Learning From the Community: Effective Financial Management Practices in the Arts

Provides financial management practices identified from a survey of directors at leading arts organizations, in order to understand how their practices could be used across the arts sector. Includes a framework for developing self-assessment tools

Sustainability Debt: A Metaphor to Support Sustainability Design Decisions

Sustainability, the capacity to endure, is fundamental for the societies on our planet. Despite its increasing recognition in software engineering, it remains difficult to assess the delayed systemic effects of decisions taken in requirements engineering and systems design. To support this difficult task, this paper introduces the concept of sustainability debt. The metaphor helps in the discovery, documentation, and communication of sustainability issues in requirements engineering. We build on the existing metaphor of technical debt and extend it to four other dimensions of sustainability to help think about sustainability-aware software systems engineering. We highlight the meaning of debt in each dimension and the relationships between those dimensions. Finally, we discuss the use of the metaphor and explore how it can help us to design sustainability-aware software intensive systems

Building scale in community impact investing through nonfinancial performance measurement

The measurement of nonfinancial performance is becoming increasingly important in the community impact investing industry, where individuals and institutions actively deploy capital in low-income domestic markets for both financial and social returns. Quality data ensure that the creation of jobs, construction of community facilities, financing of affordable housing, and other benefits that characterize the sector are delivered cost-effectively and transparently. This paper discusses the limited practice and future direction of nonfinancial performance measurement by revisiting four key questions: ; 1. Does nonfinancial performance measurement really matter for investors? ; 2. If it does matter, is nonfinancial performance measurement even possible? ; 3. If nonfinancial performance is possible to measure, what form should it take? ; 4. How will nonfinancial performance measurement increase community impact investing? ; The paper examines the barriers to a more robust regime of nonfinancial performance measurement and posits both that innovation in the sector ought to be driven by the discrete but explicit needs and demands of investors, and that greater accountability has a special role to play in making disclosure more attractive. The report concludes that nonfinancial performance measurement directly informs the investment process and is essential to growing community impact investing because it provides latent sources of capital with market-level information on the tradeoffs between financial and social return. Although the industry is unlikely to discover the “silver bullet” of nonfinancial performance measurement in the near future, there is reason to be hopeful: measurement strategies can – and will – converge through private- and public-sector innovation.Community development

A Case Study on Effectively Identifying Technical Debt

Context: The technical debt (TD) concept describes a tradeoff between short-term and long-term goals in software development. While it is highly useful as a metaphor, it has utility beyond the facilitation of discussion, to inspire a useful set of methods and tools that support the identification, measurement, monitoring, management, and payment of TD. Objective: This study focuses on the identification of TD. We evaluate human elicitation of TD and compare it to automated identification. Method: We asked a development team to identify TD items in artifacts from a software project on which they were working. We provided the participants with a TD template and a short questionnaire. In addition, we also collected the output of three tools to automatically identify TD and compared it to the results of human elicitation. Results: There is little overlap between the TD reported by different developers, so aggregation, rather than consensus, is an appropriate way to combine TD reported by multiple developers. The tools used are especially useful for identifying defect debt but cannot help in identifying many other types of debt, so involving humans in the identification process is necessary. Conclusion: We have conducted a case study that focuses on the practical identification of TD, one area that could be facilitated by tools and techniques. It contributes to the TD landscape, which depicts an understanding of relationships between different types of debt and how they are best discovered

The Decentralized Water Market: Assessing and Overcoming the Hurdles to Scale in Kenya

International Financial Corporation and Safe Water Network undertook this assessment to identify options for attracting greater commercial investment in the water sector, in Kenya and elsewhere. This includes an examination of the policy environment and of the populations' ability to pay for water at prices necessary to fund private investment, as well as a review of existing models to determine which are scalable in this context

From Ideas to Practice, Pilots to Strategy: Practical Solutions and Actionable Insights on How to Do Impact Investing

This report is the second publication in the World Economic Forum's Mainstreaming Impact Investing Initiative. The report takes a deeper look at why and how asset owners began to include impact investing in their portfolios and continue to do so today, and how they overcame operational and cultural constraints affecting capital flow. Given that impact investing expertise is spread among dozens if not hundreds of practitioners and academics, the report is a curation of some -- but certainly not all -- of those leading voices. The 15 articles are meant to provide investors, intermediaries and policy-makers with actionable insights on how to incorporate impact investing into their work.The report's goals are to show how mainstream investors and intermediaries have overcome the challenges in the impact investment sector, and to democratize the insights and expertise for anyone and everyone interested in the field. Divided into four main sections, the report contains lessons learned from practitioner's experience, and showcases best practices, organizational structures and innovative instruments that asset owners, asset managers, financial institutions and impact investors have successfully implemented

