributions › Journal articles › Research › peer-review
Standard
Defining and Conceptualizing Impact Investing : Attractive Nuisance or Catalyst? / Hockerts, Kai; Hehenberger, Lisa; Schaltegger, Stefan et al.
In: Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 179, No. 4, 01.09.2022, p. 937-950.Research output: Journal contributions › Journal articles › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Defining and Conceptualizing Impact Investing
T2 - Attractive Nuisance or Catalyst?
AU - Hockerts, Kai
AU - Hehenberger, Lisa
AU - Schaltegger, Stefan
AU - Farber, Vanina
N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2022, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V. Part of a collection: Special Issue - Impact Investing - Critical Examinations of Motivations, Processes and Results
PY - 2022/9/1
Y1 - 2022/9/1
N2 - This introduction to the special issue on impact investing applies the attractive nuisance notion to impact investing. Social sector actors ‘trespassing’ on the playing field of conventional investment markets may not appreciate the risks. We apply the framework of essentially contested concepts to foster fruitful diverse research in this emerging research field. We advance six dimensions (intentionality, additionality, contribution, materiality, measurability and attribution), which we propose allow to describe different sub-clusters of how the term is used in research and practice. For each dimension we identify risks and opportunities stemming from the contested nature and highlight an ambitious research agenda for how future business ethics scholars can help address and foster impact investing. We conclude by illustrating how the papers in this special issue address these challenges.
AB - This introduction to the special issue on impact investing applies the attractive nuisance notion to impact investing. Social sector actors ‘trespassing’ on the playing field of conventional investment markets may not appreciate the risks. We apply the framework of essentially contested concepts to foster fruitful diverse research in this emerging research field. We advance six dimensions (intentionality, additionality, contribution, materiality, measurability and attribution), which we propose allow to describe different sub-clusters of how the term is used in research and practice. For each dimension we identify risks and opportunities stemming from the contested nature and highlight an ambitious research agenda for how future business ethics scholars can help address and foster impact investing. We conclude by illustrating how the papers in this special issue address these challenges.
KW - Sustainability sciences, Management & Economics
KW - Impact investing
KW - measurement
KW - Intentionality
KW - Impact investing
KW - Intentionality
KW - Measurement
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85134995106&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - https://www.mendeley.com/catalogue/a73f7458-61b6-32b7-a224-e47f1bf0e6fd/
U2 - 10.1007/s10551-022-05157-3
DO - 10.1007/s10551-022-05157-3
M3 - Journal articles
VL - 179
SP - 937
EP - 950
JO - Journal of Business Ethics
JF - Journal of Business Ethics
SN - 0167-4544
IS - 4
ER -