#You DO NOT want a collective of those people gaining corporate power in addition to political power

[bioswear]

simply put, you do NOT want men like Ron Shitstain DeSantis to think they have power that exceeds a megacorporation’s, especially not one of THE largest, most established, and powerful corporations in history

[digital-yuri-saga]

WALL•E and Unregulated Capitalism

So, we all know that the second half of WALL•E (Pixar, 2008) shows that apparently, in 700 years, the human race is all fat, “disabled” and “lazy”, right?

Except, the problem is, they didn’t get that way on their own.

WALL•E’s main message, in my mind, is that if left unchecked, capitalism will take away literally everything. And, you can see that: The Earth has been practically destroyed by pollution, and the human race has to live in a giant outer space cruise ship, confined to their reclining hover chairs and watching their holographic screens all day while they idly sip on their food, all Buy-N-Large(TM) brand.

What’s more - the tasks the humans would normally do, such as housekeeping, putting on makeup, teaching their babies everything they need to know to be able to Human properly, even piloting the damn ship - all of it is performed by robots who were made to take those tasks out of the humans’ hands.

But is that really it? No.

Part 1 - The First Half

At the beginning of the movie, we see WALL•E performing his programmed directive - to “clean up” the Earth by compacting all the trash on the ground into huge towers, and nothing else. There are dozens, if not hundreds of other WALL•E line robots who perform the same task, and they seem to be self-sufficient - they have their own shelter, they are solar-powered so they don’t have to rely on an outside source of energy, and they don’t seem to need anything else.

And then a dust storm happens and all of the robots are damaged except for one, the titular protagonist and the last of his kind.

The movie skips to 700 years later, at which point WALL•E seems to have gained some kind of individuality. He has plenty of spare parts to keep himself alive if needed, and more than that - He likes to collect things that the humans have left behind. He collects everything from twinkies to lighters to even VHS tapes, and he seems to love all of it - all the things that humans loved, that were left behind when they left Earth.

While we see WALL•E’s current daily life, we also get some context: The humans have left Earth as it is, and are now on a giant ship somewhere. This is revealed through an advertisement from Buy-N-Large, which was seemingly a prominent corporation in the world beforehand. They seem to have had control of everything, actually - we see an “Ultra-store”, gas station, and an unholy amount of other Buy-N-Large branded things, as well as enough advertisements to make the average person irate within seconds.

At some point, this company - who knows what they originally were - monopolized so much of everything that it had basically taken over what we see of Earth. Everything, everywhere was Buy-N-Large, and nothing else. There are even corporate-sponsored newspapers - promoting the propaganda they want regular people to hear.

We then get some blatant exposition in the form of an advertisement, fitting for the world as we see in the movie.

“Too much garbage in your face? There’s plenty of space out in space! BnL Starliners leaving each day, we’ll clean up the mess while you’re away.”

The mega-corporation was advertising vacations to the regular people, presumably also non-stop, in addition to the propaganda that the Earth was in trouble and everything sucked. Why not have a little escapism?

“The jewel of the BnL fleet - The Axiom! Spend your five-year cruise in style. Maided on 24-hours-a-day by our fully automated crew, while your captain and auto-pilot try to course for non-stop entertainment, fine dining…”

Here we get to see a glimpse of what humans looked like before they left - perfectly “normal”. There does seem to be some diversity in the people shown, too, though they are clearly actors who were likely cherry-picked and paid to promote this ship. I don’t see a single fat person in the ad, which is more likely implied to be because of the in-universe corporation choosing only the most conventionally attractive people to promote their product.

“…and with our all-access Hover Chairs, even grandma can join the fun! There’s no need to walk!”

Also, it seems that at least a small part of the intention of the hover chairs was to be a mobility aid for those who wouldn’t be able to get around a giant-ass cruise ship on foot. But, they weren’t just advertised to the elderly / disabled / people that needed them, they were advertised to everyone.

Everyone that could afford a “5-year” vacation on a giant cruise ship, anyway.

We don’t see what happens to those who may not be able to afford, or even get to, one of these ships. Presumably, they were left behind too. Would a giant capitalist regime let people on that couldn’t pay them? Doubtful.

After this, we see WALL•E discover the plant - a glimmer of hope. Something finally grew on Earth. And then, immediately after, a probe - presumably from BnL to try and find evidence that the Earth was sustainable for living - lands, carrying several EVE units, also presumably made by BnL. One of them is deployed from this ship, and she is activated and begins scanning her surroundings for life.

WALL•E follows this unit around and EVE pays him no mind, because he seemingly doesn’t have what she’s looking for. She is eventually frustrated with not being able to “complete her purpose” to the point of taking it out on her surroundings. The two finally exchange formalities, and once another dust storm passes by, WALL•E takes her back to shelter.

EVE seems to fall in love with all of WALL•E’s objects, just like he did, and then he shows her the plant. Detecting life, EVE’s programming overrides her free will and collects it as a sample, then forcibly shutting her down. WALL•E stays by her side the entire time until the ship comes back for her. He hitches a ride on the ship, not wanting her to be taken away forever, and it leaves for space with him, docking on the Axiom.

We see here that there is an immense amount of space junk orbiting Earth, and that BnL was even attempting to colonize the Moon.

After the EVEs are unloaded, we see some of the robot crew of the Axiom, who strictly conform to their directive. And, as soon as anyone steps out of line, police bots are summoned - and one of them sees the plant that EVE has found and takes her away.

Part 2 - The Second Half

After some robot hijinks, we see the state of humans 700+ years after they left Earth - All of them have become fat and seemingly unable to provide for themselves to a ridiculous extent. They are constantly bombarded by ads from the screens in front of them while the robots seemingly do everything else. Several generations have passed since the original humans boarded the ship. The robotic teachers are indoctrinating kids from a very young age about BnL - quote, “B is for Buy-n-Large, your very best friend.” The megacorp wants people to be dependent on them for everything - why else would they herd everyone into areas they have full control over?

Keep in mind that while these humans all seem to be fat and hover-chair bound - this seems to be enforced. As stated earlier, BnL wants people to be hopelessly dependent on them, because that’s how they stay in power.

WALL•E breaks one person’s immersion, and she looks around - she doesn’t immediately go back to what she’s looking at on the screen, and even helps WALL•E. She doesn’t go back to looking at her screen, either. She apparently didn’t even know the Axiom had a pool, even though she “could have” looked over and seen it at any time. That is how much control BnL had over these people’s lives.

EVE is brought directly to the cockpit of the ship, where the Auto-Pilot AI notices she has found a plant and wakes up the Captain. The Captain himself is victim to the same automation as everyone else. He simply goes through the motions, and then changes the time for everyone on the ship. After his morning announcements, in which another ad is shown, EVE is reactivated.

We then see the protocol for organic life being found - and a pre-recorded message from the then-current CEO of BnL. In this, he mentions that the microgravity of the ship could have caused some “slight bone loss”, an understatement, which leads me to wonder - Was the CEO telling the truth about the passengers’ state being due to the conditions outside the ship? Or was the complete immersion, to the point where the Captain of the ship remarks he didn’t know there was a jogging track, the real cause for their current state?

During a “why can’t I voice activate the book :(“ joke, WALL•E and EVE reunite, and EVE immediately rushes to hide him from the police bot and tries to warn him of something related. Hmm.

Once EVE is opened up, the plant seems to be gone somehow. EVE is deemed to be ‘defective’, and sent to the repair ward. This will be important later.

We then see the Captain analyze a sample of dirt that came from WALL•E, and out of curiosity, he then begins to look up topics related to Earth. Knowledge that he didn’t already have. Knowledge that Buy-N-Large did not educate him on, because they wanted him to be just as hopelessly dependent on them as the others.

We are then taken to the “repair ward” - where the “defective” robots go. Here we see robots with all sorts of erratic behavior, behavior that puts them out of line. When looking at these robots as if they were human, this can also be interpreted as stereotypical mental illness that this repair ward is trying to “cure”. WALL•E promptly causes a scene, accidentally freeing all of these robots, who parade him around and alert the attention of the police bots. The robots, meant to serve the passengers of the ship, are governed by their own police state.

WALL•E and EVE are framed as rebels, and they go down to the escape pod bay, where we can see a police robot deposit the plant necessary for the humans return to Earth into an escape pod so it isn’t found.

The police robots are programmed not only to enforce compliance on the robots, but to use deception to keep the humans as they are - hopelessly dependent on Buy-N-Large.

WALL•E goes after the pod, and is shot into space along with it. We then see that the pod is set for self-destruct, implying the robot’s intention was to destroy the plant. To kill any remaining hope that humans could return to Earth.

The plant is saved and WALL•E and EVE have some romantic moments in space, and we come back to the woman from earlier, who still has not turned her screen back on. She is still admiring the view of space from the giant windows as the others cruise by, immersed in their screens. She accidentally breaks another person’s immersion, the man from earlier, and they connect over seeing WALL•E outside.

We cut back to the cockpit, and the Captain is still doing research into everything he’s missed about Earth. The Auto-Pilot tries to get him to stop by setting the ship to “nighttime mode”, but he doesn’t listen and continues researching. He does not blindly follow the AI. The other two humans seem to rebel some, too, splashing pool water at each other with their feet, and then at a robot when it tells them not to.

WALL•E and EVE sneak back into the ship, and EVE tries to sneak through a trash chute back to the cockpit in order to deliver the plant. The Captain is overjoyed, but that turns to confusion and disappointment when he sees EVE’s memories of Earth. But, that doesn’t last very long, since he has that hope for a better Earth - the plant. They have to go back.

The Captain calls the Auto-Pilot down, who immediately tries to take back the plant, and when the Captain refuses to give the plant to it, it shows him a video - from the same Buy-N-Large CEO. And the CEO gives the message,

“…so, just stay the course. Um, rather than try and fix this problem, it’ll be easier for everyone to remain in space.”

”Rather than try and fix this problem, it’ll be easier for everyone to remain in space.”

Not that it would be impossible to solve.

It would be easier.

All of this - the programming the Auto-Pilot and police bots conformed to that led them to use deception to keep humans in space, the completely sedentary, fully immersed-in-ads states the humans were led into, the reason they have been up there for 700 years - all of it was because of the opinion of one man. One CEO. One CEO who decided that it was easier if humans never regained their autonomy, that it was easier if they never got back to a state where they could fend for themselves. He wanted this.

The Captain once again rebels against the AI from Buy-N-Large.

“I can’t just sit here and do nothing! That’s all I’ve ever done! That’s all everyone on this blasted ship has ever done! NOTHING!”

“I don’t WANT to survive! I want to live!”

The Captain - no, the humans don’t actually want this. And when they are given even a scrap of their agency back, by chance through WALL•E or otherwise - they want to do things their way. Not the way Buy-N-Large wants them to.

As soon as the Captain plainly denies the Auto-Pilot, it and the police bots still under Buy-N-Large’s will immediately go against the Captain. The plant is taken from his arms and thrown into the trash chute. And who manages to climb up the chute just then, but WALL•E. He tries to keep the Auto-Pilot from getting the plant, and the Auto-Pilot resorts to damaging another robot to get what “it” wants.

What Buy-N-Large wants.

Both of the robots are tossed down the trash chute, and the Auto-Pilot forcibly takes control of the ship.

But hope is not lost - WALL•E and EVE reawaken in the trash area, and they realize that WALL•E can be repaired if they get home. So, the two of them fly out of the trash area, going straight for the area where they will deposit the plant and turn the ship around.

The Auto-Pilot catches wind of this, and sends every police bot available after them. The Captain helps by hijacking the comms, telling WALL•E and EVE what to do. The “defective” robots from before help the two, and the Captain stages his own rebellion by causing a distraction. He manages to press the button to launch the return mode of the ship, and everybody’s immersion is broken at the same time. They are herded onto the same deck, and see reality for themselves - the Captain is struggling against his own robot. The Auto-Pilot ends up tilting the ship to get the Captain off of it, and because of this all of the humans fall out of their chairs and begin sliding helplessly downhill.

Mind you, these people have just been broken out of their entranced state induced by Buy-N-Large - likely for the first time. They may never have moved a muscle outside of changing what they were watching, or grabbing a cup - all because Buy-N-Large wanted it that way. They have all just been given their agency back for the first time. And, after the humans are almost killed by transportation vehicles because of the Auto-Pilot, and WALL•E ends up squashed in the plant deposition chamber because of the Auto-Pilot, the Captain stands up for himself.

Literally.

It may not be true for every single human on the ship, but they have always had the ability to stand up for themselves, literally and figuratively. Buy-N-Large - the mega-corporation - tried to snuff all of that autonomy out.

The Captain is able to walk - albeit with difficulty - over to the Auto-Pilot and turn it off, and the ship is turned back upright. Some of the other humans can be seen standing up too in this scene, so these specific humans may not have needed mobility aids - this is unclear. But, either way, they, along with everyone else, were forced into them, necessary or not, for Buy-N-Large’s purposes.

Together, everyone manages to pass the plant to EVE, who tosses it into the deposition chamber. The course is set for Earth, and the humans fall over again as the ship launches at hyper-speed towards its destination. The Axiom lands on Earth, and the humans step out onto its surface for the first time.

One notable thing I see in the background at this point - you can see one human walking with the help of a robot as a mobility aid. Despite their autonomy being returned, some of the humans may still need mobility aids, and that’s okay. That’s normal.

WALL•E is repaired, he and EVE have their happy ending, and, meanwhile, the humans set out to rebuild. The scene pans backwards to see the progress the humans have made - and a lot more plants. And then the movie ends.

The credits show more of this progress, with the humans making progress as the visuals “evolve”, seen with the evolution of art - likely not to imply that the humans were in a “devolved” state, but to emphasize just how much was being done - and, hopefully, the influence of Buy-N-Large is gone forever.

Part 3 - Afterword

Disney-Pixar’s WALL•E is not about how, if left to their own devices, humans will become lazy and ruin the planet.

WALL•E is about how, if left unregulated, capitalism will strip away the freedoms humans have outside of their interactions with their products, to the point where they are hopelessly dependent on them, because nothing else exists.

We don’t see very much of the more controversial parts of humanity in WALL•E - homelessness, real (not artificially induced) disability, the differing opinions of humans - because capitalism in that world has tried (and almost succeeded!) in stamping those out.

Sometimes, a narrative will not include everything that exists to tell itself.

I believe, for a movie made in 2008 (16 years ago, almost two decades at this point!), WALL•E makes a great point. That point is not about the hopelessness of humanity, but the dangers of capitalism.

Was it insensitive, in retrospect, to portray that by way of making all of humanity fat and “lazy”?

Yes, but they were never “lazy” in the first place. They were made that way through several hundred years of indoctrination by the corporation - the capito-fascist regime that had control over their very existence. As soon as they gained their autonomy back, they used it to stand up for themselves - taking the “hard way” out.

Does it demonize mobility aids through this? No. The hover-chairs used as mobility aids throughout the movie were partially intended to be mobility aids for those who needed it - Buy-N-Large abused those to give themselves another layer of control over the humans. We also see a human still using a mobility aid at the end of the movie, a walker, when everyone steps off the ship.

Would this movie hold up to 2024’s standards for fat representation? It definitely seems like this isn’t the case. But, the movie was made in 2008. It would be impossible to properly hold a film to standards that came into play after it was created.

TL;DR: WALL•E doesn’t think humans will end up lazy - but they may be subjected to capitalist fascism.

[fighter-paladin]

Rules of life I've learned from 2016-2024

-Keith Dwyer

1. Governments are run like reality shows. They create artifical drama to keep the populace interested and distracted from real issues. This doesn't mean your vote doesn't count and your voice isn't heard.

2. Capitalism is the root cause of the modern day's problems. It is run off the expectation that the general populace are both workers and consumers. It is an unstable government that functions only in the short run. In Capitalism there is no planning for the long run, the point is to collect as much money as you can while the rest of the populace burns.

