Moving the lever

Equilibrium Capital Group has been involved creating and developing the next generation of impact investing: the i3 Challenge.

i3 Challenge
The Winter 2010 MBA class at Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University was given a unique project: Create financial models and proposals that would entice institutional fund managers to invest in projects that had both financial and social/environmental returns. In essence, create financially innovative pitches for impact investing.

What their teacher, Dave Chen, received from these students drove Chen’s investment firm, Equilibrium Capital Group, to collaborate with leaders at Kellogg and create a challenge to future social entrepreneurial leaders. According to Chen, “These students brought remarkable insight and innovation to the project! We knew we needed to help the next generation of finance students find ways to build careers in the impact investing sector.”

The International Impact Investing Challenge (“I3 Challenge”) focused on channeling business school student’s creativity to create innovative financial strategies and vehicles that can deliver the dual objective of generating financial returns and delivering sustainable positive impact on our society and environment. This invitation-only B-school competition was the first of it’s kind to focus on impact investing.

“The I3 Challenge is part of our commitment to building this sector and increasing the options for capital markets to realize value in projects that are both financially rewarding and that have a social/environmental impact. The event is also a way to harness huge student enthusiasm in social enterprise,” says Chen.

Equilibrium Capital played multiple roles in the creation of the I3 Challenge. The firm helped develop critical messaging around leadership, innovation, building and social responsibility and dedicated numerous hours to program development because it is fundamentally consistent with the firm’s value proposition of taking action, not just talking, about what needs to happen in the impact investing arena.

For the competition, twelve MBA programs sent one team to represent their program at a final competition at the J.P. Morgan headquarters in New York on April 8, 2011. Confirmed participating schools are: Anderson School of Management, University of California Los Angeles, Booth Graduate School of Business, University of Chicago, Columbia School of Business, Columbia University, Fuqua School of Business, Duke University, Harvard Business School, Harvard University, Johnson School of Management, Cornell University, Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University, Ross School of Management, University of Michigan, Said Business School, The University of Oxford, Stanford Graduate School of Business, Stanford University, Stern School of Business, New York University, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania.

Learn more about the event and the winning team:

Nextbillion.net, April 28, 2011, By Colm Fay, University of Michigan Ross School of Business. Guest Post: Competing in the Inaugural International Impact Investing Challenge

Daily Finance, April 21, 2011, By Catherine New, Huffington Post
Impact Investing: A Better Way to Do Well by Doing Good

Kellogg School of Management – Home Page, April 20, 2011, A Sustainable Win

ClearAdmit Admissions blog, March 24, 2011, By Jeanette Brown
Kellogg, Johnson Schools Launch New Impact Investing Competition

TheGreenMarket.blogspot.com, March 24, 2011, International Impact Investing Challenge

USNews.com, March 11, 2011, By Stacy Blackman
The Sustainable MBA

A model to build environmental and social impact based finance and investment strategies

Following is a framework or model to build environmental and social impact based finance and investment strategies.

1. Determine the economics and return
* Align the benefit streams to the beneficiaries… Who gets these benefits?
* Are the benefits always economic? If not economic, how are they “valued” by that “investor”?
* Can those benefits be “monetized” or translated into economic terms”?
* Align the incentives and cash streams to the beneficiaries that value that stream

2. Determine the real source of risk and the real pricing of that risk

* Is there enough transaction history to be able to quantify the risk profile?
* Define the “real” risk in the transaction or investment…Who’s risk are you really under-writing?
* What are the comparable rates for that level of risk?

3. TLC – the basis of building a market
* Transparency
– Are there standards to measure the benefits and economics (the basis of establishing of the value and pricing over time)? This is a core requirement for “scalable”
transparency.
– Is there a mechanism for price discovery?

* Liquidity
– Is there sufficient scale to build confidence in the instrument as an “asset class”?
– Is there a Secondary or Exit market?

* Consistency
– Is there public policy, regulatory, or market stability in order to be able to build a long term strategy on this asset?

Source: Equilibrium Capital Group analysis of emerging and maturing impact market. Wsed a core model in impact investing coursework at Kellogg School of Management.

(c) 2011 Equilibrium Capital Group.

From techno-economics to enviro-economics: Drivers of change must consider the whole picture

Moore’s Law is about techno-economics — technological change driving economic transformation. Moore’s law reinvented the world we’re in. But the Moore’s Law era is drawing to its end (if it hasn’t been ended already — the signal is probably the negative returns in venture capital over the trailing ten year period, for the first time since tracking started.) The era isn’t over because technological change has stopped, it’s because Moore’s Law has been internalized — its transformative power is now part of the fabric of the economy.

Today we’re in the first global Diamond’s Law era.

Diamond’s Law is this: When collapse is threatened, financial wealth and ecosystem and social health must create, sustain, and enable each other — or you lose all of them.

Moore’s law is about techno-economics. Diamond’s Law is about enviro-economics. If you don’t get the economics right, you break the social and environmental matrix that is the only thing that gives wealth meaning. Ozymandias (Google it if you weren’t an English Major) may still own that stretch of desert. Who cares?

Diamond’s Law has applied locally over and over in human history – see Jared Diamond’s superb work, “Collapse.” (Thanks, Dr. Diamond, for letting us put your name to this concept.) Diamond’s Law can be seen to operate both as an explanation for the end of (local) civilizations, and as an explanation for why other civilizations made it through to the other side of their own threatened collapse, and have survived in their altered state to this day. The essence is a transformation of the way they counted value and therefore what they were intent on preserving and enhancing.

