DOCSLIB.ORG

The Future of CDC

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Future of CDC House of Commons International Development Committee The Future of CDC Fifth Report of Session 2010–11 Volume I Volume I: Report, together with formal minutes, oral and written evidence Additional written evidence is contained in Volume II, available on the Committee website at www.parliament.uk/indcom Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed Tuesday 15 February 2011 HC 607 Published on 3 March 2011 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £17.50 The International Development Committee Rt Hon. Malcolm Bruce MP, (Liberal Democrat, Gordon) (Chairman) Hugh Bayley MP, (Labour, City of York) Richard Burden MP, (Labour, Birmingham, Northfield) Sam Gyimah MP (Conservative, East Surrey) Richard Harrington MP, (Conservative, Watford) Pauline Latham MP, (Conservative, Mid Derbyshire) Jeremy Lefroy (Conservative, Stafford) Mr Michael McCann MP, (Labour, East Kilbride, Strathaven and Lesmahagow) Alison McGovern MP, (Labour, Wirral South) Anas Sarwar MP, (Labour, Glasgow Central) Chris White MP, (Conservative, Warwick and Leamington) The following members were also members of the committee during the parliament: Mr Russell Brown MP, (Labour, Dumfries, Galloway) Mr James Clappison MP, (Conservative, Hertsmere) Ann McKechin MP, (Labour, Glasgow North) Publications The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House. All publications of the Committee (including press notices) are on the Internet at www.parliament.uk/indcom Committee staff The staff of the Committee are David Harrison (Clerk), Mick Hillyard (Second Clerk), Anna Dickson (Committee Specialist), Chlöe Challender (Committee Specialist), Tony Catinella (Senior Committee Assistant), Susan Monaghan (Senior Committee Assistant), Vanessa Hallinan (Committee Assistant), Emily Harrisson (Inquiry Manager) and Nicholas Davies (Media Officer) Contacts All correspondence should be addressed to the Clerk of the International Development Committee, House of Commons, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA. The telephone number for general enquiries is 020 7219 1223; the Committee’s email address is [email protected] The Future of CDC 1 Contents Report Page Summary 3 1 Introduction 5 2 The development rationale for CDC 6 The importance of private sector development 6 Development finance institutions 7 CDC 7 History of CDC 7 ‘Fund of funds’ model 8 Comparative position of CDC 9 DFID’s oversight of CDC 9 3 Development impact of CDC 10 CDC’s development impact 10 Investment model 10 CDC’s ability to leverage additional finance 12 Is CDC’s funding additional to private capital? 13 The composition of CDC’s portfolio 14 Geography 14 Sector 15 4 Remaining challenges 19 Implementation of CDC’s Investment Code 19 Measuring development impact 20 Transparency 22 Use of tax havens 23 Remuneration 24 Actis 25 5 Reforming CDC 26 New investment model for CDC 26 Investment methods 28 Sectoral mandate 30 Geographical mandate 31 Improving CDC’s development focus 32 DFID oversight of CDC 32 The new CDC 33 Conclusion 33 Conclusions and recommendations 39 2 The Future of CDC Annex 1 34 Annex 2 36 Annex 3 37 Formal Minutes 44 Witnesses 45 List of printed written evidence 45 List of additional written evidence 46 List of Reports from the Committee during the current Parliament 47 The Future of CDC 3 Summary CDC was created in 1948 as the Commonwealth Development Corporation. Its current mandate is to boost economic growth by investing in businesses in developing countries. Since restructuring in 2004, CDC almost exclusively relies on the ‘fund of funds’ investment model, thereby making almost all of its investments indirectly via fund managers. There has been mounting criticism that CDC does not have sufficient development impact. In October 2010, the Secretary of State for International Development announced that reforms to CDC were required and we decided to undertake an inquiry. We found that although CDC has increased its net assets by £1.5 billion since 2004 and has contributed to employment and the tax base of developing countries, its development impact has been insufficient for a Government-owned company whose net investments count as Official Development Assistance. We are concerned that some of the investments CDC has made are ones the private sector would have made anyway. Over half of its investments are concentrated in four middle-income countries. Too few of its investments have been in sectors which most benefit the poor such as agriculture, infrastructure and small and medium enterprises. In order radically to increase CDC’s development impact we recommend that CDC be split into two parts. The first part would primarily use