2a. To do this, the ones above set the laws for the ones below. These laws are governed to keep the lower class barely scrapping the poverty line, but just high enough that they can keep being consumers. Effectively keeping us as financial batteries for the higher ups, but keeping the lower classes suffering enough so they can't rise up.

2b. Capitalism hates two things; competition and education. Education causes the lower masses to become intelligent and create competition. The oligarchical structure of Capitalism hates real competition, instead the powers that be create shell corporations to share with the other oligarchs. By keeping the masses uneducated, the powers that be manage to keep rebellion and competition to a bare minimum.

3. Captialistic practices are unsustainable because money is an addictive substance. Once a person gains it they want more of it, never stopping and never being full.

3a. Addiction is an exponential process.

3b. A money addict will never be satisfied with what they have. They will see their other rich colleagues and feel envy and rage that they aren't richer than them. Once a person reaches a certain level of wealth it becomes impossible for them to care about anything else.

3c. Addicts in active addiction do not care about anyone but themselves and how to get their hands on their substance of choice. In a money addict's case this means exploiting workers, causing them to die on the factory floor, burning down rainforests and destroying the world to their own end. To an addict in active addiction none of this matters so long as they pull ahead.

3d. Addicts are manipulative and good at convincing people to join their side. Capitalistic societies applaud psychopaths and those with anti social personality disorders. That's why so many psychopaths and narcissists go into the business field. Because their lack of caring, compassion and empathy means that they will do whatever it takes to gain money, which in turn, causes active addiction to take hold and causes the individual to spiral further down.

4. People have power. For better or worse. The people will always have the power above the powers that be.

4a. People are fools. They will follow whoever uses the buzzwords that make them feel safe and secure. This is how the conservative base has been able to use trigger words like "freedom" or "the American way" or "the good old days" to turn their followers into a cult.

4b. This tactic can be reversed for the sake of good. Learn the enemy's buzzwords and use them to educate the masses in a language they'll understand.

4c. The enemy is corruption. The enemy are those that seek to keep anyone who is not like them in bondage and suffering. They attack these people because it is easier to control a frightened populace.

4d.  Machiavelli was wrong. It is not better to be feared than loved if you can not do both. Fear breeds resentment and rage, these ideas transcend generations. A son will feel his father's rage in addition to his own. Once enough people feel their own rage added with their ancestors rage over being oppressed that's when and why riots start. Riots are the voice of those who have been quiet too long.

4e. Unfortunately, this idea can also be reversed. The enemy can use riots for their own ends, though these riots are born from fear, not rage. Fear of the unknown, and fear of change. But mostly, fear of losing their power (read: the populace is convinced by the powers that be that they are losing their power when in reality it is just the tyrant they are following that is losing their power).

4f. Do not be content to follow another's lead. It is better to stand alone than be surrounded by those who would feed you to the wolves. In this same vein do not look for followers, look for those with the potential to lead in them.

4g. Do not lead from the back, lead from the front. Take charge and take responsibility for your actions.

5. Suffering is part of human nature. However, it is often exasperated by outside forces that are beyond your control. Sickness, politics, wars, everyday inconveniences. When times of suffering come around, remember that all life is temporary. If the goods are temporary, so are the bads.

5a. There is a concept called the Wheel of Fortune which states that every person rotates their fortunes in life. One moment you are at the top of the wheel and life is kind, the next you are at the bottom and life is suffering. This rarely is due to a person's interference, but instead by outside forces.

5b. Prepare. Prepare to be on the bottom of the wheel. Save a portion of whatever value you can whenever you can. Even the smallest amount will help you in the long run.

6. The game we are forced to play isn't fair, because the lower class were never taught the rules for our station in life.

6a. In financial matters, the government will always try to take as much money as they can from you. Do your own research, 9/10 there are programs set up to truly help the lower class but they are not advertised or they are buried beneath advertisements for the same service for a much higher price.

6b. Welfare programs and free programs that benefit the people are always demonized because they do not contribute to the bottom line. Use them anyway.

6c. You pay for the brand. Buy generic, it's better and cheaper because they don't upcharge for the brand name.

7. Human beings are animals, learning to become Gods. You will never be the person you've fantasized about being. Once you accept this, you will become the person you were always meant to be. When we strive for perfection, we will often find ourselves subject to the persuasive arguments of the enemy. Kill your pride. Kill your arrogance. Once you do this, you separate yourself from the animals.

7a. Be kind, but don't feel the need to be nice. Kindness is acting for others, supporting and caring for the people around you. Being nice is being concerned with how you are perceived. Kindness is genuine. Niceness is self serving.

7b. You can only hope to break free from human's animalistic nature but giving up your pride. Giving up your hubris and arrogance. Understand that the world is bigger than your backyard, and that those who think differently from you are not lesser because of it. Artifical concepts such as race, gender, sexuality, political parties, etc are ways to divide the mind. They occupy our thoughts with meaningless chatter so that we can not expand our thinking. The only way to become more than an animal is to open one's mind to the world around them.

7c. Lose your paranoia but be smart. Listen to your instincts and listen to the world around you. Do not assume malice with everyone you meet but be prepared in case malice comes around.

7d. Be in touch with your body. To the best of your ability, try and live healthy and well. Mind you, I say to the best of your ability. There are cases where "living healthy and well" may simply mean getting out of bed for physical, mental or emotional reasons. But make sure to get out of bed then. Do not give into the dark cloud life brings around, it will keep storming if you are laying in bed or not.

7e. Know context. Understand that life is not about you, it is about all of us as a whole. If someone speaks, and it does not concern you, do not speak over them. If you disagree with how a statement is worded but understand what the speaker is trying to say, do not call the speaker out or try and get them to speak with your tongue. Not every voice at the table must be heard. Sometimes you're just there to listen and learn.

8. Religion is optional. Faith is essential.

8a. Religions are made to explain the faith of a culture. They are meant to be guidelines on how to have faith but, like money, power is also an addiction. Power is intoxicating, and often leads to delusion. Any and ALL religious leaders who claim to be God in the flesh are delusional and not to be trusted.

8b. Any and ALL religions that place any group of people over another group of people are not to be trusted.

8c. God, faith, whatever you may call it, does not want your money. Any and ALL religions that claim otherwise or claim to be collecting "for God" are not to be trusted.

8d. Faith is to religion what kindness is to being nice. Faith is the backbone of life, and it is how we survive. In a secular way, it is an acceptable delusion to have. A belief in something greater than ourselves. A way for us to see past our own noses and engage in the wider world. Faith is greater than religion, and religion without faith is how tyrants rise to power.

8e. Faith does not need to be in a God or spirit, but it does have to guide you forward. A spark of hope which can never truly burn out. All people are given the chance to have faith, for many it is taught through the religion they grew up with, however faith also comes from killing one's own pride and arrogance.

8f. Pride and faith can not co-exist with each other. Pride tells you that you are the greatest thing to walk the Earth, while faith tells you that you are part of something greater than yourself. These ideas conflict too much to accept both. Of the two, accept faith. For its the truth. No person is greater than another, but there are people who are lesser than the collective they find themselves in.

8g. Those who claim to be God or to be God's vocal point, those who harm others for their personal gain, those who use one of the Lord's many names to profit off lost souls, those who claim absolutes and absolute dominion over their flock. These are the ones who are lesser than the collective. The ones who twist God's words to their own ends and their own wants and whims. Those who allow their pride to guide their path, those who claim to be superior over their fellow human beings without looking at their own flaws.

8h. These are the corrupted, they have lost themselves to their own vices and pride. Pity them for they have suffered and so resort to becoming this way. But don't feel sorry for them for every person makes their choice, every person has their own decisions to make. Any person who does not take ownership over their own sins, their own flaws and the pain they have caused others, is truly a coward. Learn from their mistakes, so that you can become a better person.

9. The meaning of life is to learn. To grow and mature and to pass those lessons onto the next generation. To live only for oneself is to spit in the face of humanity's evolution. We are social creatures, we function together as units. Those who purposely harm others, and those who are apathic to the suffering of others are little more than beasts.

9a. Every generation believes themselves superior to the generation that came prior. To some small extent this is true, the evolutionary point of humanity is to mature after all.

9b. A generation must be cognizant of their defects and flaws as well as their strengths. Understand that you will make amazing advancements never seen before, but you will also make grave errors that the generations after you must fix. This is the wheel of fortune summed up.

9c. To the generations after mine I say this. Be wise. I pray that you be wise, and learn from the ones before you. I pray that the suffering you must endure is lesser than the suffering my generations are enduring now.

9d. To the generations before me I say this. Thank you. Thank you to the ones who came before me who I've learned from. Thank you to the ones who came before me who fought the same battle I'm talking about now. Thank you to the ones who are no longer here, because they live on through me and the lessons they taught me. Thank you to the ones who are still here, who continue to teach me every day. I pray that the suffering you went through is worth it, and I thank you for your sacrifices.

10. Apathy is how a people die. Do not wait for change to happen. Make change happen. With each crashing wave of; bad news, end of the world predictions, pandemics, pain, war, death, and so on, stand tall. Those waves won't stop coming but the second you lay down you will be toppled over.

Apathy is the weapon of the enemy. They use it so that good people, strong people, feel useless. Feel worthless. Feel hopeless. Hope is always there. Hope is faith. So cling to hope, fight for today and tomorrow and remember the sacrifices of yesterday that have led you here.

Abandon your pride. Abandon your hatred and your malice and embrace change. Embrace what's next to come, embrace the unknown. What we face now are the screams of a dying paradigm. What happens when this is all over? We rebuild, we restructure and we create something better than what we had before. But we can't do that if we buy into the apathy of the enemy. And we can't do that if we give into our own vice, our own pride and wrath. Know when to take a stand and when to stand down but most of all.

Know to be kind. Know to care for those around you, know to love and love deeply. Love the world around you. Shine bright with a burning love for humanity that burns away the shackles of apathy and hatred. It's the most revolutionary thing a person can do in today's world.

[thelordofdarkreunion]

Magnificent Scoundrels- Seat of the Citadel

One last faction intro story, in which Shepard finally tells the Council what every Mass Effect player has ever wanted to tell them.  Unless someone specifically requests otherwise, or it is needed later, I won’t have any more “faction intros” as I’ve been writing them.  Next up is the meeting of the different governments.  As usual, I own none of these characters.  Enjoy the story.  

(A note on timelines: This takes place slightly more than halfway through the events of Mass Effect 2)

Mass Effect Galaxy

The Citadel, Capital of the Citadel Council

 The Citadel.  The beating heart of galactic power.  A glimmering jewel of elegance and culture.  An utterly massive 45 kilometer long space station, constructed by the long-extinct and highly advanced Prothean race, it was the capital of the aptly named Citadel Council, the galaxy spanning federation that ruled most of explored space.  

Discovered by the Asari in the human year 580 B.C.E., it had since remained the center of galactic power.  Open, airy, and utterly magnificent, it was a menagerie of elegant futuristic-style architecture and open water features.  Its beauty was unmatched by any other place in the galaxy; not the often conflicting human architecture of Earth, nor the sweeping elegance of Thessia, nor the simplistic, yet sturdy nature of the Turian or Salarian homeworlds.  Truly, it was a place unlike any other.  

Commander John Shepard sat in an elaborate waiting room at the base of the Citadel Tower, the large structure that housed the chambers of the Council itself.  Above was an artificial sky of brilliant blue.  Blossoming cherry trees were dotted around the large room in large pots, their blossoms adding to the Beautiful fountains trickled slowly, the sound of running water meant to calm and soothe visitors.  Shepard was anything but calm.  In fact, he was, to put it rather mildly, pissed off. 

The Council had done absolutely nothing in the two years while he had been dead.  He warned them of the coming of the genocidal synthetic race known as the Reapers, but, no, they apparently preferred the illusion of safety and calm instead of shoring up defenses and preparing for a war that was almost certainly coming.  Goddamn bureaucrats.  

Now, it was even worse.  There were nine new galaxies out there, and all of them had it together.  He shuddered as he remembered reading the briefings and documents provided by his various new colleagues.  Council will probably want to ignore that, too.  Goddamn bureaucrats, he repeated to himself.  And what did the Council do?  Invited them all over as if they were all newly discovered species.  As if they were peoples who newly discovered space flight, expected to be cowed by the might of the Council, instead of pan-galactic empires.   

Goddamn bureaucrats.

“John.  God to see you.”  Shepard looked up sharply as someone called his name.  He visibly relaxed when he saw who it was.  

Captain, now Councillor, David Anderson walked towards Shepard, a smile on his face.  Dark skin, a flat nose, and short cut hair highlighted an elegant but simple suit; the clothing of a Councillor.  Anderson was Shepard’s mentor, old captain, and still older friend.  Still more, he was the only of four Councillors that Shepard fully trusted.  

“It’s good to see you too, Anderson,” said Shepard, rising from his seat to shake his hand.  Anderson made a ‘follow me’ gesture, and the two started to walk through the extensive lobby.

“The information you sent me was quite helpful,” remarked Anderson.  Shepard rubbed the back of his neck, a nervous tick he’d picked up from somewhere.

“Ah.  Yes.  Well, my new colleagues are a bit… bizarre,” Wasn’t that the understatement of the century?  Really weird and slightly insane would probably be better.  “But, they are quite helpful.”  Especially if you want something very, very dead.  Anderson nodded in response.

“I’m sure.”  He glanced around the room, noting several Salarians hovering near a doorway.  “But the walls here have ears.  All part of the political game,” he sighed.  “Let’s take this conversation to my office.”  Shepard couldn’t agree more. 

Anderson’s office was, again, simple yet elegant, as a Councillor’s office should be.  Smooth walls and a large window, overlooking the Presidium, highlighted a maple desk.  Sitting on top of the desk, next to endless reports, was a single picture of Anderson wearing dress blues on his naval graduation day.  Anderson slid into the chair (with wheels, of course; humans in this galaxy weren't savages) and gestured for Shepard to take a seat opposite him.  

“Some of this data is, to put it bluntly, quite concerning,” opened Anderson without preamble.  He touched a button on his desk, and a hologram sprang to life, displaying three symbols: a blue triangle with a minimalized rocket taking off on it, a black and white six-spoked circle, and a double-headed golden eagle.  Of course we’d start with those three.  “These three in particular.  Tell me about them.”  He glanced at a data pad.  “The, uh, Interstellar Manufacturing Corporation, who sound a lot like if the Alliance was ruled by Cerberus, and the Galactic Empire and Imperium of Man, who,” this was accompanied by a slightly incredulous chuckle, “Sound like some nightmare governments from a bad movie.”  Shepard rubbed the back of his neck again.

“...yeah.  Sure.  I… how should I even start,” he rubbed his neck again, “The IMC is what you think would happen if a super-corporation gained enough power to rule humanity, the Galactic Empire took power after a Galactic Republic kinda lost a horrible war.” He still wasn’t 100% sure about the politics from that particular galaxy.  He shrugged, then continued.  “But, uh, both of those governments are on the decline.  Their opposite, more freedom-loving numbers have recently beat them back.  It’s the third one that’s the problem.”  Anderson shot him a look that clearly said ‘explain’.  “You see… well, how should I put this…” He frowned as he considered what to say.  “The Imperium of Man makes Terra Firma look violently pro-alien.”  Terra Firma was the System Alliance's resident human supremacist group.  Often compared to the Nazis of old, they were uncouth, brutal, and, above all, close minded.  Anderson’s eyebrows shot up at this comment.  Shepard rubbed his neck once more.  “Yeah.  No slurs or racial barbs for these guys.”  Shepard leaned in closer to Anderson to get his point across.  “One of their mottos is, and I quote, ‘Suffer not the alien to live’.”  Anderson cradled his head in his arms.  

“Oh, God.  And we invited them to the upcoming first contact talks.”  