We may be able to apply all kinds of cheaper technologies to the problems of atmospheric carbon recycling limits leading to climate change, hydrological cycle limits leading to freshwater aquifer and supply exhaustion, biological replenishment limits leading to collapse of ocean fisheries, and so on. But the technology by itself doesn’t change the underlying economic dynamic: that has to come from finding transaction structures, ownership patterns, accounting solutions, and so on that allow us to express the economic value of the human and environmental harmonies that sustain the whole system.

How can’t financial innovation in sustainability be the lever of the next decades?

In the 1990′s, Craig Barrett, CEO of Intel, presented a very simple demographics argument: In the early 1990′s 3 billion people were brought into capitalism and started the evolution to a middle class (India + China + eastern Europe). The world changed overnight from 800M in capitalism to nearly 4B. He asked, “How can’t this be the most important economic factor in the next decades?”

Barrett guided Intel’s strategy along the implications of that insight and question. We are living that cause and effect, today. Indeed, that demographic shift has changed the face of our economy and global balance. In hindsight, it wasn’t much of a leap, but at the time, it seemed like hyperbole and far off. Nonetheless, those that saw this mega trend and were willing to invest in the implications… Well you know the story.

Looking at the sustainability trends, we ask the Craig Barrett question: “How can’t this be the most important factor in the next decades?”

What do you think?

We’ll have to lead ourselves out of this malaise

(as printed in the Portland Business Journal, November 19, 2010)

We’ll have to lead ourselves out of this malaise
By Dave Chen

It feels like America is at a cross roads — or maybe it’s a plateau.

In many ways, this recession is more about a set of structural changes taking place in our country. In many ways, this recession is going to focus our attention on American expectations, our way of life, our standard of living, our role in the world.

I say “going to” because none of our political leadership wants to lead us in this discussion and paint a vision towards our Manifest Destiny of the 21st century.

America’s greatest strength is our sense of expansive opportunity and willingness to tear up the status quo and just build something new. The challenge in this century is that there are now several nations with that same culture and energy. Our greatest weakness is that we’ve lost our sense of sacrifice for the better whole. Our challenge is that the citizens of several of our competitor nations are collectively feeling this sense of national pride and destiny.

Let’s step back and look at our economy:
• The labor market is stuck. This high unemployment and “stuckness” reflects a systematic dislocation of skills and geography. The U.S. Federal Reserve is finally willing to admit the 2009 recession recovery could be much more like the 2002 recession recovery in terms of the “slope of curve,” or rate of recovery. In other words, a five-year recovery to improve they unemployment rate by 5 percent. There is a darker scenario that says this could be a 12-year process.
• Consumer spending is still down, reflecting unemployment, the loss of home value, and coming down off our historically high household debts using credit cards and home equity loans. This is going to take a long time.
• Inflation will not likely be driven by wages or capacity constraint. We have excess manufacturing capacity and companies have the ability to access a global supply chain and a global labor pool. We are seeing no real escalation of supply costs yet, though there are worries about China and India consumption driving commodity and energy prices up.

The outlook for the next three years and beyond includes strong worries about U.S. inflation based on monetary and fiscal policy.

There are reasons to be seriously worried about the recovery.
1. The high, persistent, long-term unemployment rates reflect systematic dislocation of skills, industries, and geographies.
2. State government budget gaps continue to have a ripple effect through local and regional economies. These gaps continue to have a ripple effect through local and regional economies.
3. When will we start trading down in our buying expectations and lifestyle? What are the implications of smaller homes, smaller cars, fewer, less-expensive durables on the nation’s GDP?
4. China, India and Brazil are growing. These are risky economies with prospects of bubbles.

Each of these worries are about structural, not cyclical issues. You can’t address structural challenges with tweaks around the margins.

Can we alter this course? The answer is yes. We’ve seen nations make these changes before. Twenty years ago, Brazil had a four-digit inflation rate and was World Bank basket case. Today, it’s a an agricultural superpower, a bio-economy leader and a buyer of US treasury debt.

Look at China 20 years ago, India 15 years ago and Korea 30 years ago.

In our post-Vietnam America, Ronald Reagan led us out with a vision of America’s expansiveness and destiny.

Our new Manifest Destiny will be different. Can we define the lifestyle, business model and economy of the post-consumerism industrialized nation? How do we find that nexus of change? Today, as we face malaise, if our leaders won’t lead, can we uncover this spirit ourselves and lead the way?

New sustainability investment report: Water and Wastewater

New sustainability investment report highlights issues with this depleting resource. We encourage readers to share comments and opinions on the report.

Continue Reading »

impact investing is about applying a new framework of fundamentals: “Take Action” conference shows how

georgette wong formed this conference, "Take Action!" 3 years ago to bring together investors that were trying to explore the notion of impact investing. the conference addresses the issues and myths surrounding "investing for triple bottom line results." this field lives with the baggage and legacy of its origins: the SRI funds of 30 years ...

Continue Reading »

the diamond’s law era

For most of our lives, we’ve been living in the economic era of Moore’s Law.  From 1950 to now, whole new industries have been created.  Software, integrated circuits, displays, the Internet, websites, digital video and digital audio–collectively these have generated trillions of dollars in wealth. Yet the very words we use to describe them were ...

Continue Reading »

turning the negawatt into marketable securities

Finally 30 years after Amory Lovins introduced the idea of the negawatt and the non-use based energy resource, we have the opportunity to execute that vision. For years we only had one model: the ESCO…which had limited adoption. Last year we saw the roll-out of one of the first next gen models: PACE.  This year we ...

Continue Reading »

the challenging next 12 months

The fed chair's econ outlook...slow, steady challenges This FEB/MAR/APRIL you could feel the optimism in the air.  Wall street activity & the dow “said” it was all looking good. The on-the-street reality is somewhat different:  stubborn un-employment, continued mixed picture in housing, caution in consumer spending, continued productivity + slack ...

Continue Reading »