the ‘fund of funds’ method and co- investment (through equity), and other financial instruments as appropriate, to make investments in developing countries. The new second part would have a mandate to make innovative investments in ‘pro-poor’ sectors. The profit from the first part of the business would fund or subsidise the second. CDC should be more transparent to facilitate greater accountability and public oversight. We believe the remuneration of CDC’s executives is excessive and that high quality staff could be secured for lower salaries. CDC has an important role to play. However, CDC’s mandate should be changed from economic growth to incorporate a specific focus on poverty alleviation. DFID should become a more active shareholder of CDC and undertake closer oversight of CDC in future. CDC should retain its expert status and should remain complementary to the other DFIs, whilst sharpening its development impact and poverty alleviation focus. The Future of CDC 5 1 Introduction 1. CDC Group plc (formerly the Commonwealth Development Corporation) is a public limited company wholly owned by the UK Government. It is the UK’s Development Finance Institution (DFI) and aims to help fill a shortage of finance for investment that is a major constraint to economic growth and poverty reduction. CDC is a major element of the support provided by the Department for International Development (DFID) for the private sector in developing countries. CDC’s objective is to invest in the creation and growth of viable private businesses in poorer developing countries to contribute to economic growth for the benefit of the poor; and to mobilise private investment in these markets both directly and by demonstrating profitable investments as part of the mission of the DFID to fight world poverty.1 2. CDC has been self-financing since 1995 and has had some significant successes. Since 2004, CDC has generated substantial growth in its assets from £1.2 billion to £2.7 billion.2 However, concerns have been growing regarding CDC’s development impact, its ‘fund of funds’ model3 and operational practices. These mounting concerns led the Secretary of State for International Development, the Rt. Hon Andrew Mitchell MP, to announce a review of CDC on 12 October 2010, “in order radically to increase its development impact.” He stated that he wanted CDC to be “more pro-poor focused than any other DFI, doing the hardest things in the hardest places.”4 3. Following the Secretary of State’s announcement of a review of CDC, we decided to carry out an inquiry into the future of CDC. We aimed to consider CDC’s development impact and how this could be maximised in the future. We also wanted to evaluate the implications of potential reforms. In parallel to our inquiry, DFID has held a consultation regarding the future of CDC, prior to the publication of CDC’s new business plan. This inquiry follows on from our predecessor Committee’s report on Private Sector Development and the Public Accounts Committee’s report on DFID’s oversight of CDC.5 4. We received 27 written submissions of evidence from a variety of sources ranging from non-governmental organisations to CDC’s fund managers. We have also received a briefing from the National Audit Office (NAO). We held three evidence sessions, during December 2010 and January 2011, with: the Secretary of State for International Development, CDC executives, academics, fund managers, non-governmental organisations and journalists. We are grateful to all those who provided oral and written evidence for their valuable contributions. We would like to thank our specialist adviser Dr Dirk Willem te Velde of the Overseas Development Institute. 1 CDC, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills Online, www.bis.gov.uk 2 Ev 65 3 For description see Chapter 2 4 HC Deb, 12 October 2010, col14-15WS 5 International Development Committee, Fourth Report of Session 2005-06, Private Sector Development, HC 921-I and Public Accounts Committee, Eighteenth Report of Session 2008-09, Investing for Development: the Department for International Development's oversight of CDC Group plc, HC 94 6 The Future of CDC 2 The development rationale for CDC The importance of private sector development 5. The private sector is increasingly recognised as a vital component of sustainable development and ‘pro-poor’ growth.6 In his speech on 12 October 2010, the Secretary of State said that it was the private sector which “promotes new jobs, new opportunities, new markets and new prosperity.”7 The private sector has the capacity to create employment, increase trade, provide goods and services and generate substantial tax revenues. These tax revenues can be used to provide basic public services such as healthcare and education. 