“Yep!” replied Shepard with slightly more relish than was actually necessary.  It would be a real shame if xenocidal zealots murdered the Council (maybe), but perhaps it would be a good thing if they shook things up a little.  Certainly, if Cain was anything to go by, they weren’t all bad.  

“How are the other three going to react to all of this?” moaned Anderson, head still in his arms.

“Not quite sure,” replied Shepard, “Although, this time, it’s all politics, so the illustrious Commander Shepard isn’t going to be able to save their collective asses, like I’ve done the last five or six times.”  His face took on a pensive look.  “Although, maybe this will actually get them to listen about the Reapers…”  Anderson and Shepard’s thoughts were broken by a blue-skinned Asari, who politely knocked.

“Excuse me, Councillor Anderson.  The Council is ready to see Commander Shepard,” said the Asari.  Anderson sighed and slowly shook his head.  

“Well, duty calls.  This ought to be interesting.”

The Council chambers were much like the rest of the Citadel: utterly beautiful with a simple and refined elegance.  Too bad such a wonderful room was squandered on the walking wastes of oxygen that were the Council.  At least, that was Shepard’s opinion.  He didn’t have much liking for politicians, and most definitely had no liking for these three in particular.  He looked up at the podium where the Councillors stood.  At least they bothered to meet in person this time.  

There were three Councillors, excluding Anderson, each from a different species.  The Asari, a graceful, elegant monogendered race of blue-skinned women, the Salarians, a short lived but extremely intelligent race of amphibians, and the Turians, a militaristic race descended from avians.  Humanity was the most recent addition to the Council, a move that many seem to resent, but thanks to Commander John Shepard saving the Citadel and the Council it housed, a move that no one could oppose.  

“Commander Shepard,” began Sparatus, the Turian Councillor.  “While we appreciate being given information about these new galaxies,” this was inflicted by a measure of sarcasm, “Some of this seems quite hard to believe.”  ‘Just like the Reapers’ remained unsaid, but everyone was thinking it.  Shepard sighed inwardly.  It’s going to be one of these meetings.  

“Yes.  You went off on your own, chasing some message, and just sent this data back.  Explain yourself,” said Tevos, the Asari Councillor.  Anderson looked like he was about to intervene on Shepard’s behalf, but was interrupted.  

“Some of this seems highly unlikely.  First you come up with Reapers, a race of immortal sentient machines hell-bent on killing us all, now this!” intoned Valern, the Salarian Councillor.  Shepard struggled to keep a straight face.  

Calm down! said one part of his mind.  Explain to them what’s happening out there!  Tell them what you’ve seen.  Getting angry will get you nowhere.

Or will it? asked another part.  They didn’t listen about the Reapers, despite being attacked by one, they didn’t listen about your involvement with Cerberus, preferring to label you a terrorist.  They haven’t listened to you about anything.  Maybe anger will help you!  Besides, continued to voice, it's not like you couldn’t find similar employment elsewhere.  The Scoundrels trust you more than these idiots ever have.  I’m sure there are plenty of people who would pay top dollar for someone like you.   

“You know what?  I’m sick of this bullshit,” said Shepard.  “I am goddamn sick and tired of this bullshit.  You can believe whatever you want to believe, despite evidence to the contrary.  I have never lied to you.  I saved your lives.  I saved the Citadel.  I died for you!” he thundered.  The Councillors seemed rather taken aback.  “Yes, still, you don’t heed my warnings!  You don’t follow my advice, even though I have not once lied to any of you.  You sit, on your comfy chairs, trying to keep a peace that will most definitely be shattered.  You do nothing because it is simply more convenient to ignore reality,” he hissed, words dripping with venom.  Spartacus bristled.

“How dare you-”  Shepard whirled around to face him.

“Shut.  The fuck up, Sparatus.”  The calm in Shepard’s voice was deadly.  The Councilors blanched.  No one’s ever talked to them like that before, I’d guess.  He would have laughed if he wasn’t in mid-rant.  “Apparently, what I gave you was good enough to invite all of these governments over for peace talks.  All of them.  You also apparently trusted myself and my new colleagues enough to give them these invitations, instead of contacting these governments directly.”  Which was probably a wise move, in the long run, considering some of the reactions would have been ‘piss off and die’ if the invitations weren’t hand delivered by galaxy wide heroes.  Were they invitations?  Or… treaties?  What was a document inviting someone to a peace talk called?  Shepard shook himself out of his tangent and continued.

“Also, it seems you trust eight unknown people more than you trust the Spectre who has never lied, saved your lives, and died for you.  Have I missed anything?” he spun around to the room, arms outstretched theatrically.  

“Fine then, Shepard,” said Valern.  “You are dismissed.  Apparently,” he threw the word back in Shperad’s face, “Our top intelligence gatherer isn’t loyal to us anymore.  Other Spectres or the STG can take care of finding out what we need to know.”  Tevos and Sparatus looked apprehensive at their colleagues's dismissal.  While they might have been bureaucrats, they knew Shepard was one of the best Spectres and intelligence agents they had.  Shepard gave a laugh; a full throated hearty laugh.

“Oh, yeah.  Have fun with that.  Have fucking fun with that.  Have fucking fun sending the STG or some lone-wolf Spectre against people who have entire armies of super-soldiers at their disposal and who can legally destroy planets*.  Have fucking fun.”  He sneered.  “This is now the intelligence game you’re playing.  You aren’t in complete control anymore.”  Shepard crossed his arms and looked up at the Council.  “So, only one question remains: do you want my help or not?  ‘Cause if you don’t, there isn’t much point in me staying, is there?”  There it was: the ultimatum was out.  Would they back down and realize that Shepard was their best shot, or would they allow their emotions to get in the way?  Honestly, it could probably go either way.  Spartacus shot a look at Anderson.  Anderson replied with a ‘hey, not my problem’ stare.  Tevos cleared her throat.

“It seems we have been remiss, Spectre Shepard.”  Shepard let out a breath he had been silently holding.  While he would have made good on his threat, this was his home galaxy, and he wasn’t particularly sure he wanted to be working for someone like Crossgrow or the Inquisition.  “As you are the only one who has had contact with these people, please give us your opinion on how we should handle this situation.”  Shepard was sure it had probably physically hurt the Council to say that.  He dismissed the thought and returned to his duty.

“First thing first: you have to present a united front.  You can’t disagree with each other.  Second, all of the species’ representatives should be here.”  Before anyone could make an objection, he continued.  “All of them.  Definitely the client races.”  The Council had four races as members, but many more that were under their jurisdiction and not full members.  Many of those races were trying (and, for the most part, failing) to get a seat on the Council itself.  It wouldn’t do if the more open minded government, such as the Federation or GA, came to the Citadel, then saw the Council treating other races as less than equals.  “Even some of the other races who aren’t officially part of the Council, if you think you can control them.”  Shepard paced the floor.

“In addition, you should probably beef up the Citadel fleet.  Send in more ships.  Turian, Asari, Alliance, I don’t care.  We need as much security as possible, and some of these governments will be impressed by shows of force.”  

“Yes… we shall think about this,” replied Tevos.  “Your input will be helpful.  Please stay on the station during the talks.”  Shepard nodded, then came to a realization.  Oh, hell.  The first meeting of all of these governments is only slightly more than a week away.  This was going to be interesting.  Or deadly.  One of the two.  

*ONI can call on Spartans, ISB has Death troopers, and the Inquisition has the Grey Knights and the Deathwatch.  In addition, ISB helped to create the Death Star and has sway over Imperial Navy battlegroups, enough to bombard a planet into uninhabitable-ness, and the Inquisition can enact Exterminatus.  Shepard and the rest of the Scoundrels would know about all of this, except for the Grey Knights.

[is6621]

Have you ever been the target of an online attack? Matt Genirs

This was very much a rhetorical question. I am confident the answer for every single person reading this is yes. We have all been the target of a potential cyber threat by virtue of using email, visiting certain websites, clicking on bad ads, andmuch more. We are constantly under this threat and potential danger, and all the companies we know and love (or hate) today are absolutely no different. There is nothing we or every company in the world can do to prevent it. With all of the technological developments and progress going on around us, don’t think for a second that hackers aren’t doing everything they can to keep up.

           The key to this harsh reality is the word prevent. While companies cannot prevent these attacks, they can certainly prepare for them and defend against them. But the only way they can accomplish this is by paying for it. According to Gartner, cybersecurity spending is forecasted to grow by about 9% a year through 2024, which would have it closing in on the 200 billion dollar industry mark. Even though many companies have already heavily invested into their cybersecurity defenses, threats are always evolving. This is especially dangerous for companies that are just recently becoming increasingly more digital, meaning they need to invest in both the tech they want to improve their business and the security measures they will need to protect it. This stems from adopting technological strategies and innovations like increasing their reliance on cloud networks, creating and installing new Internet of Things products, and new applications and uses of artificial intelligence. But yet not all companies understand how important this security aspect is, especially when adopting new tech. In a survey of cybersecurity professionals by Isaca, only 58% of respondents anticipated an increase in their organizations cybersecurity budget in the next 12 months. While this number may be skewed down due to financial difficulties that COVID has created, it is still disheartening that such a large percentage don’t see the need to continue to innovate their cybersecurity defenses. I believe companies have to recognize how seriously they must take their security, as if they don’t there could be massive consequences. For example, just a mere two weeks ago, a woman in Germany died because of a cybersecurity hack at a hospital. As she was rushed into the hospital for emergency treatment, she was turned away and directed to another hospital 20 miles away because all of their technology was compromised and unusable. She died as a result. While this is a rare occurrence, it should warn companies of the significance of protecting their networks.

With the rise of COVID, the investments and developments of many companies’ cloud networks have been accelerated, especially as more employees need easy access to these corporate networks from home. Gartner reports that spending on these cloud based network systems is forecasted to increase by 30% a year. And as more companies expand their cloud based networks, the more security they will need. Yet it can be tempting for companies to cut corners as the cloud can be difficult to defend and secure due to the different configurations and programs that cloud based service companies use. As a result, companies need to approach multiple different cybersecurity vendors that specialize in different tasks and protecting different assets and entry points, which can quickly add up. Moreover these companies’ movement to and expansion of cloud based networks means they need to start thinking about how their security needs are changing and keep up with adding these needed measures. One popular security strategy many are starting to employ is the idea of the zero-trust principle. This means that every user and device on a certain network must be rigorously authenticated every time they log on. For example, many companies have begun to use is adaptive multifactor authentication to ensure that only authorized users enter the network. Even Boston College has adopted this system; we are required to pass two forms of authentication before doing important and sensitive things like viewing our tuition bill.

Companies are also beginning to focus on their security measures around their developing AI and IoT products. The IoT products present a particular risk as each subsequent link to the network, regardless of what the technology may be or how it is used, can represent an access point for hackers to gain access to the companies’ entire network as a whole. And in many cases, companies are only just getting started with their entrance into the IoT industry. Moreover, many of these companies have long term goals of creating massive IoT systems that largely run on AI. For example, Covanta, a New Jersey based company that has more than 40 industrial plants worldwide which burn trash and convert it into electricity, have long term dreams of operating entirely digitally. They want to develop a stable of network connectable devices that can autonomously operate and monitor each plant in addition to collecting and analyzing the data from their operations of each one. This too would require an expansive cloud based network that would again require a number of different security vendors to protect each aspect.

What do I think of all of this? To say the least, I am very, very scared. I think companies need to understand that security is just as, if not more important than, the networks they build and data they collect. In my opinion, this is especially true for IoT products. As I outlined earlier, most of these IoT products are brand new forms of technology, many of which will not have sufficient security systems. As a result, they could end up being extremely easy for hackers to break into, giving them access to powerful companies’ networks and data and putting all of our info that we provide them at risk for theft. But as IoT develops, there can be even more direct dangers as these IoT products become more significant and applicable to the daily consumers’ lives. Thinking back to the hospital example I mentioned earlier, what if the creation of hospital equipment IoT products could be hacked into? No doubt this would put tons of people’s lives in severe danger without control over their equipment needed for treatment or surgery. Taking this another step, what about when autonomous cars are mainstream on the road? These will certainly be IoT products, and if hacked could see owners lose entire control of their cars and put their lives at the mercy of those who hacked into them. While these may be far reaching and seem impossible now, we must remember the speed at which these technologies are developing. I would much rather companies spend the extra money now to ensure the new tech they employ is safely and securely protected, rather than wait until something catastrophic happens to take action.

[alexsmitposts]

