Have we 'stretched' social impact bonds too far? An empirical analysis of SIB design in practice
Have we 'stretched' social impact bonds too far? An empirical analysis of SIB design in practice
复制标题
我们是否把社会影响力“延伸”得太远了？
DOI：
10.1080/10967494.2022.2077867
复制
发表时间：
2022
影响因子：
2.6
通讯作者：
Economy C
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Economy C
当社会影响债券(SIB)模式在2010年首次引入时，关于这些项目如何改变公共服务提供的说法很多。本文考察了SIB项目是如何根据两个初衷进行设计的：(1)将公共服务提供的重点转移到实现影响力上；(2)将风险从政府转移到外部投资者。对美国和英国在2020年前启动的SIB项目(n = 114)进行了定性的内容分析，以绘制和分析SIB项目的设计如何在这些意图之间发生变化。我们发现，在实践中，SIB设计在几个重要方面偏离了模型的初衷：在英国，支付结果通常不受严格的验证方法的约束。在美国和英国，前期资本通常是独立的和有风险的，但风险缓解策略可能会限制预期向投资者转移风险。
When the social impact bond (SIB) model was first introduced in 2010, there were many claims about how these projects could transform public service delivery. This article investigates how SIB projects have been designed in relation to two original intentions: (1) shifting the focus of public service delivery to achieving impact and (2) transferring risk from the government to external investors. Qualitative content analysis of SIB projects launched until 2020 in the US and UK (n = 114) is used to plot and analyze how the design of SIB projects vary across these intentions. We find that SIB design in practice has deviated from the model’s original intent in several important ways: In the UK, payable outcomes are generally not subject to rigorous validation methods. In both the US and the UK, upfront capital is generally independent and at-risk, but risk mitigation strategies may limit the intended transfer of risk to investors.