6. The NAO found that research demonstrated that growth was “an essential, although not always sufficient, precondition for poverty reduction.”8 It is also clear that strong growth is contingent on high rates of investment.9 However, there is still a considerable lack of capital available for some sectors and regions in developing countries.10 Foreign direct investment (FDI) flows to Sub-Saharan Africa remain persistently low; it receives only 5% of global FDI.11 Almost 50% of African companies identify a lack of finance as a major constraint to doing business.12 The lack of capital is further illustrated by the fact that nearly three-quarters of the funds in which CDC invested during 2009 and 2010 received funding from other DFIs and 36% of these funds failed to reach their target size.13 7.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Envisioning New Partnerships for Africa's Future
    ENvISIONING NEW PARTNERSHIPS FOR AFRICA’S FuTuRE: MAkING GLOBAL GOvERNANCE WORk IN A POST-2015 WORLD Dominik Balthasar / Hannah Bowen / Clara Brandi / Kathrin Hamm / Whitney Haring-Smith / Ginger Turner Yuzhe Wang / Jiajun Xu SEPTEMBER 2013 BERLIN GG2022.NET BEIJING WASHINGTON DC Supported by Partners WWW.GG2022.NET ENVISIONING NEW PARTNERSHIPS FOR AFrica’s FuturE: MAKING GLOBAL GOVERNANCE WORK IN A POST-2015 WORLD _ TABLE OF CONTENTS ABOUT THE REPORT 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2 INTRODUCTION 7 SCENARIO 1: AFRICA LEFT BEHIND 9 SCENARIO 2: CUT-THROAT COMPETITION 15 SCENARIO 3: AFRICA RISING 22 STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS 30 POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 2013 35 FELLOWS OF THE GLOBAL DEVELOPMENT 38 GOVERNANCE WORKING GROUP APPENDIX 1: SCENARIO PLANNING METHODOLOGY 41 APPENDIX 2: GLOBAL DEVELOPMENT GOVERNANCE TODAY 45 GLOBAL GOVERNANCE 2022 _ ACRONYMS ANC African National Congress, South Africa AU African Union BIS Bank for International Settlements BITs Bilateral Investment Treaties BRIC Brazil, Russia, India, China BRICS Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa CDA Citizen Development Assistance DAC Development Assistance Committee, Development Cooperation Directorate, OECD DCF United Nations Development Cooperation Forum EAC East African Community ECOSOC Economic and Social Council ECOWAS Economic Community of West African States EITI Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative FDI Foreign Direct Investment FSF Financial Stability Forum GDP Gross Domestic Product GEC Global Economic Council GNI Gross National Income IFC International Financial Corporation,
    [Show full text]
  • Entrepreneurial Action and the Emergence of China’S Private Solar Photovoltaic Firms
    *** Forthcoming in Research Policy *** OVERCOMING THE LIABILITY OF NEWNESS: ENTREPRENEURIAL ACTION AND THE EMERGENCE OF CHINA’S PRIVATE SOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC FIRMS Wei Zhang Associate Professor & Steven White Associate Professor Department of Innovation, Entrepreneurship & Strategy School of Economics and Management Tsinghua University Abstract This study explores how entrepreneurs introducing a new organizational form can build legitimacy and capabilities to overcome significant liabilities of newness, and how their actions and the institutional structure co-evolve. Our multiple case study design enabled us to explicate specific actions that entrepreneurs founding China’s private solar photovoltaic (PV) firms took as they built organizational capabilities and established their legitimacy vis- à-vis resource holders and global markets. We identified three legitimacy-based strategies they used: leveraging their existing sources of legitimacy, aligning their actions with established institutional rules and norms, and enacting the institutional environment to change perceptions of what is legitimate. We also found a stark contrast between the early and late entrants. The early entrants had to build an effective organizational capability and establish their own firm’s legitimacy, as well as establish the legitimacy of the private Chinese solar PV firm as a viable organizational form, both domestically and abroad. Later entrants could leverage the legitimacy established by the early entrants, enabling them to more easily and quickly access external resources and become competitive. Our findings also suggest an important role for government in promoting and supporting entrepreneurship that complements well-established approaches. Namely, through its policies and actions, the government can create an environment in which experimentation and exploration is legitimate, thereby making it easier for entrepreneurs, new ventures and new organizational forms to access critical resources and realize their potential.