Conservative Americans Now Labeled “Domestic Terrorists” The long-awaited transition of power finally occurred in the United States on January 20, 2021 when Joe Biden and Kamala Harris were sworn in as president and vice president. Two weeks before on January 6, a large number of Donald Trump’s supporters rallied in Washington DC to protest what they believed to be a stolen election by the Democrats. A small fraction of the demonstrators were let into (or broke into) the Capitol Building and staged a riot which was eventually ended by security forces with a small number of casualties. It is clear that the media and political reactions and the possible long-term effects on freedom of speech are more interesting than the riot itself. Speaking with Geoff Young, a US antiwar activist who ran for the Kentucky House of Representatives in 2012, and several times for the US House of Representatives, and Governor of Kentucky in 2015 and 2019, some additional insight can be added. He hasn’t won any elections yet, but he has discovered in campaigning how corrupt the Democratic and Republican Parties are when it comes to vote rigging. He currently has active lawsuits against both the Kentucky “Democratic” Party (KDP) and the Republican Party of Kentucky (RPK). Mr. Young, what is going on here? One just has to carefully evaluate the media, not only MSM. It’s easy to notice that the framing of the “domestic terrorism” issue is being promoted by public television and radio stations as well as the usual mainstream media corporations, most of which are openly biased in favor of the Democrat Party. As Glenn Greenwald wrote in a January 19, 2021 article called, “The New Domestic War on Terror Is Coming,” “The more honest proponents of this new domestic War on Terror are explicitly admitting that they want to model it on the first one. A New York Times reporter noted on Monday that a “former intelligence official on PBS NewsHour” said “that the US should think about a ‘9/11 Commission’ for domestic extremism and consider applying some of the lessons from the fight against al-Qaeda here at home.” Are they suggesting that the CIA should fire missiles from drones at members of the Proud Boys and Antifa without any kind of legal due process? Greenwald went on to note that “former Facebook security official Alex Stamos” emphasized “the need for social media companies to use the same tactics against US citizens that they used to remove ISIS (banned in Russia) from the internet — in collaboration with law enforcement — and that those tactics should be directly aimed at what he calls extremist ‘conservative influencers’.” Glenn Greenwald: “Meanwhile, Congressman Adam Schiff (D-CA) — not just one of the most dishonest members of Congress but also one of the most militaristic and authoritarian — has had a bill proposed since 2019 to simply amend the existing foreign anti-terrorism bill to allow the US Government to invoke exactly the same powers at home against ‘domestic terrorists’.” In a recent airing of Frontline: American Reckoning – A PBS NewsHour Special Report, the narrator said within the first 30 seconds of the show: “Provoking a mob of his supporters, President Trump upended a long tradition of peacefully transferring power.” That anti-Trump framing continued throughout the entire 57-minute broadcast. Do you buy this narrative? There’s no real evidence that Trump ever incited his supporters to break into the Capitol, however, and quite a bit of evidence that he urged them to remain peaceful, nonviolent and loud. If that is the case, then the Democrats’ second impeachment of Donald Trump was as constitutionally and legally unsound as the first one. Both impeachments were exercises in pure partisan politics designed to benefit the fortunes of the Democrat Establishment and damage Trump and the GOP as much as possible. With social media and government agencies working in tandem to restrict foreign and domestic news, and to label journalists who are not toeing the US line as foreign agents, the First Amendment is under attack. President Biden has not expressed any interest in dropping all charges against Julian Assange. Was this a false flag? It is not at all clear who turned the loud, outdoor demonstration on January 6, 2021 into a riot in the Capitol Building. It could have been the Trump supporters, but it could also have been the Capitol Police, other anti-Trump security forces, international experts in color revolutions such as George Soros, the Trump-hating FBI, the Trump-hating CIA, or the DNC. If anti-Trump organizations were the ones who got the large rally to turn violent, the riot would have been a coup against Donald Trump as an individual, not against the American republic. One is reminded of what happened in 1933 – the burning of the German Reichstag. When the German parliamentary building went up in flames, Hitler harnessed the incident to seize power – and that means gaining control of the media and cracking down with laws “to protect society,” and the Constitutional Order (“Ordnung” in German). For this reason, it is not only appropriate but necessary to revisit history, because whenever citizens and politicians feel threatened by executive overreach, the Reichstag Fire is referred to as a cautionary tale. Young concludes, “It seems likely that the Democrats are using the January 6 riot as an excuse to impose something like martial law on the American people and to stifle all criticism of the incoming Democrat administration (or regime).” Analysis and Commentary It is doubtful that any expected FBI investigation into the causes of the riot will ever incriminate the FBI or crisis actors but the very talk may be used to invoke some kind of crackdown on those who “take exception” with the new government and its policies and methods. It should be noted that the PBS broadcast also examined the impact of President Donald Trump’s rhetoric throughout his presidency and the government’s missed opportunities to manage the spread of misinformation and the rise of domestic terrorism. These are valid issues to be discussed; however, all who supported Trump cannot be labeled as fringe groups, totally disgruntled or domestic terrorists. As Time Magazine so accurately describes, “Rolling back those freedoms has served in other countries as a prelude to authoritarianism, and it is easy enough to imagine a future US President deciding to label his opponents terrorists before stripping them of their fundamental rights.” It is an overreaction to be calling for a domestic war on terrorism. Nonetheless, it is easy to collectively take words and actions of Trump’s supporters, even when they renounce the results of a [supposedly] free and fair election and label such discontents as being against the Constitution or legal order. However, let us not forget the double standard, and how former President Trump attempted “to designate Antifa, a loose band of left-wing radicals, as a terrorist organization, a move that civil liberties groups successfully resisted. The larger purpose, however, appears to paint all those groups in the wake of the storming of the Whitehouse on any group which supported Trump, and label all those who will not recant their support as potential domestic terrorists or conspiracy theorists. Even PBS admits there have been double standards in how such breaches of government building are addressed. It would be nice to believe that freedom of speech will continue to mean that people are free to engage in certain forms of protected speech, including criticizing the government and politicians, without control or reprisal by the government, provided they don’t call for direct violence or overthrow. However, that may be short lived, and now Senator Dick Durbin, an Illinois Democrat, plans to reintroduce the Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act, which passed the House last fall but went nowhere in the Senate. Its purpose is to authorize dedicated domestic terrorism offices within the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation to analyze and monitor domestic terrorist activity and require the Federal Government to take steps to prevent domestic terrorism. Biden is keeping to the script, by stating soon thereafter, “don’t dare call them protesters. They were a riotous mob, insurrectionists, {they were] domestic terrorists: It’s that basic. It’s that simple.” However, it is not that simple, in light of the emotions running high in the US. These words may come back to haunt him and his administration, as a self-fulfilling prophesy. And now Biden is just as guilty as Trump for dividing an already divided people, with his own fiery rhetoric: “No one can tell me that if it had been a group of Black Lives Matter protesting, they wouldn’t have been treated very, very differently from the mob of thugs that stormed the Capitol,” the president-elect said The timing and choice of wording is most inopportune and inappropriate, as much of what the US has accused other nations of doing, controlling media, and its people, is fast becoming a US production. In fact it is as if Biden is borrowing pages from Trump own play book. This does not come at at good time, with social media and government agencies working in tandem in restricting foreign news and domestic news, and labeling journalists who are not toeing-the-US line as foreign agents. There have even been instances of where native born US citizens have been sanctioned by the US Treasury Department simply for writing articles and publishing them on Russian media sites. All the while, the plurality of the US media is at its lowest point ever, controlled, manipulated, bought and paid for. There is no longer a fine line between news and blatant propaganda. Being labeled as part of a group that really believes that the US election result was tainted now may put you on a list for a visit from Homeland Security or some anti-terrorist organization. There was no Trump Era! He was merely a papier-mâché cut out puppet, and who out of his bottomless narcissism reined over the corporate media news and talk shows with his Mad Hatter Tweets, using the same Twitter that mobilized the Arab Spring masses to screw up their countries too, a pre-test before fanning it out on a declining ready for figuratively beheading much of the US domestic population over their political preferences. The post Trump period is being compared on PBS to post Civil War, “incitement of insurrection,” and “how US President Grant realized how the KKK was an essential threat to everything that had been achieved by that bloody war, and various commentators claim that that is what the Federal Government is now facing. Those who stormed the White House are described (43:00) as “white nationalists, and there is a need to aggressively pursue and root out this cancerous menace of white nationalism and the “kind of” white extremist militias that are really a functionally revanchist movement in American Society.” All things considered, and the swing of the pendulum, things will not get better with Biden anytime soon, maybe even worse, because the ruling elite in their “close knit societies,” have it all mapped out in detail. It appears as some of the Capitol guards let the fed agent provocateurs, and if some of the crisis actors just waltz right in … and keep in mind that the Reichtag Fire was not engineered by the guards circling and within the Reichtag. There are too many unanswered questions, just look at the US Congress, most of the powerful have been in office for over 50 years, and never leave office, and the newbies, especially in the Democrat party, are former military or CIA trained or Intel Democrats, young and frisky. It is a threatening time (even more than during Trump), and that era is fading; however, it seems America may be in for some rough times with the crackdown on civil liberties because of COVID and the NEW domestic terrorist label. Protecting the American people from themselves is the NEW doublespeak.

[mostlysignssomeportents]

#5yrsago Aaron Swartz was no criminal

Dan Purcell, one of Swartz' lawyers, writes about the spiteful and unreasonable charges that led to his suicide—and MIT's gutless support of his prosecutors.

I am a lawyer in San Francisco with a firm called Keker & Van Nest. I was one of Aaron's lawyers in his criminal case, in 2012 and early 2013.

I didn’t know Aaron that well, and our interactions were always colored by the fact that he didn’t really want to be talking to me. I was a criminal defense lawyer after all, and the only reason we knew each other was because he was facing a federal criminal indictment under the CFAA (Computer Fraud and Abuse Act) for computer fraud.

Those of you who knew Aaron don't need me to tell you what kind of person he was. Brian Knappenberger's excellent movie, "The Internet's Own Boy," will tell you more about Aaron than I could. But one thing Aaron was not was a criminal, and I'm here to clear up a few misconceptions you may have about what he did and what he was charged with.

One thing that drives me crazy is when people refer to his criminal case as a case about "hacking." And they do it in sort of a pejorative, scary way. And it's just nonsense. Aaron was, of course, a hacker in the broad sense of the term: he was an innovative thinker, looking for creative ways around problems. But in the criminal sense of the word, as somebody who breaks into a secure computer system for nefarious purposes, Aaron was no hacker, and he didn't do anything like that.

One thing that Aaron strongly believed was that the advances, the discoveries and the secrets we’ve collectively unlocked over the past millennia, about how the world works, belong to all of us. Aaron greatly resented people or entities who try to lock up scientific knowledge and keep it away from general use, so they might monetize it for personal gain.

You might be surprised at how much money is being made in this world by entities that follow just that business model. They take things that are in the public domain, and take them out of the public domain, and then charge for access to them. One field where this happens a lot is academic publishing. Obviously, there is so much information in so many books that it’s not practical to just have physical copies of them all. Digitizing all that data is an easy solution, and indeed there are many places to look up scholarly content online. But when you go to try to do that, you'll generally find that there's a subscription fee, or you can't access them unless you are affiliated with a certain institution. They're in the public domain—meaning that everyone is entitled to read it—but they’re not actually public or available for public use.

This bothered Aaron. It bothered him a lot. And he had fought against this problem throughout his life. He wanted to teach the system a lesson. So, he went to MIT, a university that had, and still has, one of the most permissive computer networks in the world—certainly for an institution of that size. At the time he did what he did, in 2010-2011, anyone in the world could walk onto MIT’s campus. With or without a student ID. With or without any affiliation with MIT at all. They could log on to MIT’s system as a guest. They didn't have to use their real name. And then they could do whatever they wanted on MIT's system.

One thing that MIT made available to its users was access to JSTOR, an online database of scholarly materials. So anybody in the world could go to MITs campus, they could get on to JSTOR, and they could download articles from JSTOR. Anyone.

That’s what Aaron did.

He went to the MIT campus, like anyone could have done. He logged onto the system, like anyone could have done. He went on to JSTOR, like anyone could have done. And he downloaded articles.

That is not hacking. That is walking through a door that MIT, the owner of the door, deliberately left open for anyone to walk through.

Of course, the story's not exactly that simple, because Aaron didn’t want to take the time to manually download thousands of articles, which would have been impractical. He wrote what experts have confirmed was a fairly simple computer program to automate the downloading. So he left his laptop behind, and he went on his way. He downloaded the files, but he didn't steal anything; he used the access freely given at MIT. All the articles that he downloaded stayed in the JSTOR database. They were still available to anybody with access to JSTOR. If you have a JSTOR subscription, and you go to the database, they are still there today. He didn't deprive anybody of access to that material.

After a while, JSTOR noticed the downloading activity and JSTOR shut down access to their database from MIT’s network. For a few days, nobody could get onto JSTOR using the MIT network. That was an inconvenience, for sure, but it was temporary, and MIT’s access to JSTOR was soon restored.

What Aaron did, whether you call it a prank or a consciousness-raising exercise, was not a crime. He downloaded a bunch of articles he was permitted to access using an automated program that made it easier. The idea that anybody could think that was a crime was insane to me. Was it inconsiderate? Possibly. Many acts of civil disobedience and conscious-raising are, and I think Aaron probably would have pleaded guilty to that.

JSTOR was the ostensible victim here, but JSTOR made it clear from the start that they didn't see this as a Federal case. They didn't want Aaron to be prosecuted; they just basically wanted it to be over.

So, why all the fuss? Why did this terrible thing happen?

The first reason is prosecutorial discretion. The prosecutor was Steve Heymann, the head of the Computer Crimes division of the United States Attorney’s office in Boston. You’ll hear a little from him, and a little about him, in Brian’s movie, but I have nothing good to say about him. You might ask, like I did, what Aaron’s actions had to do with “computer crimes.” Aaron hadn’t broken into a secure network and stolen credit card numbers. He hadn't stolen anyone's healthcare data. He hadn't violated anyone's privacy. He hadn't caused anybody to lose any money. There are things that are "computer crimes" that we all recognize are invasive and dangerous, and this was not one of them.

But Steve Heymann did what bureaucrats and functionaries often choose to do. He wanted make a big case to justify his existence and justify his budget. The casualties be damned.

Unfortunately, he had a lot of weapons on his side, in addition to having the power of the Federal Government. He had the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, which is an over broad federal statute that has been made more broad by federal prosecutors trying to stretch its terms. But under the indictment in Aaron's case, the government still had to prove that Aaron had gained unauthorized access to a computer system. Our defense was really pretty simple. There were going to be other nuances, and we were going to talk a lot about Aaron’s motivations and the type of person Aaron was, but our bottom line was going to be that Aaron had done only what MIT permitted him to do. He hadn't gained unauthorized access to anything. He had gained access to JSTOR with full authorization from MIT. Just like anyone in the jury pool, anyone reading Boing Boing, or anyone in the country could have done.

We hoped that the jury would understand that and would acquit Aaron, and it quickly became obvious to us that there really wasn't going to be opportunity to resolve the case short of trial because Steve Heymann was unreasonable.

Of course, after Aaron's passing, it's really easy for them to say "35 years. That was a bluff. It was never gonna happen." That was not what they were telling us. Heymann always insisted on a sentence of hard time in Federal Prison. We said, "this is really a very trivial thing. Can't we resolve it with probation or some other thing that made a little more sense and would make it possible for Aaron to go on with his life?”

He said "no." He insisted that Aaron plead to a felony and serve prison time. And of course, what he said, as prosecutors often do, is that if we go to trial, it won't be so easy, and if we lose, well, this is a tough judge, and the prosecution is going to recommend a very difficult sentence. Aaron may end up having a term of years.

These after-the-fact statements they're making in the media, to try to make them seem more reasonable? That's all they are.

It really goes to show you how much power prosecutors wield in our Federal system. They dictate the charges that are brought. They dictate how serious the sentence will be, because the sentence depends on how the crime is charged, and there are sentencing guidelines that limit the judge’s discretion. And if a prosecutor has bad judgment, as Steve Heymann did—blowing out of all proporition a harmless effort to point out a problem with how public-domain information is being locked up—there isn't a lot you can do about that other than fight, and the consequences can be terrible.

The second reason for this terrible outcome is MIT.

As a defense attorney, I never expect the prosecutors to do the right thing, but I did expect MIT to do the right thing. JSTOR, as I said, came out and said "We don't want to see Aaron prosecuted. We consider the matter closed." MIT never did that. MIT carries a lot of water in Boston. I don't know if they could have stopped Heymann from prosecuting Aaron, but they could have done a lot more than they did.

MIT is an institution that was known for creativity, for hacking, for pranks, for pushing the boundaries—and for showing that good can come out of it. In this case, they responded like a typical corporation. They were entirely gutless. They were supplicants to the government, and they did whatever they could to help the government's case. They were not cooperative with us. A lot of people in the MIT community are furious with MIT, and I think they have good reason to be.

There's no question that Aaron paid a price because of who he was, because he was in the habit of sticking his thumb in the eye of the government, of challenging things, and of challenging certain things that were happening that weren't fair. He was an activist, and he wasn't afraid to ruffle a few feathers.

We'll see what the FOIA requests come to. I don't think there were orders from on high to hurt Aaron, and that Steven Heymann was just the arm of the law. But there's no question in our society, those that go along, get along better, and Aaron wasn't willing to go along, much to his credit.

In the end, the whole thing makes me very sad. It is sad for all of us that Aaron is no longer with us. Sad for his family and friends, most of all. I’m sad I didn’t have the chance to try to help him, and walk him out of the courtroom a free man. We could have done that, and it was certainly what he deserved. But I'm glad to honor Aaron's memory, and to think about what we can do for our own sakes, and our country’s sake.

Photo: Wikipedia

https://boingboing.net/2014/11/18/aaron-swartz-was-no-criminal.html

[tradestockalerts240-blog]

Best Stocks to Invest Now for Beginners in Stock Market Trading

The first step in successful stock market investing is to Understand the stock market. This is a very crucial step in your investing journey. If you begin investing in the stock market with a thorough or at least a good comprehension of the stock market itself; you may suffer losses in the beginning. These initial losses may discourage you lifelong from job stock market investments. So, it is highly important that you begin your journey being fully ready.

A stock market is basically a market to buy and sell Stocks of those companies. It refers collectively to all of the stock exchanges, where the issuing and trading of stocks take place. The stock trading could be performed on the proper exchange platform or in an over-the-counter market. Stock market is also referred to as the equity market. The stock market provides a company with a mechanism to acquire capital from investors instead of a partial or fractional ownership.

The stock market has two main components viz. primary market and secondary market. The new issues of the stocks are sold in the primary market by the company going public. The subsequent buying and selling of the stock, after it has been listed and sold by the company, takes place in the secondary sector.

Stock Exchanges Today:

Stock exchanges have been established in all major financial Centers and cities across the world such as New York, London, Hong Kong, Singapore, Tokyo, etc..

New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) and the NASDAQ will be the two  Largest stock exchanges in america. NYSE was founded in 1792. NYSE is the biggest stock exchange in the world in terms of market capitalization.