The Evolution of Sociology of Software Architecture

The dialectical interplay of technology and sociological development goes back to the early days of human development, starting with stone tools and fire, and coming through the scientific and industrial revolutions; but it has never been as intense or as rapid as in the modern information age of software development and accelerating knowledge society (Mansell and Wehn, 1988; and Nico, 1994, p. 1602-1604). Software development causes social change, and social challenges demand software solutions. In turn, software solutions demand software application architecture. Software architecture (“SA”) (Fielding and Taylor, 2000) is a process for “defining a structural solution that meets all the technical and operations requirements...” (Microsoft, 2009, Chapter I). In the SA process, there is neither much emphasis on the sociological requirements of all social stakeholders nor on the society in w hich these stakeholders use, operate, group, manage, transact, dispute, and resolve social conflicts. For problems of society demanding sociological as well as software solutions, this study redefines software application architecture as “the process of defining a structured solution that meets all of the sociological , technical, and operational requirements…” This investigation aims to l ay the groundwork for, evolve, and develop an innovative and novel sub-branch of scientific study we name the “Sociology of Software Architecture” (hereinafter referred to as “SSA”). SSA is an interdisciplinary and comparative study integrating, synthesizing, and combining elements of the disciplines of sociology, sociology of technology, history of technology, sociology of knowledge society, epistemology, science methodology (philosophy of science), and software architecture. Sociology and technology have a strong, dynamic, and dialectical relationship and interplay, especially in software development. This thesis investigates and answers important and relevant questions, evolves and develops new scientific knowledge, proposes solutions, demonstrates and validates its benefits, shares its case studies and experiences, and advocates, promotes, and helps the future and further development of this novel method of science

Capital markets, CDFIs, and organizational credit risk

Can Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFIs) get unlimited amounts of low cost, unsecured, short- and long-term funding from the capital markets based on their organizational credit risk? Can they get pricing, flexibility, and procedural parity with for-profit corporations of equivalent credit risk? One of the key objectives of this book is to explain the reasons why the answer to the two questions above remains “no.” The other two key objectives are to show the inner workings of what has been done to date to overcome the obstacles so that we don’t have to retrace the same steps and recommend additional disciplines that position CDFIs to take advantage of the mechanisms of the capital markets once the markets stabilize

The Inclusive Growth and Development Report 2017

Around the globe, leaders of governments and other stakeholder institutions enter 2017 facing a set of difficult and increasingly urgent questions:With fiscal space limited, interest rates near zero, and demographic trends unfavorable in many countries, does the world economy face a protracted period of relatively low growth? Will macroeconomics and demography determine the world economy's destiny for the foreseeable future?Can rising in-country inequality be satisfactorily redressed within the prevailing liberal international economic order? Can those who argue that modern capitalist economies face inherent limitations in this regard – that their internal "income distribution system" is broken and likely beyond repair – be proven wrong?As technological disruption accelerates in the Fourth Industrial Revolution, how can societies organize themselves better to respond to the potential employment and other distributional effects? Are expanded transfer payments the only or primary solution, or can market mechanisms be developed to widen social participation in new forms of economic value-creation?These questions beg the more fundamental one of whether a secular correction is required in the existing economic growth model in order to counteract secular stagnation and dispersion (chronic low growth and rising inequality). Does the mental map of how policymakers conceptualize and enable national economic performance need to be redrawn? Is there a structural way, beyond the temporary monetary and fiscal measures of recent years, to cut the Gordian knot of slow growth and rising inequality, to turn the current vicious cycle of stagnation and dispersion into a virtuous one in which greater social inclusion and stronger and more sustainable growth reinforce each other?This is precisely what government, business, and other leaders from every region have been calling for. Over the past several years, a worldwide consensus has emerged on the need for a more inclusive growth and development model; however, this consensus is mainly directional. Inclusive growth remains more a discussion topic than an action agenda. This Report seeks to help countries and the wider international community practice inclusive growth and development by offering a new policy framework and corresponding set of policy and performance indicators for this purpose

The struggle to perform the political economy of creditworthiness: European Union governance of credit ratings through risk

Analysing the European Union's regulatory response in the wake of the credit and sovereign debt crises, this paper argues how its adoption of risk management as the core strategy for governing the credit ratings space may undermine European efforts to rebalance the growing asymmetry between private expertise and public democracy. While centralised oversight, enhanced transparency and restorative, technical intervention seem like sound regulatory initiatives, I problematise the methodologies, models and assumptions of sovereign ratings to show how the new ratings framework may actually impede the ability of the technocratic European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) to redress the most egregious deficiencies of ratings. Drawing on the performativity of market relations, the paper argues how ESMA's supervisory conflicts undermine the EU's capacity to perform an alternative political economy of limits. Neither is it democratically sanctioned to interfere in the analytical substance of ratings nor should it distort the social facticity of creditworthiness by relying primarily on quantitative risk analysis, ESMA will be forced to either repoliticise the ratings process or promote the status quo, which diminishes fiscal sovereignty