Publications Database

Welcome to the new Schulich Peer-Reviewed Publication Database!

The database is currently in beta-testing and will be updated with more features as time goes on. In the meantime, stakeholders are free to explore our faculty’s numerous works. The left-hand panel affords the ability to search by the following:

  • Faculty Member’s Name;
  • Area of Expertise;
  • Whether the Publication is Open-Access (free for public download);
  • Journal Name; and
  • Date Range.

At present, the database covers publications from 2012 to 2020, but will extend further back in the future. In addition to listing publications, the database includes two types of impact metrics: Altmetrics and Plum. The database will be updated annually with most recent publications from our faculty.

If you have any questions or input, please don’t hesitate to get in touch.

 

Search Results

Kate Ruff, Pier-Luc Nappert, Cameron Graham (2023). "Impact Valuations in Social Finance: Emic and Polyvocal Stakeholder Accounts", Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 36(1), 295-322.

View Paper

Keywords
Abstract

Purpose

This paper aims to understand how social finance and impact measurement experts include stakeholders' voices in valuations of social and environmental impact.

Design/methodology/approach

The paper used the content analysis of an online discussion forum where experts discussed impact valuation approaches.

Findings

Many experts seek impact valuations that take into account the experiences of those whose lives are most affected. Ideally, these accounts need to be emic to (in the language of) those stakeholders, and polyvocal (representing many different stakeholders' voices). However, these experts also seek to effect systemic change by encouraging mainstream financial markets to use social and environmental valuations in their decision-making. These experts consider full plurality too complex to be useable by financial markets, so the experts argue in favor of etic valuations (stated in the language of investors), to appeal to mainstream finance, while endeavoring nonetheless to represent multiple stakeholders' voices. The authors identify two discursive strategies used to resolve this tension: effacing of differences between diverse stakeholders, and overstating the universality of money as a common language.

Social implications

The terms emic and polyvocal provide experts with nuanced ways to understand “stakeholder voice.” The authors hope these nuances inspire new insights and strategies and help the community with their goal of bridging to mainstream finance.

Originality/value

The paper presents a theoretical framework for describing plurality in impact valuations and examines the challenges of bridging from social finance, which seeks to give voice and representation to those whose lives are most affected, to mainstream finance.

Geobey, S., Westley, F. R., & Weber, O. (2012). "Enabling Social Innovation through Developmental Social Finance", Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 3(2), 151-165.

View Paper

Keywords
Abstract This paper explores social finance as a strategy for generating social innovations and, at the same time, financial returns. It explores why risk assessment for social finance is so challenging and suggests three sources of difficulty: setting boundaries, integrating heterogeneous values, and responding with sufficient speed and flexibility to support innovation. It suggests links between the seemingly distinct challenges of social finance being able to maximize its impact at different stages of the innovation process in a complex socio-ecological system, whilst also acting as a reframing agent in terms of the understanding of the system itself at other stages. Finally, this paper develops a new concept ‘developmental impact investing’ as a modified version of a portfolio strategy that uses a range of projects both to manage risk and to generate new knowledge about the complex systems in which the social finance attempts to create impact and innovation.