    [Show full text]
  • SBCERS PE Q1 2018.Indd
    Santa Barbara County Employees’ Retirement System First Quarter 2018 PE Performance Update Agenda • Q1 Private Equity Performance 1 • Deal Review 11 • Appendix 14 Q1 Private Equity Performance PE Portfolio Highlights - March 31, 2018 Performance and Value Creation • Portfolio outperforms the Russell 3000 + 300 bps (designated benchmark) for long-term periodss • 43 bps since inception; 1 bp for the 10-year period • 17.06% point-to-point IRR for the one-year period, with four quarters of positive performance • Net value gains of $37.0M over the year PE Portfolio Returns PE Portfolio Value Created 15% $20 12.51% 12.17% 12.35% 12.07% $14.4 $15 $13.5 10% $11.0 $10 $9.6 5.72% $8.5 $8.5 5.12% 5% 3.70% ($ in Millions) $5 $4.0 $4.0 1.60% 0% $0 6/30/2017 9/30/2017 12/31/2017 3/31/2018 6/30/2017 9/30/2017 12/31/2017 3/31/2018 Point to Point IRR Since Inception IRR Net Value Gain Market Value Growth Page 2 Portfolio Summary SBCERS PE Portfolio Since-Inception Summary $ in Million 12/31/2017 3/31/2018 Net Change Active Partnerships 64 66 2 • Two new investments added in the fi rst Active GP Relationships 30 30 - quarter to existing managers Committed Capital $537.5 $557.9 $20.4 • Portfolio is ~73% paid-in at 3/31/18 Unfunded Commitment $216.3 $227.7 $11.4 Paid-in Capital $395.3 $407.2 $11.9 • Slight increase to distributed-to-paid-in ratio Distributions $305.5 $317.3 $11.8 over the quarter, 78% since inception D/PI 77% 78% 1% Net Invested Capital $89.8 $89.9 $0.1 Market Value $249.5 $253.5 $4.0 Total Exposure $465.8 $481.2 $15.4 Average Age of Commitments
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Review 2006 1 2006 Highlights
    ANNUAL REVIEW 2006 CDC Group plc Our mission is to generate wealth, broadly shared, in emerging markets, particularly in poorer countries, by providing capital for investment in sustainable and responsibly managed private sector businesses. Contents Our target is to make at least 70% of 1 2006 Highlights 2 The Development Process 4 Chairman’s Statement our investments in the poorer countries* 6 Chief Executive’s Report 11 Business Principles and in the world and the remaining 30% in Development Impact 13 Business Review – Africa countries which are classified as poor**. 16 Business Review – Asia 20 Business Review – Latin America 21 Business Review – Power 23 Performance Review 28 Board of Directors We also target at least 50% of our 30 Senior Investment Team 32 CDC’s Fund Managers investments in sub-Saharan Africa IBC CDC’s Top Ten Underlying Investments and South Asia. *Countries where Gross National Income (GNI) per head is less than US$1,750. **Countries where GNI per head is less than US$9,075. CDC Group plc Annual Review 2006 1 2006 Highlights £2bn 23% £375m NET ASSETS INCREASE IN VALUE TOTAL RETURN AFTER TAX OF ASSETS 19 £413m NEW FUND MANAGERS NEW COMMITMENTS IN 2006 • Outperformed MSCI Emerging Markets Index by 14% • Profits recycled into new investments in poor countries • £132m of third party capital mobilised alongside CDC in Actis and Aureos funds • £914m outstanding commitments to 77 funds 2 CDC Group plc Annual Review 2006 The Development Process 1. CDC Capital CDC has assets of £2.0bn (US$3.9bn). Our purpose is to stimulate economic growth by investing successfully in the private sector.