Stock Market Risks:

There are a number of dangers associated with stock market investing. The volatility of the stock prices is among the most significant risks associated with investing in stocks. The rise and decline in the price of a stock even by 20 percent every day, isn't a matter of surprise.

Sometimes, There's a widespread decline or fall in the Prices of almost all of the stocks. This situation is known as a stock market crash and is very painful to the stockholders. In the event of a stock exchange crash, the investors may not find any buyers for many of the stocks they hold.

Regulators of the Stock Markets:

The governments of various countries have established Regulators to track the actions of the stock exchanges with an aim to protect investors.

In America, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is The main regulator that tracks the U.S. stock markets. The SEC outlines that its job is to protect investors, maintain fair, orderly, and efficient markets, and facilitate capital formation."

Stock Market Functionaries and Players:

The stock exchange has a number of functionaries and players. They are stockbrokers, traders, portfolio managers, stock analysts, and investment bankers. They have different roles to play but are interrelated.

Stockbrokers buy and sell securities on behalf of the investors. Portfolio managers look after and manage the investments or stocks for their clients. Stock analysts study on the stocks and rate them for buying and selling. Investment bankers work for the businesses for their IPOs, mergers, and acquisitions, etc..

Best Stocks to Invest In

One of the more powerful methods of investing in stocks is investing in mutual funds. Mutual funds invest in stocks as well, howeverthey pool the investible funds of a large number of investors, and then invest that collective pool of funds on the individual stocks. If there is any reduction in one particular stock; it is spread over a high number of investors and consequently, the reduction to a single investor is quite bearable. This is simply because of the large magnitude of the total funds. Therein resides the beauty of investing in stocks through mutual funds.

The benefit of diversification, which is not available to a  Small investor in pure stock investing, becomes available to the smallest individual investor thanks to mutual funds. The mutual fund companies, also known as asset management businesses, employ professionally qualified and experienced persons to manage the investments. Their expertise and professional approach to stock investing functions the tiny investors very well, thus, mutual funds are an effective, efficient, and less risky way to invest in the stocks. However, mutual funds are not a totally risk-free way of investing. Mutual funds also include various fees and expenses. The investor must bear them ultimately.

Benefits of Mutual Funds:

· Diversification: Mutual funds have well-diversified portfolios. They have a high number of stocks of numerous companies across many industries. This helps them in bearing the risk due to a sudden or big loss caused by a specific stock or industry. By spreading the investments throughout the spectrum of shares, companies, or industries, you can protect your investments at the days of wide swings or market fluctuations. Mutual funds are a real life application of an age-old maxim"Do not put all your eggs in one basket".

· Variety: The mutual funds, particularly the large and well established mutual funds, have an enormous amount of money for investing and this means that they are able to invest in an array of assets and asset classes. For example, some mutual funds may invest in a mix of big caps and mid caps. The large caps provide stability to the portfolio; while mid caps offer the growth potential.

· Affordability: If investors want to build a well-diversified portfolio, they will require a huge amount to invest. But, a small investor may also invest in a well diversified portfolio via a mutual fund by investing in an amount money that's affordable.

· Dividend: You can get some regular income through the dividend declared and distributed by the mutual fund.

· Liquidity: You may also redeem your mutual fund portfolio at the net asset value (NAV).

· Professional Expertise: Mutual funds are managed by people who have a lot of financial expertise and experience. This makes it easier for you to reap the benefits of smart investments.

Benefits of Mutual Funds:

· Costs: You have to bear ultimately all of the expenses, fees, and fees related to the operations of the mutual fund or the asset management company. This reduces the value of your mutual fund portfolio or the net asset value (NAV) in addition to the returns. You must bear these costs even if the performance of the mutual fund is negative i.e. you have made losses with the decline in the entire value of your mutual fund portfolio.

· Risk of Loss: You have all of the risks related to inventory investing when you invest in a mutual fund. You may lose a part or all your money in a mutual fund investment in case of market volatility.

· Performance: Even though the mutual funds have a past performance and track record, it does not be certain that the future operation would be outstanding.

· Limited Potential: When markets are on the move with higher growth in selected stocks or businesses, you may not gain full profit potential of investing in these specific stocks or industries. This is because your investments have a diversified mutual fund.

· Lack of Guarantee: The mutual fund investments aren't guaranteed by the government or by any other government agency such as the guarantee you have for your deposits in the bank in many nations e.g. guarantee of Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) in the united states.

You can decide on whether to invest your money in mutual Funds after considering the advantages and drawback of the mutual funds in your individual case, taking into account your investment objectives, size of portfolio, risk appetite, etc..

Best Stocks to Buy Now

There are various types of mutual funds in which you can invest. Mutual funds have three main categories viz. stock funds or equity funds, bond funds, and money market funds. Each category of the mutual funds has its own unique attributes, returns, and risks. Higher the return potential, the greater is the chance of loss.

There are some limitations imposed on the mutual fund with Respect to where and how much it can invest in the different types of assets or stocks based on its category. However, these rules vary from country to country. In some countries, there are rules that call for a mutual fund to invest at least 80% assets in the type of investments belonging to its declared category. You can have an idea of the exact type of investments in the mutual fund prospectus.

Money Market Mutual Funds: These are funds that invest in short-term Investments or securities issued by the government, or top-level creditworthy corporates. They are less volatile when compared with the other types of mutual funds. But, they have low yields too. The yields usually move in tandem with the short-term interest prices. They offer a fantastic alternative to keeping your money in cash in a bank account, as they offer you high liquidity and you can take out your money very quickly.

Bond Mutual Funds: These are funds That invest in the bonds issued by the government and companies. They have higher risks as compared to the money market funds, but less danger as compared to the stock or equity funds. Most of the bond funds focus on higher yields. The bond fund's earnings after expenses are known as bond yield, which mainly depends upon bond quality and maturity.

These funds mainly face credit risk i.e. the danger that the counterparty viz. Bond issuing authorities entity or the company may fail to pay the coupon/interest or the principal amount. The credit risk depends on credit the quality of the bonds contained in the fund portfolio. These funds also face interest rate risk and usually, the market value of the bond funds goes down when interest rates rise, particularly in case of longer term-bonds. Usually, the lower the quality or the longer the maturity of bond; the higher is the yield and risk.

Stock or Equity Mutual Funds: These funds invest in the shares of various companies. They have higher risks as compared to money market or bond funds. They also have high volatility. But, the stock or equity mutual funds have performed better than other investments over the long term historically.

These funds mainly face the market risk The prices of stocks may fluctuate considerably. The costs may fluctuate due to many reasons, e.g. changes in the overall economy, industry level happenings, individual company or stock level developments related to sales, input costs, management, etc..

Stock or Equity Mutual Funds is a broad degree category and include many sub-categories of mutual funds in it, such as:

· Growth Funds: focus on stocks with high growth potential.

· Income Funds: concentrate on stocks paying regular dividends.

· Sector Funds: focus on a particular industry or sector e.g. IT, telecom, etc..

· Index Funds: focus on a portfolio of shares replicating an Index to accomplish the same yield, e.g. S&P 500.

· Balanced Funds: focus on a portfolio with an optimum combination of both the stocks and bonds.

Buying and Selling of Mutual Funds

You may buy the shares of mutual funds in a number of ways. The Most frequent way is either buying from the fund itself or buying via a financial advisor.

The Purchase Price for mutual fund stocks is usually calculated on the basis of the per stock net asset value (NAV) of the mutual fund. Based on a mutual fund, there may be a stockholder fee imposed at the time of buying such as sales load. The NAV of a mutual fund is calculated at the end of the particular business day by dividing the total value of the holdings of the mutual fund after deduction of expenses, by the total number of stocks owned by the mutual fund. Buyers of mutual funds buy in the NAV calculated after they place the buying order.

The shares of mutual funds are redeemable i.e. the investor can sell the stocks back to the mutual fund at any point in time.

All said and done, mutual fund investing is a great and Amazing way to invest in the stocks. There are a number of mutual funds with wide-ranging characteristics, different types of portfolios, and investment philosophies. You may choose the one which best fits your individual needs and circumstances concerning return objectives, risk tolerance, liquidity needs, etc..

It will give you a good opportunity to learn about inventory  Investing if you continuously track the performance of your mutual fund portfolio and the way it moves with the overall stock markets in addition to with the peer group of mutual funds.

Thus, you will start recognizing a pattern of price movements From the stocks with relation to the economic environment, the performance of the industries and businesses, earnings, results of organizations, etc.. After a while, when you become well versed with these stock investment related things, you may decide to take a dip into the broad ocean of stock investing on your own; and come out with flying colors.

https://tradestockalerts.com/best-stocks-to-invest-in

https://tradestockalerts.com/best-stocks-to-buy-now

[batallanr123-blog]

Energy, curiosity and urgent questions on the AVPN agenda

20 minute read

This text was initially featured on Alliance Magazine here.

The 2019 AVPN conference in Singapore put its cards firmly on the table from the begin.

The main target can be on massive themes: schooling, gender equality, hunger and malnutrition, and climate change – most of all on climate change. From the first session, speaker after speaker reminded us that we solely have 15 years through which to scale back greenhouse fuel emissions before the effects of local weather change turn out to be irreversible.

Amy Khor, Singapore’s Minister for Surroundings and Water Assets

And Asia is at the sharp end. The struggle to combat climate change shall be gained and lost there, stated Maria Athena Ballesteros, of the Growald Household Fund. Amy Khor, Singapore’s Minister for Surroundings and Water Assets, noted that the country had declared 2018 an official yr of climate motion. Rising sea ranges and rising temperatures (the island state is heating up twice as shortly as the rest of the world, she stated) posed a menace to its future. It’s investing in solar power and expanding its public transport community so that eight out of each 10 Singaporeans can be inside strolling distance of a railway station. But, she stated, the authorities could not do it alone. It needed the help of both enterprise and civil society. Fung Wing-ah of BRACE Hong Kong defined that the funding firm had now aligned its whole portfolio on local weather change mitigation and, like Minister Khor, also careworn that the efforts of one sector alone wouldn’t be enough. Enter another key conference theme: all of the issues beneath discussion will require partnerships that contain not just cash but joint motion.

Later in the conference, Christine Heenan of the Rockefeller Foundation additionally touched on both of those in a keynote speech. The challenge is not to find options to local weather change, she argued. These exist already. The problem is to deliver them to scale. That’s the place partnerships come into play, partnerships based on mutual respect, complementary strengths and synergy.

Words to deeds The convention also marked the launch of AVPN’s local weather motion platform. Naina Batra, AVPN chair and CEO, signalled the want for a deeper and extra lively dedication which was evident all by means of proceedings. The platform, she stated, will probably be greater than a bit of symbolism, a board which all members have been invited to signal as an earnest of their solidarity, it should attempt to attach all the sectors, offering funding opportunities and information. However, she added, to achieve success, ‘it needs your engagement’. She spoke of the power of networks, which not solely deliver individuals collectively (her welcoming remarks have been addressed to 1348 delegates from 48 nations, itself a token of the formidable convening power of AVPN), they convey campaigns together and they bridge divides. However convening is just not enough. We have to catalyse and allow action. We need to cooperate, to behave urgently, whereas not dropping endurance and we have to make change irresistible.

Eileen Rockefeller Growald of the Growald Family Fund (GFF) struck a constructive word: ‘we can and are finding climate solutions together,’ she insisted. GFF is seeding social enterprises and innovators and collaborating with them and with funders to further climate options. The obstacles, nevertheless, remain formidable.  Know-how must be delivered to bear more shortly, stated Dan Choon of Cycle Group. Know-how transfer presently takes too lengthy – historically, 45-60 years to get to 20 per cent market penetration. We have to transfer a lot quicker. In the similar session, Britt Groosman of the Environmental Defense Fund spoke of the difficulties of shifting finance in the direction of measures to combat climate change. The subsequent-best factor, she stated, is to induce sectors who produce large-scale emissions, like aviation and delivery to think about carbon pricing, indeed there are indicators that they are doing so. Geoffrey Seeto of New Forests Asia endorsed this from his personal expertise. A variety of airways, one among which is Indigo in India, have agreed to offset their carbon emissions from 2020 and they see funding forestry from the proceeds of pricing carbon as part of doing that. Nevertheless, while funding carbon sequestration at scale is a confirmed technique of local weather change mitigation, only three per cent of local weather finance presently goes into it.

Ideas for attracting finance for local weather solutions brainstormed amongst all members in the session ranged from coaching grassroots installers of solar panels, debt aid for governments funding clean power and banks cooperating to offer concessionary ESG bonds.

Breaking boundaries Along with what we have to do, there’s the additional question of the place we’ll get the assets to do it. AVPN COO, Kevin Teo reminded the viewers that, if the SDGs are to be achieved, an estimated $2.5 trillion per yr will probably be needed (he was not the just one to cite this figure over the coming days). Giant buyers, subsequently, will need to make giant investments with proportionally huge influence and the convention title, Breaking Boundaries, signalled the need to attract those buyers – public and personal – into the social and environmental sphere. How to do this shaped one other strand linking convention proceedings. For its half. AVPN has been actively working with buyers in each these sectors, making an attempt to hyperlink personal influence or would-be impression buyers with social businesses on the one aspect and continuing to press forward with the APx coverage discussion board on the different.

Why don’t donors, especially corporate donors, let communities define their own needs quite than simply giving them what they, the donors, have?

James Chen, Founder of Clearly.

In his quest to ‘privatise failure and socialise success’ James Chen referred to as on philanthropists to train their much-touted capability for danger. ‘If you are serious about impact,’ he stated, ‘high risk is where the real returns occur.’ He provided Gates Basis’s work with malaria as a mannequin of catalytic philanthropy and an example of how ‘perseverance and domain expertise’ might have great influence. His personal organisation, Clearly, which aims to deliver low-cost imaginative and prescient correction to poor communities round the world, had overcome initial objections from funders, amongst them the World Financial institution, that there was no proof for the impact of imaginative and prescient correction programmes and no model of the intervention in low-income nations, by providing each in the form of Vision for a Nation, a programme run collectively with the authorities of Rwanda, and a serious research in the Lancet. Each, he stated, had helped to de-risk investment in sight correction.

Suitability and sustainability How are you going to construct a philanthropic culture when the word ‘philanthropy’ is barely understood, or has connotations of charity and patronage because it does in both Myanmar and Indonesia? The questions have been asked in a breakout session on unlocking native philanthropic funding in South-East Asia. In a spot like Myanmar the place investment and philanthropy are both discovering their ft, individuals have to build good companies, not just give away cash from successful ones, argued Aung Htun of Myanmar Investments. Ruel Maranan of the Ayala Foundation (Philippines) agreed, noting that the younger era is extra aware of the concept of social impression, so change is on the method. A more direct means of encouraging giving, believes Victor Hartono of the Djarum Basis in Indonesia, is for governments to offer tax incentives, a problem to which Veronica Colondam of YCAB Foundation in Indonesia would return later in the conference. The restrictive surroundings for philanthropy in that nation has meant, amongst different things, that YCAB took longer to find a suitable technique and type for its operation, since there are not any endowments.

Ertharin Cousin, Energy of Vitamin.

Inevitably, there was a lot speak of sustainability over the three and half days of the convention. It was Ruel Maranan who matched it with the notion of suitability. Why don’t donors, especially corporate donors, let communities define their own wants quite than simply giving them what they, the donors, have? It makes for larger engagement: ‘they [communities] are already involved and open,’ and if all stakeholders are concerned, all of them win, he argued. The theme of suitability also arose in discussion of the question of influence. Victor Hartono urged donors to assume ‘what’s applicable for you’ as well as for beneficiaries. Djarum, which has pioneered a form of vocational faculty that the authorities is now copying, crops timber as part of its local weather change mitigation efforts. It’s inside reach whereas funding in a more refined carbon seize know-how will not be.

The themes of collaboration and ‘feet on the ground’ have been additionally in proof in the session. Hartono spoke of the importance of ‘staying local. You are there, your people are there.’

