Exploring Venture Funding in the Entrepreneurial University

This chapter considers the role of venture funding in the entrepreneurial university. It begins by discussing the literature on the entrepreneurial university, focusing on the role of financing. The literature shows that there are gaps in the financing of academic and graduate ventures. The second part of the chapter introduces short case examples that illustrate different forms of university-led venture funding, demonstrating how different universities have sought to fill funding gaps by means of seed capital grants, micro-financing, small business research grants, crowdfunding, social impact investing, seed capital investing, public venture capital, and venture capital. The chapter concludes by arguing that universities have sufficient resource endowments and human capital to address many funding gaps through innovative thinking and practice.

Evaluation in Impact Investing

The emergence of impact investing over the past decade has been accompanied by an increased interest of practitioners and scholars in the impact evaluation topic, one of the twofold pillars of the such an innovative financial approach. To contribute to the international debate, this study adopts a qualitative approach by obtaining results from a systematic literature review of extant research. This is useful to 1) identify the current existing impact evaluation approaches adopted in the field and 2) derive an empirical analysis in the impact investing sector with a focus on impact measurement in social impact bonds. The study opens interesting insights into recognizing the potential for the whole impact investing field, deriving both from theory and evidence of impact evaluation practices.

Current demand and supply of impact investments across different geographic regions, sectors, and stages of business: Match or mismatch?

We examine the match/mismatch between the demand and supply of impact investments. We show that some geographic regions display an upward match, while others exhibit a downward match. We explain how regions with well-developed (or less-developed) economies are not necessarily equal to regions with well-developed (or less-developed) impact investment markets. We also highlight the sectors exhibiting a match or mismatch between the demand and supply of investments, and explain the potential reasons. Regarding both geographic and sector concentration, the demand for investments is much more concentrated than their supply. Finally, early-stage companies suffer from an undersupply of investments, while growth-stage companies display an upward match and mature companies have an oversupply of investments. These findings have implications for impact investing theory and practice, including the attainment of Sustainable Development Goals. JEL Classification: D53; E41; E51; G15; G23

Unlocking the black box of private impact investors

Purpose This paper aims to empirically describe the general characteristics and the investment behavior of high-net-worth individuals (HNWIs) who pursue impact investing. Design/methodology/approach Data was collected from members of a global impact investor network, using an online questionnaire, a portfolio-data collection tool and semi-structured interviews. Findings Wealthy private impact investors are largely similar in terms of their general characteristics and investment behavior, but they diverge in their interest in specific Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). They tend to be strongly values-driven and to adopt an investment time horizon of 7+ years for their impact investments, which they expect to yield financial returns that are no different from those of traditional investments. Interestingly, these investors perceive the well-established sustainable investing strategies of exclusion, environmental, social and governance (ESG) integration and best-in-class as not having high impact-generating potential. Practical implications Suggestions are provided about how wealthy private investors could use the findings to improve their impact investment decisions. Advice is offered to investment professionals on how to optimize impact investment products and services for this economically and societally highly relevant target group. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first scientific study to investigate the general characteristics and investment behavior of HNWIs who pursue impact investing. HNWIs have great relevance for financial markets yet they are out of reach for most researchers. As a result, they are poorly understood, and apparently also often misunderstood, which has substantial economic and social implications that this paper helps mitigate.

Promprylad.Renovation: impact investing in emerging markets

Learning outcomes The learning outcomes of this paper is as follows: to structure the impact investing phenomenon and distinguish it from traditional investing or philanthropy, including the motivation of investors in impact investing projects; to analyse stakeholders in impact investing projects according to four main categories; to structure the implementation model of the theory of change in the context of impact investing; to build managerial decisions concerning the development of impact investing projects in crisis situations. Case overview/synopsis The case describes the development path of the Promprylad.Renovation project from its concept to the critical moment at the end of 2018. Yuriy Fyliuk – the case protagonist, acts as the main ideologist and leader of the project, the essence of which is the establishment of an innovation centre on the area of the old Promprylad plant in Ivano-Frankivsk. Impact investing was selected as the main project development tool, as it allows for attracting investors who share the aspiration for positive change of the city and potential financial benefit. The project is implemented in several stages as follows: partner involvement (Insha Osvita, MitOst, Pact Ukraine and LvBS), vision finalisation and research (together with Stanford Research Institute, Zotov & Co, FORMA Architects, Moris Group, etc.), the launch of the pilot floor (attracting more than $683,000 from allocated grants and more than $590,000 of private investments). Open equity crowdfunding and the purchase of the entire plant, with its subsequent renovation, should be the next stage. As of 2017, agreements have been reached to pay fully for the purchase of the plant by the end of 2019. After a successful pilot and lengthy negotiations, it was agreed that $1,000,000 should be paid by the end of 2018 and $2,000,000 by the end of 2019 to complete the buyout. However, as of the end of 2018, martial law was proclaimed in Ukraine. Hence, considering the risks, a major US investor refuses to contribute. The main dilemma is either to find a suitable solution to complete the buyout of the plant or to stop the project. Complexity academic level This case can be used in the master’s programmes of business schools (MBA, Executive MBA, Entrepreneurship, etc.), as well as in training programmes for public and state sector managers. The case study will be particularly useful for mixed groups with representatives from different sectors of the economy. This case study might be taught in the following disciplines: social entrepreneurship, social investing, leadership and crisis management. The subject of impact investing allows recognition of the benefits of combined cross-sectoral efforts over joint projects. Supplementary materials Teaching notes are available for educators only. Subject code CSS 7: Management science.