    [Show full text]
  • The New Farm Owners Table
    Corporate investors lead the rush for control over overseas farmland Investment Legal base Type Participating Details vehicle investors Abraaj Capital UAE Investment Abraaj Capital reported in 2008 that it had been buying farmland in Pakistan. The company also said it would invest in dairy firm farming in Pakistan from its US$250 million fund for Pakistan. Abraaj manages five equity funds and its parent group, Abraaj Capital Holdings Limited, has an issued share capital of US$ 1 billion and US$5bn of assets spread across the Middle East, North Africa and the South Asia AC Agri Germany Specialised - Aquila Capital Aquila Capital Group is an investment company with US$2.4 billion under management. Its AC Agri Opportunity Fund seeks to Opportunity fund (Germany) take over farm properties in Brazil, Australia and New Zealand. The fund is targeting an investment of up to US$400 million, Fund with a first capital raising of US$100 million. It is run by Detlef Schoen, an ex-CEO of Cargill Germany. The farm properties selected will be producers of dairy, beef cattle, sugar cane and row crops in stable least-cost locations, ensuring the minimisation of risk through both commodity and location diversity. This fund is composed of two sub-funds: the Oceania Dairy Fund (ODF) and the Brazil AgriFund (BAF), with rate of return targets of 12% and 25% respectively for a minimum of 5 years. Investments, set at a minimum of US$5m, will be generally allocated between the ODF and BAF at 30% and 70%, but investors will be able to select their own allocations depending on their individual needs.
    [Show full text]
  • Trends in Private Equity and Venture Capital Investments with Special Focus on the Booming India Growth Story
    Journal of International Commercial Law and Technology Vol. 4, Issue 2 (2009) Trends in Private Equity and Venture Capital Investments with Special Focus on the Booming India Growth Story ∗ Ritankar Sahu Ananya Nath & Priyadarshi Banerjee National Law University Jodhpur (India) Abstract. Private Equity investments have restructured the trend of acquisitions and aided in value creation as against strategic buyers. Private equity’s growing involvement in many sectors is even more striking. The nature of investments of private equity firms and funds, the strategies employed, value creating practices, profitable exits are significantly different from that of other strategic and corporate buyers. The paper deals with the above aspects. The paper is divided into two parts. Part I deals with the basics of private equity investment structures and exits. Part II of the paper deals with the private equity growth story in India. Private equity investments, proposed changes to regulations, sectoral growth, venture capital regulations as well as impact of the latest Union budget a the credit crunch have been dealt with. 1. Basics of Private Equity Investments – structures, funds and exits 1.1 Introduction Private Equity is the provision of equity capital by financial investors – over the medium or long term – to non- quoted companies with high growth potential.1 Venture capital is, strictly speaking, a subset of private equity and refers to equity investments made for the launch, earl development, or expansion of a business. Private equity covers not only the financing required to create a business, but also includes financing in the subsequent development stages of its life-cycle.
    [Show full text]
  • Private Equity in Brazil
    JUNE 2019 Private Equity in Brazil 1 The Brazilian Private Equity and Venture Capital Association is a non-profit organization that promotes the development of private equity, venture capital and seed capital in Brazil, by improving industry conditions and understandings, while also fomenting good practices that are aligned with international industry standards. The Brazilian Trade and Investment Promotion Agency (Apex-Brasil) works to promote Brazilian products and services abroad, and to attract foreign investment to strategic sectors in Brazil. The Agency carries out several trade promotion initiatives, such as commercial and prospective missions, business rounds, support to the participation of Brazilian companies in major business fairs, and visits of foreign buyers and opinion formers to assess the country’s productive structure. Apex-Brasil also plays a key role in attracting foreign direct investment to Brazil, working to detect business opportunities, promoting strategic events and providing support to foreign investors interested in allocating resources in the country. The InBrazil Private Equity & Venture Capital Program is a joint initiative between ABVCAP and Apex-Brasil, set up to keep international investors well informed, linking them up with Brazilian fund managers and portfolio companies. The main goal of the program is to inform and empower the global investor community about the PE-VC ecosystem in Brazil, spotlighting its many opportunities. 2 Industry Overview This report offers a general overview of the private equity indus- try in Brazil. Through data, analyses and interviews with some of Brazil’s leading players, this publication outlines the main trends for this sector, together with the outlook for the next few years.
