Search results

The aim of this paper is to provide insights and knowledge about the motivations and implications for social enterprises' participation in SIBs, particularly in terms of collaboration and partnership with the public sector, as well as the different positions on this issue. The overall aim, therefore, is to show how social enterprises and public organisations have interacted in the context of SIBs and what has been achieved by participating.

This multiple case study approach applies qualitative methods like observations and semi-structured and unstructured interviews.

The study shows that SIBs can be an option for financing social enterprises within a strategy of income diversification and resource dependency. Despite tensions and complexities, SIBs can renew the traditional funding relationship by adding innovation, strengthening the co-creation process and creating a stable relationship.

Research findings may lack generalisability due to the specific context in which the case study is rooted.

The paper offers practical implications in terms of insights and suggestions for social enterprises and the public sector interested in developing the scheme.

This paper adds the voice and perspective of social enterprises on the relationship with the public sector within the framework of SIBs initiatives.

The purpose of the paper is twofold. Firstly, this study aims to investigate the factors influencing stakeholders’ intention to invest in Shariah-compliant social impact bonds (SC SIBs) in Malaysia. Secondly, this study compares the differences in the perception of different stakeholders on the importance of the factors.

Using the extended theory of planned behaviour, the study undertakes a questionnaire survey on licensed capital market investors and individuals involved in the development of the financial market (developers). A total of 260 complete and valid responses were obtained from the survey. Multiple regression and Mann–Whitney tests were carried out to achieve the two objectives, respectively.

The results reveal that attitude (β = 0.447, p < 0.01), subjective norm (SN) (β = 0.255, p < 0.01) and moral norm (MN) (β = 0.163, p < 0.01) are significantly positive predictors of intention to invest in SC SIBs. In terms of the differences in the perceptions of the two parties, the results show that the factors have more effect towards developers than investors.

The empirical evidence from this study on the factors that influence stakeholders’ participation in SC SIBs is useful to the policymakers and interested parties in taking the next steps to develop, implement and promote SC SIBs to stakeholders in Malaysia. Fund managers can use the study’s insights to promote positive attitudes, SNs and MNs towards SC SIBs, especially targeting developers who are more influenced by these factors. More importantly, the results indicate a need for different strategies to influence the stakeholder investment behaviour of SC SIB in Malaysia to ensure that it is sustainable and viable in the long run.

Policymakers worldwide have proposed a new contract – the ‘social impact bond’ (SIB) – which they claim can allay the underperformance afflicting not-for-profits, by tying the private returns of (social) investors to the success of social programs. We investigate experimentally how SIBs perform in a first-best world, where investors are rational and able to obtain hard information on not-for-profits’ performance. Using a principal-agent multitasking framework, we compare SIBs to inputs-based contracts (IBs) and performance-based contracts (PBs). IBs are based on a piece-rate mechanism, PBs on a non-binding bonus mechanism, and SIBs on a mechanism that, due to the presence of an investor, offers full enforceability. Although SIBs can perfectly enforce good behaviour, they also require the principal (i.e., government) to relinquish control over the agent’s (i.e., not-for-profit’s) payoff to a self-regarding investor, which prevents the principal and agent from being reciprocal. In spite of these drawbacks, in our experiment SIBs outperformed IBs and PBs. We therefore conclude that, at least in our laboratory test-bed, SIBs can allay the underperformance of not-for-profits.

The authors contribute to practice-driven institutionalism by examining how the introduction of new field-level evaluation practices may facilitate encroachment of highly institutionalized organizational fields by new institutional logics. The authors conducted an inductive study of a trial of social impact bonds in the field of social integration services in Finland. Our analysis elaborates how new field-level evaluation practices created an experimental space that induced organizational practice experimentation, reconfigured relationships among field members, and lowered the barriers to entry for new organizations. The authors theorize how evaluation practices may create experimental spaces by suspending the carriers of established logics and legitimizing institutional innovations. The authors further elaborate how such spaces can bring about a parallel “shadow field” by inducing bottom-up experimentation aligned with a new institutional logic.

This study investigates barriers to social impact bond (SIB) implementation through a review of academic and gray literature. A SIB is a type of public policy instrument that leverages payment for performance (P4P), contracting together with private investments in the delivery of welfare programs. Outcome-based contracts, such as SIBs, are gaining attraction for public service providers in developed countries, but research regarding their implementation remains underexplored both empirically and theoretically.

A literature review is conducted in which two types of documents are included: (1) empirical research papers and (2) evaluations of completed SIB projects. In total, 43 documents have been investigated. The study engages in a comparative design where insights across sectors (healthcare, social care and employment/education), are leveraged. The insights rest on evidence from the UK and US.

The investigation reveals five types of barriers to SIB implementation related to: (1) the SIB model, (2) organizational competencies, (3) data infrastructure, (4) stakeholder engagement and (5) the institutional context. The study discusses ways of managing these barriers and develops a conceptual framework for empirically investigating SIB implementation.

This study is the first academic paper to systematically assess insights regarding the implementation of SIBs. Also, the article proposes a conceptual framework for investigating SIB implementation.

The purpose of this paper is to assist the numerous regulators around the globe who are currently considering ways to impose domestic systemic importance-based capital requirements on banks.

The article discusses in some detail a number of issues from the viewpoint of regulatory practice, mentioning relevant literature where available. Comments partly reflect the experience that the Czech National Bank gathered over the past two years while preparing its own regime of domestic systemic importance-based capital requirements on banks.