The malnourished and the hungry 81.7 million youngsters in Asia endure from stunting because of malnutrition, stated Ertharin Cousin, previously of the World Food Programme and now a board member of the Energy of Vitamin. Opening a discussion on investing for higher vitamin, she introduced that the international value of malnutrition is now a staggering $three.5 trillion per yr, leaving apart the value in distress and suffering. We have to reform the international meals system, she stated, and we will’t do it without personal sector funding and involvement. To get it, we’d like agreed metrics outlined based on business rules. One other method, instructed both Martin Brief, CEO of the Energy of Vitamin and Rebecca Boustead of Kellogg, may be appealing to buyers’ bottom line, mentioning the economic effects of the drawback. Ertharin Cousin also sees nothing incorrect in corporations taking advantage of social investments, as long as they work and social benefits accrue.

If self-interest was a approach into the pockets of the personal sector, how might we get governments to take a position extra of their malnourished communities?

For Rebecca Boustead, there are two questions. How can we make meals which is both nutritious and appealing, and how can we get it to small village markets? She spoke of partnerships which Kellogg had with the Breakfast Revolution and with the Sesame Workshop. In the former case, meals was attending to the hard-to-reach and in the second, the message of the significance of vitamin was being conveyed.

If self-interest was a means into the pockets of the personal sector, how might we get governments to take a position extra in their malnourished communities? ‘Engage, engage, engage – with hard data’, was Ertharin Cousin’s recipe. Give them sensible solutions that help them get monetary savings, instructed Rebecca Boustead, a prescription not up to now faraway from that advocated by individuals for use with the personal sector.

Impression investing: time, transparency and demonstration These three issues are wanted to ramp up influence funding throughout all sectors. Whereas it is perhaps true to say, as Richard Ditzio of the Milken Institute, who chaired the subsequent panel discussion, did, that there is spare capital and it needs to spend money on sustainability, there are still obstacles. Didier von Daeniken, additionally of Normal Chartered questioned how banks and monetary institutions might help shoppers translate words like sustainability, influence investing and philanthropy into language they might perceive. Measurement continues to be a sticking level, he noted, as is the lack of knowledge about funding alternatives. Angela Bai of China Alliance of Social Worth Funding (CASVI) and Roy Swan of the Ford Foundation each endorsed this in a later session. Bai added a 3rd challenge: the problem of creating investments scalable.

Doug Lee of D3Jubilee Partners, an impression enterprise fund in South Korea famous a Catch-22 state of affairs arising. First-time funds have the lowest price of return, so buyers draw back, but if funds can’t appeal to buyers, how are they to succeed? Foundations have the added problem of persuading the trustees. Roy Swan associated that it took two years to induce Ford’s trustees to release eight per cent of the foundation’s endowment to dedicate to influence investing! Frank Niederlander of BMW Stiftung Herbert Quandt agreed that endurance is needed and caution. The pioneer buyers, he stated, have to be apostles. They will’t afford to fail.

Many banks in Asia (native and worldwide) nonetheless didn’t have a clear grasp of sustainable funding.

Rashesh Shah (proper) CEO of Edelweiss.

All that stated, there is progress. Rashesh Shah of Edelweiss (India) famous that particular person buyers are asking extra of their banks. Banks themselves, represented by Jose Vinals of Normal Chartered, can earn a living and assist save the world at the similar time, he stated. From doing no harm, Commonplace Chartered is now shifting in the direction of being a pressure for good. He referred to as for benchmarks on inexperienced bonds, tips for company disclosure and higher sustainability built into the financial system.  This remark itself is progress, says Annie Chen (RS Group, Hong Kong). She noted that she could not have imagined listening to a financial institution saying it ought to do good 10 years ago. The Sustainable Finance Initiative in Hong Kong which RS launched a yr earlier helps to spread the word on influence investing amongst household workplaces there and to foment a strong impression investment group. She famous, nevertheless, that many banks in Asia (local and international) nonetheless didn’t have a clear grasp of sustainable investment. Didier von Daeniken agreed. Communication is their largest drawback. Normal Chartered’s research among its Asian shoppers, nevertheless, means that 20 per cent of respondents at the moment are allocating some investment in the direction of the SDGs and that there’s higher understanding of impression investing.

There are different grounds for optimism. Each Annie Chen and Eliza Foo of Temasek International (Singapore) see hope in the evident want for change, particularly among the younger, and in the tempo of change. And there’s a lot at stake. If influence investing actually takes maintain, stated Amit Bouri of the International Influence Investing Community (GIIN), we’d change the means the financial markets work.

Measurement The challenge the convention returned to most frequently, although, was measurement of impression. Eric Rice of Wellington Management Singapore noted little progress on this, but influence is ‘what distinguishes this segment. We won’t get mainstream capital if we don’t determine it out, he warned. Moreover, new era donors are notably eager on impression, stated Giovanni Zenteno from LGT Enterprise Philanthropy. On the plus aspect, should you can present it, money is extra more likely to come your means.

Adam McCarty of Mekong Economics, whom I had marked down as a hard-shell pragmatist from previous periods, has a barely totally different take. We do influence measurement, he stated, because that’s the deal of influence investing. If you would like free or low cost cash, it’s a must to answer for the good you’re doing. Most influence measurement at the second is rudimentary, he advised and extra refined means gained’t emerge until donors demand it. Usually, panellists agreed, influence measurement is donor-driven, though Ronald Abraham of iDinsight in India feels that each side have to take it critically. He sees three essential challenges: first, impression evaluation is sluggish. It may take between one and three years, by which era the programme has changed. Second, the quality of the knowledge is usually poor. Third, it’s costly, though it could actually repay expenditure by the NPO, even if it doesn’t lead to extra funding. Idinsight had labored with Educate Women on a machine-learning venture which has enabled them to work with more youngsters on their price range, regardless of the initial value of the train.

Collaborative philanthropy For those who ask donors whether or not they practise collaboration, all of them say ‘yes’, stated Nadia Roumani of the Institute of Design at Stanford, though a show of arms in a breakout session on the matter revealed that only half a dozen or so out of an viewers of 50-60 are actually pooling assets. Why so few when it’s clear that more may be completed by working with others? The chief purpose given in the session was lack of management. Smaller contributors worry being swamped by larger ones, moreover, it is troublesome to reconcile giving unrestricted grants from the pool with the specific needs of particular person donors? Co-Influence tries to bypass this by allowing smaller contributors to vote on where they want their funds to go within the framework of the programme, stated Anne-Marie Harling of Co-Influence. Individuals also want a specific amount of humility. Erin Hulme of the Gates Basis stated that in the collaboration on polio involving Gates, WHO and UNICEF, the foundation had been prepared to ‘go where the expertise lies’ and did not want to steer. Boon Heong Ng of Temasek Worldwide agreed. Temasek was originally the sole donor of Challenge Silver Display in Singapore which works to fight listening to deficiencies amongst the elderly. Silver Display now includes other corporations, the Ministry of Well being and individuals’s associations, all of whom deliver totally different sorts of expertise.

Regardless of apparent advantages, collaboration remains troublesome, especially amongst establishments.

It’s not just massive funders who can benefit from collaboration. Ludwig Forrest of the King Baudouin Basis (KBF) explained the concept of umbrella foundations. These permit modest donors to pool assets beneath the aegis of a bigger entity like KBF and to provide to causes they have in widespread. It’s a approach of democratising philanthropy, he stated. KBF presently has 750 smaller foundations sheltering underneath its umbrella.

Regardless of obvious advantages, collaboration stays troublesome, especially amongst establishments. Establishing collaborations requires giving a number of thought to the construction, which must be clear, yet flexible sufficient to adapt, stated Nadia Roumani.

Larry Kramer, President of the Hewlett Foundation.

What’s efficient philanthropy? For these – and there have been many – who had been urging the non-profit to be more like the for-profit sector, Larry Kramer of the Hewlett Basis, had some words of warning. ‘It’s an enormous mistake,’ he stated. ‘We all want to be efficient but that’s not enterprise, it’s good organisational considering.’ Non- and for-profit organisations have totally different strategies, totally different areas of work and, most essential, totally different technique of measuring. Enterprise has one easy metric Philanthropy can’t have, however that doesn’t imply it could actually’t be effective. There are three parts to effective philanthropy: have a aim, have a story about the way to obtain it and have a approach to measure progress. The criterion for the last, he argued, is ‘reasonableness under the circumstances.’ Don’t mislead yourselves and don’t drive it. Settle for that there can be some fuzziness. He urged the viewers to assume when it comes to learning, not of success or failure.

Prizes If the ethos of the non-profit sector is – or should be – collaboration, the MacArthur Foundation has discovered competition can typically be helpful. Its 100 and Change prize gives $100 million for any answer to any drawback, defined Celia Conrad. The primary winner in 2017 was the Sesame Workshop. Along with sparking innovation, the applicants, even the unsuccessful ones, can generate invaluable concepts which could possibly be shared. For the winners themselves, the prize money will help deliver in more funds, as has happened for Sesame Workshop. Lisa George from the MacQuarie Group Basis in Australia had launched an identical, though more modest ($10 million) prize to mark its 50th anniversary. Like MacArthur, that they had been stunned by the high quality and breadth of the purposes. The shortlist of finalists had included initiatives as numerous as the Ocean Cleanup, Human Rights Watch and Woman Impact.

It’s a high-stakes recreation although, cautioned Safeena Hussain of Educate Women, a profitable applicant to the Audacious Challenge run by TED for its efforts to deliver 1.5 million women back into the faculty system in India. Whereas the software process may also help NGOs assume by way of what they do, additionally it is time-consuming. ‘If we hadn’t gained, we might have struggled,’ she stated, ‘because we had invested so much in the process for over a year.’ She urged funders to think about the value of the acquisition of their money.

Previous power, new energy The nature of power is changing and donors and buyers want to adjust to cope with the shift, says Jeremy Heimans of Function. Previous power is formal, specialist, non-participatory. It’s what he termed energy as foreign money. Harvey Weinstein is previous power (an unsympathetic instance in case you have been wondering which aspect you should be on). New power is transparent, casual, fluid, participatory, or energy as present, as he put it. Examples embrace #MeToo, Occupy and Airbnb. The longer term might be a battle for mobilisation, he predicted and the drawback philanthropists want to unravel is find out how to work with new power.

Workshops The final day of the convention offered the probability to work in more element in a collection of workshop throughout the morning and afternoon. As with the breakout and plenary periods, these coated a variety of subjects, among them, options journalism and the influence of storytelling, methods to improve the effectiveness of philanthropic follow, utilizing finance as a software to deal with gender-based violence, and figuring out impression funding opportunities in Asia. Each of the ones I attended proved fascinating and involving. In a single, Eric Nee, editor of Stanford Social Innovation Evaluate (SSIR) and Fan Li, his counterpart on the Chinese language version of SSIR, introduced the concept of options journalism. Moderately than providing exposés of issues, as traditional journalism tended to do, Nee defined, options journalism – nicely, the clue is in the identify – focuses on the response to the drawback, goes into element on how the response works and supplies lessons and frameworks, not just inspiration. He and Fan Li also outlined ways on presenting concepts in order that they might persist with the audience, telling tales that have been credible, concrete, simple and arresting.

‘Make expectations clear at the outset, listen more than you talk and be clear and consistent in your dealings with the grantee.’

The workshop on the effectiveness of philanthropy, introduced by Lindsay Louie of the Hewlett Basis, looked at 4 parts of Hewlett’s follow, values, strategy, measurement and grant apply. Louie underlined the importance that Hewlett attaches to analysis, spending two per cent of its finances on the difficulty. Moreover, Hewlett periodically evaluates its own evaluations. Evaluations need to watch three criteria, she steered: utility, acceptability and suitability. In different phrases, assessment needs to fit the intervention in question, it has to make respondents really feel part of the venture and it must be tied to implementation. When it comes to how one can be a great grantmaker, she provided the following: be responsive, show curiosity about the grantee organisation, not just the programme, make expectations clear at the outset, pay attention more than you speak and be clear and constant in your dealings with the grantee.

Consuming the conference As regular, AVPN offered an array of periods and subjects that have been virtually overwhelming in quantity and selection. When you’re catering for as giant and numerous an viewers as the conference attracts, it’s a must to put on an enormous menu.

It was thoughtfully set out, although. The subjects, although assorted, by no means strayed removed from the major themes of the convention. It appeared to me, too, that this yr, it was higher paced, with fewer, but longer periods which allowed larger discussion and there was an urgency and a conviction about proceedings which was putting. There were additionally more – and welcome – modifications of tempo, with a larger number of participatory periods. The standard of the periods, as all the time, depends on the presenters. Everyone could have their very own highlights, in response to taste. For me, James Chen’s and Larry Kramer’s keynotes, the workshops, and the local weather finance and the listening to the voices of grantees breakout periods stood out.

‘If you are giving money away, you’re a philanthropist. In the event you’re expecting inventory market returns, you’re not a philanthropist.’

One panellist remarked that you would put all of the individuals into three bins – those that want money, those that have it to provide and those who mediate in numerous capacities between them. He could also be proper, however those are very huge bins, accommodating many differing kinds and sizes of organisation – funders, non-profits, investment managers of different stripes, researchers, CSR officers and consultants and native and regional social enterprises who have been pitching to the ‘deal share’platform all added to the combine. A trademark of the AVPN conference remains its power and its curiosity. There’s a willingness to satisfy and to strike up conversations that isn’t all the time apparent at different gatherings. Little question individuals convey this with them, however AVPN deserves some credit score for offering the setting and the environment to allow them to do so.

One factor extra: Quite a few audio system appealed to an financial, fairly than a normative, rationale for addressing the points discussed which – for me – felt jarring. True, there were a lot of people in the room accustomed to considering in monetary phrases and each mode of life has its own conceptual body and its personal vocabulary. Perhaps, too, they thought the message of the social sector can be heard more readily by mainstream capital if it have been couched in phrases it might readily grasp. In any respect events, it felt at occasions like listeners have been being urged to take on social issues for the sake of worldwide GDP, slightly than for causes extra primarily human.

Clearly, it is going to take more than two or three days to break the boundaries between the social and mainstream investment worlds. Even those already on the social and impression funding bus – so to speak – weren’t all the time clear about the place to take a seat, who to take a seat with, or even what route the bus should take to its vacation spot. One participant I spoke to had a easy rule of thumb: ‘If you are giving money away, you’re a philanthropist. In case you’re anticipating stock market returns, you’re not a philanthropist.’ But if members are typically hazy about their very own roles and nomenclature and the difficulties of bringing others who are presently outdoors the ambit of social investment (nevertheless outlined) remain unresolved, certainly one of the things the convention made clear is that working in widespread takes time and plenty of conversations. You must start someplace. AVPN’s convention was a firm and essential first step.

The post Energy, curiosity and urgent questions on the AVPN agenda appeared first on Android Smart Gears.

[ourwinterana0universe]

Energy, curiosity and urgent questions on the AVPN agenda

20 minute read

This text was initially featured on Alliance Magazine here.

The 2019 AVPN conference in Singapore put its cards firmly on the table from the begin.

The main target can be on massive themes: schooling, gender equality, hunger and malnutrition, and climate change – most of all on climate change. From the first session, speaker after speaker reminded us that we solely have 15 years through which to scale back greenhouse fuel emissions before the effects of local weather change turn out to be irreversible.