    [Show full text]
  • Renewable Energy Generation: a New Fixed Income Alternative
    2Q 2013 Renewable Energy Generation: A new fixed income alternative Renewable energy assets are positioned to be an attrac- institutional funds will increasingly come to a similar tive asset class. Long-term cash yields from renewable conclusion. energy assets are very attractive relative to investment Many utilities do not have the financial resources to alternatives with comparable risk. Additionally, the continue to invest, or even maintain, large renewable investible universe of renewable energy assets is large portfolios on their balance sheets. The enterprise value and growing, and asset ownership is migrating from of the Europe utility industry was €900 billion at the utilities and IPPs to investors. These trends will lead end of 2007. Five years later, at the end of 2012, it was to a lower cost of capital for deployment and help spur €450 billion. Distributed renewable generation, weak further development of renewable generation. load growth, excess capacity and aging infrastructure all Installed wind and large-scale solar power generation combined to severely pressure the financial wherewithal assets in North America and Europe have grown to over of the European utility industry. The same trends are 180 gigawatts, representing over $250 billion in asset accelerating in the US, and many utility and resource value. Utilities and independent power producers (IPPs) companies are seeking to monetize portions of their are still by far the largest owners of these assets. Over renewable generation assets. We estimate that over $23 trillion of capital exists in institutionally managed 10 gigawatts of existing wind generation assets in the funds from pensions, insurers, endowments and others US will change hands in the next two to three years, as which to date have not made direct investments in many tax equity structures flip and cash begins flowing renewable energy infrastructure.
    [Show full text]
  • L500UK Pp02-16.Indd 1 05/11/2015 10:11:50 the LEGAL 500 UK AWARDS 2015
    supported by THE LEGAL 500 UK AWARDS 2015 Welcome to the The Legal 500 UK Awards 2015, where we recognise and reward the very best of the best across the legal industry. We pride ourselves on the thorough, in-depth research we carry out in order to produce our rankings of firms and sets in the United Kingdom. This leaves us in a unique position to be able to identify the teams who warrant particular recognition. The shortlist and winners are based on merit alone, there are no specific submission requests. Each researcher who worked on the guide was asked for their input and the criteria was a simple but effective one: which law firms stood out for you this year and why? We were not necessarily looking for top-tier firms, nor the largest firms. We also asked, which companies stood out throughout the course of your research and why? We combined those answers with the research carried out for our GC Powerlist series, and our work over the past year for our latest publication, GC magazine, to identify our in-house winners. In the pages to follow I will share some of the reasons behind our decisions with you. DAVID BURGESS PUBLISHING DIRECTOR THE LEGAL 500 L500UK pp02-16.indd 1 05/11/2015 10:11:50 THE LEGAL 500 UK AWARDS 2015 BANKING IN-HOUSE INDIVIDUAL OF THE YEAR John Collins, general counsel, RBS John Collins began his career with RBS in 2007 WINNERS where he has since helped the bank through the financial crisis, navigating through the turmoil of its bailout, its sell-off, its exit from over 12 countries and a number of regulatory fines.