The authors stress, among other points, one weakness of the (otherwise well-designed) method suggested by the Basel Committee for Banking Supervision (BCBS) for assessment of banks’ systemic importance: the method is “relative” in that it does not reflect the absolute importance of the banking sector for the economy. The paper also explains that in some cases, use of individual-level rather than consolidated-level data may be preferable, in contrast to what the BCBS guidance suggests. Further, implications of the buffers over a longer term are pointed out.

As far as the authors are aware, this article is the first to comprehensively discuss the main issues surrounding both key steps (systemic importance assessment and determination of buffer level) in the process of introducing buffers based on domestic systemic importance. A number of questions related to these two steps are raised which regulators may appreciate to be reminded of, even if some of the questions are such that it is not possible to give a generally applicable answer to them.

The objectives of this paper are two-fold: first, to empirically compare and contrast the salient features of three financial instruments (FIs), namely sustainable and responsible investment (SRI) ṣukūk, social impact bonds (SIBs) and conventional bonds (CBs) and second, to examine the differences between the perceptions of the investors and the developers on the features of the three FIs.

Using a questionnaire survey, 251 completed and useable responses were received, representing a 42.54% response rate. In examining the differences and similarities in the characteristics of the three FIs, the inferential statistical of frequency and percentage were used. Wilcoxon and Mann–Whitney tests were conducted to investigate the differences in the salient features of the three FIs and the differences between the investors and developers' perceptions on the salient features of SRI ṣukūk, SIBs and CBs, respectively.

The results reveal that stakeholders view SRI ṣukūk, SIBs and CBs to be statistically significantly different from each other. This shows that stakeholders do not view SRI ṣukūk as “old wine in a new Sharīʿah-compliant bottle” but instead considered different from SIBs and CBs. Furthermore, stakeholders also differentiate between SIBs and CBs.

The paper provides empirical evidence that Islamic finance (IF) instrument, represented by SRI ṣukūk, is viewed as different instruments to conventional tools, represented by SIBs and CBs. First, it debunks the notion that IF is viewed as similar to its conventional counterpart. Second, SIBs are seen as different from CBs, illustrating the distinct categorisation of impact investing instruments. As such, third, the development of SRI ṣukūk and SIBs can provide diversification to portfolios as it is a unique instrument in the social finance and financial market.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the world’s first social impact bond (SIB) and the lessons that can be learned for the Islamic finance industry to fulfil its true objectives.

The Peterborough SIB was recently announced to be successful in achieving its targeted social and investment outcomes, reducing recidivism by 9 per cent and paying back investors a 3 per cent pa return. The paper compares Peterborough SIB with socially responsible investment (SRI) sukuk in terms of form and substance, and finds that there are various lessons from the Peterborough SIB that can be useful for future development of Islamic financial products.

Innovative social financial tools such as SIB exemplify the true spirit of risk sharing and social responsibility, which is arguably missing in current practices of the Islamic finance industry. With the growing interest towards SRI strategies and increase in socially motivated investors, such financial tools may not only help the sustainable growth of the Islamic finance industry, but also fill in the gap between its theory and practice.

As such, the paper also proposes a social impact sukuk model which integrates the key aspects learned from Peterborough SIB. This includes prioritising social impact, measurable success indicators, data and management systems, flexible contracts, third sector integration, risk sharing and fostering the culture of innovation.

The findings can offer some practical insights in dealing with the issue of Islamic finance practice being overly concerned with its formal adherence with Islamic legal rules whilst neglecting its true fundamental values.

Social impact bonds (SIBs) have become a favoured way to fund public services, including housing, prison and homelessness projects, in an era of austerity. In a growing critical literature on SIBs, a largely absent voice is that of the link worker. This paper aims to focus on the views of link workers in a SIB funded project which works with long-term entrenched rough sleepers in the East of England.

Interviews with link workers were conducted with a thematic analysis echoing many of the views expressed in the critical literature not only about the problems but also some of the advantages that SIBs offer to this type of project.

Three key themes were discomfort with the funding mechanism; flexible and innovative interventions that SIBs make possible; and problems with the outcome measures that trigger payments. This study concludes that if SIBs are to achieve their promise of providing funding which leads to effective solutions to deeply ingrained social problems, there needs to be more careful evaluation of their true benefits in comparison to publicly funded projects, adoption of more appropriate and project-specific outcome measures and a much clearer explanation and justification of the way in which SIB funding works.

Few studies have specifically explored the perceptions of front-line link workers in the homelessness sector. This study highlights not only the concerns but also the benefits associated with the use of SIB as a funding mechanism within the homelessness sector.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the negative consequences of employee perceptions of supervisor self-interested behavior (SIB). Using social exchange theory, the authors argue that perceived supervisor SIB reduces affective commitment to the supervisor (ACS), which in turn fosters employees’ negative reciprocal behavior in the form of counterproductive work behavior – interpersonal (CWBI) and counterproductive work behavior – organizational (CWBO). In addition, the authors identify employee power distance orientation (PDO) as an important contingent factor that influences the indirect effects.

Using a final sample of 441 employees from 146 workgroups across 6 firms in China, the hypotheses are tested using multilevel path analysis to account for the nesting effects.

Perceived supervisor SIB is negatively related to ACS, which in turn is related to employee CWBI and CWBO. Furthermore, employee PDO moderates the indirect effects of perceived supervisor SIB on employee CWBI and CWBO through decreased ACS. Specifically, when employee PDO is low, the indirect effects on employee CWBI and CWBO are stronger.

This is one of the first studies to investigate the influence of employee perceptions of supervisor SIB on negative employee behavior in the workplace. Furthermore, it furthers our understanding of how negative exchange can stimulate negative reciprocal behavior, which is a relatively underexplored area. Another strength of this paper is the multi-time survey design and the adoption of multilevel path analysis.