Home » Posts tagged 'Outcomes'
Tag Archives: Outcomes
So Australia wants to become innovative. The Lucky Country wants to become the Smart Country. It wants to embrace disruptive innovation, face the future…
Dear Valued Readers, It has been a while since I’ve written, mostly because I have become busier working on business ideas so I haven’t had…
I have travelled to Asia many times. I have experienced the traditional elegance of Japan, the ferocious hordes of China, eaten yum cha in Hong…
The Victorian Auditor General’s Office (VAGO) has just tabled a report into the ‘Operational Effectiveness of the myki Ticketing System’. For those of you…
Sign up to the Barefoot Economist’s Newsletter
© Barefoot Economic Services
Last week, I attended the All-Energy Australia Conference because of my interest in renewable technologies and energy efficiency. A couple of speakers from the Clean Energy Finance Corporation (CEFC) were highlights for me. The CEFC is an Australian Government-owned financial corporation that was established to address financial impediments to private financing of renewable energy, energy efficiency and low emissions projects and emissions – i.e. it addresses a market failure in clean energy financing. It does this by developing innovative financial products and working with private financiers, principally aimed at reducing risk which in turns reduces the risk premium charged to clean energy projects and companies. Furthermore, it does so by actually generating a profit for the Australian Government; it provides loans and equity on a commercial basis and doesn’t provide grants. It seemed to me that basic model of the CEFC would be useful in catalysing private capital in other policy areas, such as reducing social disadvantage. This blog post will go through my thinking on how a ‘Social Impact Bank’ could work along CEFC lines.
You have probably been approached on the street to donate to a social or environmental cause by an enthusiastic spruiker. If you are like me, you are torn between two impulses: one to protect yourself from being ripped off, but the other to help. Because I can’t verify if my donation will actually make a difference, I usually don’t donate. This is an example of what economists call ‘asymmetric information’; the potential donor has little or no information on how their donation may help, whereas the charity organisation holds this information. Because of asymmetric information, people who may want to help do not help because they cannot verify (without incurring high costs) whether or not their donation had an impact. Social Impact Bonds (SIBs) are a way of overcoming this asymmetric information problem. (more…)