Amy Khor, Singapore’s Minister for Surroundings and Water Assets

And Asia is at the sharp end. The struggle to combat climate change shall be gained and lost there, stated Maria Athena Ballesteros, of the Growald Household Fund. Amy Khor, Singapore’s Minister for Surroundings and Water Assets, noted that the country had declared 2018 an official yr of climate motion. Rising sea ranges and rising temperatures (the island state is heating up twice as shortly as the rest of the world, she stated) posed a menace to its future. It’s investing in solar power and expanding its public transport community so that eight out of each 10 Singaporeans can be inside strolling distance of a railway station. But, she stated, the authorities could not do it alone. It needed the help of both enterprise and civil society. Fung Wing-ah of BRACE Hong Kong defined that the funding firm had now aligned its whole portfolio on local weather change mitigation and, like Minister Khor, also careworn that the efforts of one sector alone wouldn’t be enough. Enter another key conference theme: all of the issues beneath discussion will require partnerships that contain not just cash but joint motion.

Later in the conference, Christine Heenan of the Rockefeller Foundation additionally touched on both of those in a keynote speech. The challenge is not to find options to local weather change, she argued. These exist already. The problem is to deliver them to scale. That’s the place partnerships come into play, partnerships based on mutual respect, complementary strengths and synergy.

Words to deeds The convention also marked the launch of AVPN’s local weather motion platform. Naina Batra, AVPN chair and CEO, signalled the want for a deeper and extra lively dedication which was evident all by means of proceedings. The platform, she stated, will probably be greater than a bit of symbolism, a board which all members have been invited to signal as an earnest of their solidarity, it should attempt to attach all the sectors, offering funding opportunities and information. However, she added, to achieve success, ‘it needs your engagement’. She spoke of the power of networks, which not solely deliver individuals collectively (her welcoming remarks have been addressed to 1348 delegates from 48 nations, itself a token of the formidable convening power of AVPN), they convey campaigns together and they bridge divides. However convening is just not enough. We have to catalyse and allow action. We need to cooperate, to behave urgently, whereas not dropping endurance and we have to make change irresistible.

Eileen Rockefeller Growald of the Growald Family Fund (GFF) struck a constructive word: ‘we can and are finding climate solutions together,’ she insisted. GFF is seeding social enterprises and innovators and collaborating with them and with funders to further climate options. The obstacles, nevertheless, remain formidable.  Know-how must be delivered to bear more shortly, stated Dan Choon of Cycle Group. Know-how transfer presently takes too lengthy – historically, 45-60 years to get to 20 per cent market penetration. We have to transfer a lot quicker. In the similar session, Britt Groosman of the Environmental Defense Fund spoke of the difficulties of shifting finance in the direction of measures to combat climate change. The subsequent-best factor, she stated, is to induce sectors who produce large-scale emissions, like aviation and delivery to think about carbon pricing, indeed there are indicators that they are doing so. Geoffrey Seeto of New Forests Asia endorsed this from his personal expertise. A variety of airways, one among which is Indigo in India, have agreed to offset their carbon emissions from 2020 and they see funding forestry from the proceeds of pricing carbon as part of doing that. Nevertheless, while funding carbon sequestration at scale is a confirmed technique of local weather change mitigation, only three per cent of local weather finance presently goes into it.

Ideas for attracting finance for local weather solutions brainstormed amongst all members in the session ranged from coaching grassroots installers of solar panels, debt aid for governments funding clean power and banks cooperating to offer concessionary ESG bonds.

Breaking boundaries Along with what we have to do, there’s the additional question of the place we’ll get the assets to do it. AVPN COO, Kevin Teo reminded the viewers that, if the SDGs are to be achieved, an estimated $2.5 trillion per yr will probably be needed (he was not the just one to cite this figure over the coming days). Giant buyers, subsequently, will need to make giant investments with proportionally huge influence and the convention title, Breaking Boundaries, signalled the need to attract those buyers – public and personal – into the social and environmental sphere. How to do this shaped one other strand linking convention proceedings. For its half. AVPN has been actively working with buyers in each these sectors, making an attempt to hyperlink personal influence or would-be impression buyers with social businesses on the one aspect and continuing to press forward with the APx coverage discussion board on the different.

Why don’t donors, especially corporate donors, let communities define their own needs quite than simply giving them what they, the donors, have?

James Chen, Founder of Clearly.

In his quest to ‘privatise failure and socialise success’ James Chen referred to as on philanthropists to train their much-touted capability for danger. ‘If you are serious about impact,’ he stated, ‘high risk is where the real returns occur.’ He provided Gates Basis’s work with malaria as a mannequin of catalytic philanthropy and an example of how ‘perseverance and domain expertise’ might have great influence. His personal organisation, Clearly, which aims to deliver low-cost imaginative and prescient correction to poor communities round the world, had overcome initial objections from funders, amongst them the World Financial institution, that there was no proof for the impact of imaginative and prescient correction programmes and no model of the intervention in low-income nations, by providing each in the form of Vision for a Nation, a programme run collectively with the authorities of Rwanda, and a serious research in the Lancet. Each, he stated, had helped to de-risk investment in sight correction.

Suitability and sustainability How are you going to construct a philanthropic culture when the word ‘philanthropy’ is barely understood, or has connotations of charity and patronage because it does in both Myanmar and Indonesia? The questions have been asked in a breakout session on unlocking native philanthropic funding in South-East Asia. In a spot like Myanmar the place investment and philanthropy are both discovering their ft, individuals have to build good companies, not just give away cash from successful ones, argued Aung Htun of Myanmar Investments. Ruel Maranan of the Ayala Foundation (Philippines) agreed, noting that the younger era is extra aware of the concept of social impression, so change is on the method. A more direct means of encouraging giving, believes Victor Hartono of the Djarum Basis in Indonesia, is for governments to offer tax incentives, a problem to which Veronica Colondam of YCAB Foundation in Indonesia would return later in the conference. The restrictive surroundings for philanthropy in that nation has meant, amongst different things, that YCAB took longer to find a suitable technique and type for its operation, since there are not any endowments.

Ertharin Cousin, Energy of Vitamin.

Inevitably, there was a lot speak of sustainability over the three and half days of the convention. It was Ruel Maranan who matched it with the notion of suitability. Why don’t donors, especially corporate donors, let communities define their own wants quite than simply giving them what they, the donors, have? It makes for larger engagement: ‘they [communities] are already involved and open,’ and if all stakeholders are concerned, all of them win, he argued. The theme of suitability also arose in discussion of the question of influence. Victor Hartono urged donors to assume ‘what’s applicable for you’ as well as for beneficiaries. Djarum, which has pioneered a form of vocational faculty that the authorities is now copying, crops timber as part of its local weather change mitigation efforts. It’s inside reach whereas funding in a more refined carbon seize know-how will not be.

The themes of collaboration and ‘feet on the ground’ have been additionally in proof in the session. Hartono spoke of the importance of ‘staying local. You are there, your people are there.’

The malnourished and the hungry 81.7 million youngsters in Asia endure from stunting because of malnutrition, stated Ertharin Cousin, previously of the World Food Programme and now a board member of the Energy of Vitamin. Opening a discussion on investing for higher vitamin, she introduced that the international value of malnutrition is now a staggering $three.5 trillion per yr, leaving apart the value in distress and suffering. We have to reform the international meals system, she stated, and we will’t do it without personal sector funding and involvement. To get it, we’d like agreed metrics outlined based on business rules. One other method, instructed both Martin Brief, CEO of the Energy of Vitamin and Rebecca Boustead of Kellogg, may be appealing to buyers’ bottom line, mentioning the economic effects of the drawback. Ertharin Cousin also sees nothing incorrect in corporations taking advantage of social investments, as long as they work and social benefits accrue.

If self-interest was a approach into the pockets of the personal sector, how might we get governments to take a position extra of their malnourished communities?

For Rebecca Boustead, there are two questions. How can we make meals which is both nutritious and appealing, and how can we get it to small village markets? She spoke of partnerships which Kellogg had with the Breakfast Revolution and with the Sesame Workshop. In the former case, meals was attending to the hard-to-reach and in the second, the message of the significance of vitamin was being conveyed.

If self-interest was a means into the pockets of the personal sector, how might we get governments to take a position extra in their malnourished communities? ‘Engage, engage, engage – with hard data’, was Ertharin Cousin’s recipe. Give them sensible solutions that help them get monetary savings, instructed Rebecca Boustead, a prescription not up to now faraway from that advocated by individuals for use with the personal sector.

Impression investing: time, transparency and demonstration These three issues are wanted to ramp up influence funding throughout all sectors. Whereas it is perhaps true to say, as Richard Ditzio of the Milken Institute, who chaired the subsequent panel discussion, did, that there is spare capital and it needs to spend money on sustainability, there are still obstacles. Didier von Daeniken, additionally of Normal Chartered questioned how banks and monetary institutions might help shoppers translate words like sustainability, influence investing and philanthropy into language they might perceive. Measurement continues to be a sticking level, he noted, as is the lack of knowledge about funding alternatives. Angela Bai of China Alliance of Social Worth Funding (CASVI) and Roy Swan of the Ford Foundation each endorsed this in a later session. Bai added a 3rd challenge: the problem of creating investments scalable.

Doug Lee of D3Jubilee Partners, an impression enterprise fund in South Korea famous a Catch-22 state of affairs arising. First-time funds have the lowest price of return, so buyers draw back, but if funds can’t appeal to buyers, how are they to succeed? Foundations have the added problem of persuading the trustees. Roy Swan associated that it took two years to induce Ford’s trustees to release eight per cent of the foundation’s endowment to dedicate to influence investing! Frank Niederlander of BMW Stiftung Herbert Quandt agreed that endurance is needed and caution. The pioneer buyers, he stated, have to be apostles. They will’t afford to fail.

Many banks in Asia (native and worldwide) nonetheless didn’t have a clear grasp of sustainable funding.

Rashesh Shah (proper) CEO of Edelweiss.

All that stated, there is progress. Rashesh Shah of Edelweiss (India) famous that particular person buyers are asking extra of their banks. Banks themselves, represented by Jose Vinals of Normal Chartered, can earn a living and assist save the world at the similar time, he stated. From doing no harm, Commonplace Chartered is now shifting in the direction of being a pressure for good. He referred to as for benchmarks on inexperienced bonds, tips for company disclosure and higher sustainability built into the financial system.  This remark itself is progress, says Annie Chen (RS Group, Hong Kong). She noted that she could not have imagined listening to a financial institution saying it ought to do good 10 years ago. The Sustainable Finance Initiative in Hong Kong which RS launched a yr earlier helps to spread the word on influence investing amongst household workplaces there and to foment a strong impression investment group. She famous, nevertheless, that many banks in Asia (local and international) nonetheless didn’t have a clear grasp of sustainable investment. Didier von Daeniken agreed. Communication is their largest drawback. Normal Chartered’s research among its Asian shoppers, nevertheless, means that 20 per cent of respondents at the moment are allocating some investment in the direction of the SDGs and that there’s higher understanding of impression investing.

There are different grounds for optimism. Each Annie Chen and Eliza Foo of Temasek International (Singapore) see hope in the evident want for change, particularly among the younger, and in the tempo of change. And there’s a lot at stake. If influence investing actually takes maintain, stated Amit Bouri of the International Influence Investing Community (GIIN), we’d change the means the financial markets work.

Measurement The challenge the convention returned to most frequently, although, was measurement of impression. Eric Rice of Wellington Management Singapore noted little progress on this, but influence is ‘what distinguishes this segment. We won’t get mainstream capital if we don’t determine it out, he warned. Moreover, new era donors are notably eager on impression, stated Giovanni Zenteno from LGT Enterprise Philanthropy. On the plus aspect, should you can present it, money is extra more likely to come your means.

Adam McCarty of Mekong Economics, whom I had marked down as a hard-shell pragmatist from previous periods, has a barely totally different take. We do influence measurement, he stated, because that’s the deal of influence investing. If you would like free or low cost cash, it’s a must to answer for the good you’re doing. Most influence measurement at the second is rudimentary, he advised and extra refined means gained’t emerge until donors demand it. Usually, panellists agreed, influence measurement is donor-driven, though Ronald Abraham of iDinsight in India feels that each side have to take it critically. He sees three essential challenges: first, impression evaluation is sluggish. It may take between one and three years, by which era the programme has changed. Second, the quality of the knowledge is usually poor. Third, it’s costly, though it could actually repay expenditure by the NPO, even if it doesn’t lead to extra funding. Idinsight had labored with Educate Women on a machine-learning venture which has enabled them to work with more youngsters on their price range, regardless of the initial value of the train.

Collaborative philanthropy For those who ask donors whether or not they practise collaboration, all of them say ‘yes’, stated Nadia Roumani of the Institute of Design at Stanford, though a show of arms in a breakout session on the matter revealed that only half a dozen or so out of an viewers of 50-60 are actually pooling assets. Why so few when it’s clear that more may be completed by working with others? The chief purpose given in the session was lack of management. Smaller contributors worry being swamped by larger ones, moreover, it is troublesome to reconcile giving unrestricted grants from the pool with the specific needs of particular person donors? Co-Influence tries to bypass this by allowing smaller contributors to vote on where they want their funds to go within the framework of the programme, stated Anne-Marie Harling of Co-Influence. Individuals also want a specific amount of humility. Erin Hulme of the Gates Basis stated that in the collaboration on polio involving Gates, WHO and UNICEF, the foundation had been prepared to ‘go where the expertise lies’ and did not want to steer. Boon Heong Ng of Temasek Worldwide agreed. Temasek was originally the sole donor of Challenge Silver Display in Singapore which works to fight listening to deficiencies amongst the elderly. Silver Display now includes other corporations, the Ministry of Well being and individuals’s associations, all of whom deliver totally different sorts of expertise.

Regardless of apparent advantages, collaboration remains troublesome, especially amongst establishments.

It’s not just massive funders who can benefit from collaboration. Ludwig Forrest of the King Baudouin Basis (KBF) explained the concept of umbrella foundations. These permit modest donors to pool assets beneath the aegis of a bigger entity like KBF and to provide to causes they have in widespread. It’s a approach of democratising philanthropy, he stated. KBF presently has 750 smaller foundations sheltering underneath its umbrella.

Regardless of obvious advantages, collaboration stays troublesome, especially amongst establishments. Establishing collaborations requires giving a number of thought to the construction, which must be clear, yet flexible sufficient to adapt, stated Nadia Roumani.

Larry Kramer, President of the Hewlett Foundation.

What’s efficient philanthropy? For these – and there have been many – who had been urging the non-profit to be more like the for-profit sector, Larry Kramer of the Hewlett Basis, had some words of warning. ‘It’s an enormous mistake,’ he stated. ‘We all want to be efficient but that’s not enterprise, it’s good organisational considering.’ Non- and for-profit organisations have totally different strategies, totally different areas of work and, most essential, totally different technique of measuring. Enterprise has one easy metric Philanthropy can’t have, however that doesn’t imply it could actually’t be effective. There are three parts to effective philanthropy: have a aim, have a story about the way to obtain it and have a approach to measure progress. The criterion for the last, he argued, is ‘reasonableness under the circumstances.’ Don’t mislead yourselves and don’t drive it. Settle for that there can be some fuzziness. He urged the viewers to assume when it comes to learning, not of success or failure.

Prizes If the ethos of the non-profit sector is – or should be – collaboration, the MacArthur Foundation has discovered competition can typically be helpful. Its 100 and Change prize gives $100 million for any answer to any drawback, defined Celia Conrad. The primary winner in 2017 was the Sesame Workshop. Along with sparking innovation, the applicants, even the unsuccessful ones, can generate invaluable concepts which could possibly be shared. For the winners themselves, the prize money will help deliver in more funds, as has happened for Sesame Workshop. Lisa George from the MacQuarie Group Basis in Australia had launched an identical, though more modest ($10 million) prize to mark its 50th anniversary. Like MacArthur, that they had been stunned by the high quality and breadth of the purposes. The shortlist of finalists had included initiatives as numerous as the Ocean Cleanup, Human Rights Watch and Woman Impact.