    [Show full text]
  • NSIA Annual Report 2018
    Nigeria Sovereign Investment Authority Investment Nigeria Sovereign Annual ReportAnnual 2018 & Accounts Enabling Sustainable Growth: making an impact on Nigeria’s future Nigeria Sovereign Investment Authority Annual Report & Accounts 2018 The Clan Place, 4th Floor Plot 1386A, Tigris Crescent Maitama, Abuja Nigeria Tel: +234 (0)9 461 0400 Email: [email protected] www.nsla.com.ng The Nigeria Sovereign Introduction Investment Authority manages Nigeria’s Sovereign Wealth Fund. It was established as an independent investment institution by an Act of Management Funds the National Assembly in May 2011. Corporate Governance Corporate Contents Risk Management Introduction 01 Risk Management 42 About NSIA 02 Risk Overview 43 The Mandate Funds 02 Risk Management Approach 49 Corporate Philosophy 03 Objectives of Risk Management 49 Better road infrastructure helps in achieving Chairman’s Statement 04 Risk Management Governance Structure 49 Making an Impact: Chief Executive Officer’s Review 06 Risk Appetite 50 speedier deliveries and getting more products to Investment Milestones 10 Risk Universe 51 the market quicker. This has the effect of generating better roads mean greater profits for business, taxes for government Funds Management 12 Financial highlights 56 better connections, and real, sustainable economic growth. Further, it Market Overview 13 General Information 57 Highlights Financial means the populace has access to affordable high- The Future Generations Fund 16 Directors’ Report 58 The Stabilisation Fund 19 Statement of Directors’
    [Show full text]
  • Handbook on Responsible Investment Across Asset Classes
    Institute for Responsible Investment Handbook on Responsible Investment Across Asset Classes Funded by the F.B. Heron Foundation in collaboration with Table of Contents Acknowledgements ...................................... 1 Introduction ................................................. 2 Cash and Cash Equivalents ......................... 6 Fixed-Income .............................................. 18 Public Equities ........................................... 28 Private Equity ............................................. 42 Real Estate .................................................. 54 Hedge Funds ............................................. 68 Commodities .............................................. 78 Note on Emerging Markets ........................ 85 Selected Readings on Responsible Investment ................................................... 92 Appendix: Links to Organizations and Referenced Readings .......................... 94 For more information contact: David Wood, Director [email protected] 617.552.1140 This piece is printed on Mohawk Via 100% post consumer waste paper manufactured with windpower and is Green Seal and FSC certified. The print facility has a 100% recycling policy and uses UV Environmental Inks with no VOCs. Boston College Center for Corporate Citizenship • www.bcccc.net Acknowledgements This project was made possible by a generous grant from the F.B. Heron Foundation. The principal authors of this Handbook were David Wood and Belinda Hoff, staff members of the Institute for Responsible Invest-
    [Show full text]
  • Impact Investing in West Africa
    Impact investing in West Africa COPENHAGEN | DAKAR | GENEVA | JOHANNESBURG | MUMBAI | NAIROBI | NEW YORK | SANTIAGO | SAN FRANCISCO | WASHINGTON DC Supported by Acknowledgements This report was made possible thanks to the generous contributions of time and expert knowledge from many individuals and organisations. The Advisory Team provided invaluable insights, guidance and support throughout the preparation of this report. In addition, special thanks goes to all the individuals that took part in the interviews and attended the impact investing workshops in Senegal, Ghana and Nigeria in March 2011. Through the interviews and the workshops, a wealth of experience, understanding and data was shared on impact investing activities in West Africa. We would also like to thank Jenny Everett of the Aspen Network of Development Entrepreneurs, Oliver Karius of LGT Venture Philanthropy, and our colleagues at Dalberg, Peter Tynan and Andrew Stern, who also contributed their time and energy. Any errors or omissions in the report are the responsibility of the Editorial Team. Advisory Team Margot Brandenburg, The Rockefeller Giselle Leung, The Global Impact Investing Foundation, New York Network, New York Justina Lai, The Rockefeller Foundation, Jacob Samuelson, The Global Impact New York Investing Network, New York Wiebe Boer, The Tony Elumelu Foundation, Laurie Rud, The Global Impact Investing Lagos Network, New York Amit Bouri, The Global Impact Investing Stephen Nairne, Lundin for Africa, Network, New York Vancouver Sapna Shah, The Global Impact Investing Network, New York Dalberg Editorial Team Madjiguene Sock, Dakar Afua Sarkodie‐Kupka, Dakar Angela Hansen, Johannesburg Daniela Nwaobasi, Dakar Liesbet Peeters, London Abdourahmane Diop, Dakar Susanne Normark Christensen, Copenhagen Table of contents Executive summary .....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]