It’s a high-stakes recreation although, cautioned Safeena Hussain of Educate Women, a profitable applicant to the Audacious Challenge run by TED for its efforts to deliver 1.5 million women back into the faculty system in India. Whereas the software process may also help NGOs assume by way of what they do, additionally it is time-consuming. ‘If we hadn’t gained, we might have struggled,’ she stated, ‘because we had invested so much in the process for over a year.’ She urged funders to think about the value of the acquisition of their money.

Previous power, new energy The nature of power is changing and donors and buyers want to adjust to cope with the shift, says Jeremy Heimans of Function. Previous power is formal, specialist, non-participatory. It’s what he termed energy as foreign money. Harvey Weinstein is previous power (an unsympathetic instance in case you have been wondering which aspect you should be on). New power is transparent, casual, fluid, participatory, or energy as present, as he put it. Examples embrace #MeToo, Occupy and Airbnb. The longer term might be a battle for mobilisation, he predicted and the drawback philanthropists want to unravel is find out how to work with new power.

Workshops The final day of the convention offered the probability to work in more element in a collection of workshop throughout the morning and afternoon. As with the breakout and plenary periods, these coated a variety of subjects, among them, options journalism and the influence of storytelling, methods to improve the effectiveness of philanthropic follow, utilizing finance as a software to deal with gender-based violence, and figuring out impression funding opportunities in Asia. Each of the ones I attended proved fascinating and involving. In a single, Eric Nee, editor of Stanford Social Innovation Evaluate (SSIR) and Fan Li, his counterpart on the Chinese language version of SSIR, introduced the concept of options journalism. Moderately than providing exposés of issues, as traditional journalism tended to do, Nee defined, options journalism – nicely, the clue is in the identify – focuses on the response to the drawback, goes into element on how the response works and supplies lessons and frameworks, not just inspiration. He and Fan Li also outlined ways on presenting concepts in order that they might persist with the audience, telling tales that have been credible, concrete, simple and arresting.

‘Make expectations clear at the outset, listen more than you talk and be clear and consistent in your dealings with the grantee.’

The workshop on the effectiveness of philanthropy, introduced by Lindsay Louie of the Hewlett Basis, looked at 4 parts of Hewlett’s follow, values, strategy, measurement and grant apply. Louie underlined the importance that Hewlett attaches to analysis, spending two per cent of its finances on the difficulty. Moreover, Hewlett periodically evaluates its own evaluations. Evaluations need to watch three criteria, she steered: utility, acceptability and suitability. In different phrases, assessment needs to fit the intervention in question, it has to make respondents really feel part of the venture and it must be tied to implementation. When it comes to how one can be a great grantmaker, she provided the following: be responsive, show curiosity about the grantee organisation, not just the programme, make expectations clear at the outset, pay attention more than you speak and be clear and constant in your dealings with the grantee.

Consuming the conference As regular, AVPN offered an array of periods and subjects that have been virtually overwhelming in quantity and selection. When you’re catering for as giant and numerous an viewers as the conference attracts, it’s a must to put on an enormous menu.

It was thoughtfully set out, although. The subjects, although assorted, by no means strayed removed from the major themes of the convention. It appeared to me, too, that this yr, it was higher paced, with fewer, but longer periods which allowed larger discussion and there was an urgency and a conviction about proceedings which was putting. There were additionally more – and welcome – modifications of tempo, with a larger number of participatory periods. The standard of the periods, as all the time, depends on the presenters. Everyone could have their very own highlights, in response to taste. For me, James Chen’s and Larry Kramer’s keynotes, the workshops, and the local weather finance and the listening to the voices of grantees breakout periods stood out.

‘If you are giving money away, you’re a philanthropist. In the event you’re expecting inventory market returns, you’re not a philanthropist.’

One panellist remarked that you would put all of the individuals into three bins – those that want money, those that have it to provide and those who mediate in numerous capacities between them. He could also be proper, however those are very huge bins, accommodating many differing kinds and sizes of organisation – funders, non-profits, investment managers of different stripes, researchers, CSR officers and consultants and native and regional social enterprises who have been pitching to the ‘deal share’platform all added to the combine. A trademark of the AVPN conference remains its power and its curiosity. There’s a willingness to satisfy and to strike up conversations that isn’t all the time apparent at different gatherings. Little question individuals convey this with them, however AVPN deserves some credit score for offering the setting and the environment to allow them to do so.

One factor extra: Quite a few audio system appealed to an financial, fairly than a normative, rationale for addressing the points discussed which – for me – felt jarring. True, there were a lot of people in the room accustomed to considering in monetary phrases and each mode of life has its own conceptual body and its personal vocabulary. Perhaps, too, they thought the message of the social sector can be heard more readily by mainstream capital if it have been couched in phrases it might readily grasp. In any respect events, it felt at occasions like listeners have been being urged to take on social issues for the sake of worldwide GDP, slightly than for causes extra primarily human.

Clearly, it is going to take more than two or three days to break the boundaries between the social and mainstream investment worlds. Even those already on the social and impression funding bus – so to speak – weren’t all the time clear about the place to take a seat, who to take a seat with, or even what route the bus should take to its vacation spot. One participant I spoke to had a easy rule of thumb: ‘If you are giving money away, you’re a philanthropist. In case you’re anticipating stock market returns, you’re not a philanthropist.’ But if members are typically hazy about their very own roles and nomenclature and the difficulties of bringing others who are presently outdoors the ambit of social investment (nevertheless outlined) remain unresolved, certainly one of the things the convention made clear is that working in widespread takes time and plenty of conversations. You must start someplace. AVPN’s convention was a firm and essential first step.

The post Energy, curiosity and urgent questions on the AVPN agenda appeared first on Android Smart Gears.

[dreadsleepblog-blog]

Energy, curiosity and urgent questions on the AVPN agenda

20 minute read

This text was initially featured on Alliance Magazine here.

The 2019 AVPN conference in Singapore put its cards firmly on the table from the begin.

The main target can be on massive themes: schooling, gender equality, hunger and malnutrition, and climate change – most of all on climate change. From the first session, speaker after speaker reminded us that we solely have 15 years through which to scale back greenhouse fuel emissions before the effects of local weather change turn out to be irreversible.

Amy Khor, Singapore’s Minister for Surroundings and Water Assets

And Asia is at the sharp end. The struggle to combat climate change shall be gained and lost there, stated Maria Athena Ballesteros, of the Growald Household Fund. Amy Khor, Singapore’s Minister for Surroundings and Water Assets, noted that the country had declared 2018 an official yr of climate motion. Rising sea ranges and rising temperatures (the island state is heating up twice as shortly as the rest of the world, she stated) posed a menace to its future. It’s investing in solar power and expanding its public transport community so that eight out of each 10 Singaporeans can be inside strolling distance of a railway station. But, she stated, the authorities could not do it alone. It needed the help of both enterprise and civil society. Fung Wing-ah of BRACE Hong Kong defined that the funding firm had now aligned its whole portfolio on local weather change mitigation and, like Minister Khor, also careworn that the efforts of one sector alone wouldn’t be enough. Enter another key conference theme: all of the issues beneath discussion will require partnerships that contain not just cash but joint motion.

Later in the conference, Christine Heenan of the Rockefeller Foundation additionally touched on both of those in a keynote speech. The challenge is not to find options to local weather change, she argued. These exist already. The problem is to deliver them to scale. That’s the place partnerships come into play, partnerships based on mutual respect, complementary strengths and synergy.

Words to deeds The convention also marked the launch of AVPN’s local weather motion platform. Naina Batra, AVPN chair and CEO, signalled the want for a deeper and extra lively dedication which was evident all by means of proceedings. The platform, she stated, will probably be greater than a bit of symbolism, a board which all members have been invited to signal as an earnest of their solidarity, it should attempt to attach all the sectors, offering funding opportunities and information. However, she added, to achieve success, ‘it needs your engagement’. She spoke of the power of networks, which not solely deliver individuals collectively (her welcoming remarks have been addressed to 1348 delegates from 48 nations, itself a token of the formidable convening power of AVPN), they convey campaigns together and they bridge divides. However convening is just not enough. We have to catalyse and allow action. We need to cooperate, to behave urgently, whereas not dropping endurance and we have to make change irresistible.

Eileen Rockefeller Growald of the Growald Family Fund (GFF) struck a constructive word: ‘we can and are finding climate solutions together,’ she insisted. GFF is seeding social enterprises and innovators and collaborating with them and with funders to further climate options. The obstacles, nevertheless, remain formidable.  Know-how must be delivered to bear more shortly, stated Dan Choon of Cycle Group. Know-how transfer presently takes too lengthy – historically, 45-60 years to get to 20 per cent market penetration. We have to transfer a lot quicker. In the similar session, Britt Groosman of the Environmental Defense Fund spoke of the difficulties of shifting finance in the direction of measures to combat climate change. The subsequent-best factor, she stated, is to induce sectors who produce large-scale emissions, like aviation and delivery to think about carbon pricing, indeed there are indicators that they are doing so. Geoffrey Seeto of New Forests Asia endorsed this from his personal expertise. A variety of airways, one among which is Indigo in India, have agreed to offset their carbon emissions from 2020 and they see funding forestry from the proceeds of pricing carbon as part of doing that. Nevertheless, while funding carbon sequestration at scale is a confirmed technique of local weather change mitigation, only three per cent of local weather finance presently goes into it.

Ideas for attracting finance for local weather solutions brainstormed amongst all members in the session ranged from coaching grassroots installers of solar panels, debt aid for governments funding clean power and banks cooperating to offer concessionary ESG bonds.

Breaking boundaries Along with what we have to do, there’s the additional question of the place we’ll get the assets to do it. AVPN COO, Kevin Teo reminded the viewers that, if the SDGs are to be achieved, an estimated $2.5 trillion per yr will probably be needed (he was not the just one to cite this figure over the coming days). Giant buyers, subsequently, will need to make giant investments with proportionally huge influence and the convention title, Breaking Boundaries, signalled the need to attract those buyers – public and personal – into the social and environmental sphere. How to do this shaped one other strand linking convention proceedings. For its half. AVPN has been actively working with buyers in each these sectors, making an attempt to hyperlink personal influence or would-be impression buyers with social businesses on the one aspect and continuing to press forward with the APx coverage discussion board on the different.

Why don’t donors, especially corporate donors, let communities define their own needs quite than simply giving them what they, the donors, have?

James Chen, Founder of Clearly.

In his quest to ‘privatise failure and socialise success’ James Chen referred to as on philanthropists to train their much-touted capability for danger. ‘If you are serious about impact,’ he stated, ‘high risk is where the real returns occur.’ He provided Gates Basis’s work with malaria as a mannequin of catalytic philanthropy and an example of how ‘perseverance and domain expertise’ might have great influence. His personal organisation, Clearly, which aims to deliver low-cost imaginative and prescient correction to poor communities round the world, had overcome initial objections from funders, amongst them the World Financial institution, that there was no proof for the impact of imaginative and prescient correction programmes and no model of the intervention in low-income nations, by providing each in the form of Vision for a Nation, a programme run collectively with the authorities of Rwanda, and a serious research in the Lancet. Each, he stated, had helped to de-risk investment in sight correction.

Suitability and sustainability How are you going to construct a philanthropic culture when the word ‘philanthropy’ is barely understood, or has connotations of charity and patronage because it does in both Myanmar and Indonesia? The questions have been asked in a breakout session on unlocking native philanthropic funding in South-East Asia. In a spot like Myanmar the place investment and philanthropy are both discovering their ft, individuals have to build good companies, not just give away cash from successful ones, argued Aung Htun of Myanmar Investments. Ruel Maranan of the Ayala Foundation (Philippines) agreed, noting that the younger era is extra aware of the concept of social impression, so change is on the method. A more direct means of encouraging giving, believes Victor Hartono of the Djarum Basis in Indonesia, is for governments to offer tax incentives, a problem to which Veronica Colondam of YCAB Foundation in Indonesia would return later in the conference. The restrictive surroundings for philanthropy in that nation has meant, amongst different things, that YCAB took longer to find a suitable technique and type for its operation, since there are not any endowments.

Ertharin Cousin, Energy of Vitamin.

Inevitably, there was a lot speak of sustainability over the three and half days of the convention. It was Ruel Maranan who matched it with the notion of suitability. Why don’t donors, especially corporate donors, let communities define their own wants quite than simply giving them what they, the donors, have? It makes for larger engagement: ‘they [communities] are already involved and open,’ and if all stakeholders are concerned, all of them win, he argued. The theme of suitability also arose in discussion of the question of influence. Victor Hartono urged donors to assume ‘what’s applicable for you’ as well as for beneficiaries. Djarum, which has pioneered a form of vocational faculty that the authorities is now copying, crops timber as part of its local weather change mitigation efforts. It’s inside reach whereas funding in a more refined carbon seize know-how will not be.

The themes of collaboration and ‘feet on the ground’ have been additionally in proof in the session. Hartono spoke of the importance of ‘staying local. You are there, your people are there.’

The malnourished and the hungry 81.7 million youngsters in Asia endure from stunting because of malnutrition, stated Ertharin Cousin, previously of the World Food Programme and now a board member of the Energy of Vitamin. Opening a discussion on investing for higher vitamin, she introduced that the international value of malnutrition is now a staggering $three.5 trillion per yr, leaving apart the value in distress and suffering. We have to reform the international meals system, she stated, and we will’t do it without personal sector funding and involvement. To get it, we’d like agreed metrics outlined based on business rules. One other method, instructed both Martin Brief, CEO of the Energy of Vitamin and Rebecca Boustead of Kellogg, may be appealing to buyers’ bottom line, mentioning the economic effects of the drawback. Ertharin Cousin also sees nothing incorrect in corporations taking advantage of social investments, as long as they work and social benefits accrue.

If self-interest was a approach into the pockets of the personal sector, how might we get governments to take a position extra of their malnourished communities?

For Rebecca Boustead, there are two questions. How can we make meals which is both nutritious and appealing, and how can we get it to small village markets? She spoke of partnerships which Kellogg had with the Breakfast Revolution and with the Sesame Workshop. In the former case, meals was attending to the hard-to-reach and in the second, the message of the significance of vitamin was being conveyed.

If self-interest was a means into the pockets of the personal sector, how might we get governments to take a position extra in their malnourished communities? ‘Engage, engage, engage – with hard data’, was Ertharin Cousin’s recipe. Give them sensible solutions that help them get monetary savings, instructed Rebecca Boustead, a prescription not up to now faraway from that advocated by individuals for use with the personal sector.

Impression investing: time, transparency and demonstration These three issues are wanted to ramp up influence funding throughout all sectors. Whereas it is perhaps true to say, as Richard Ditzio of the Milken Institute, who chaired the subsequent panel discussion, did, that there is spare capital and it needs to spend money on sustainability, there are still obstacles. Didier von Daeniken, additionally of Normal Chartered questioned how banks and monetary institutions might help shoppers translate words like sustainability, influence investing and philanthropy into language they might perceive. Measurement continues to be a sticking level, he noted, as is the lack of knowledge about funding alternatives. Angela Bai of China Alliance of Social Worth Funding (CASVI) and Roy Swan of the Ford Foundation each endorsed this in a later session. Bai added a 3rd challenge: the problem of creating investments scalable.

Doug Lee of D3Jubilee Partners, an impression enterprise fund in South Korea famous a Catch-22 state of affairs arising. First-time funds have the lowest price of return, so buyers draw back, but if funds can’t appeal to buyers, how are they to succeed? Foundations have the added problem of persuading the trustees. Roy Swan associated that it took two years to induce Ford’s trustees to release eight per cent of the foundation’s endowment to dedicate to influence investing! Frank Niederlander of BMW Stiftung Herbert Quandt agreed that endurance is needed and caution. The pioneer buyers, he stated, have to be apostles. They will’t afford to fail.

Many banks in Asia (native and worldwide) nonetheless didn’t have a clear grasp of sustainable funding.

Rashesh Shah (proper) CEO of Edelweiss.

All that stated, there is progress. Rashesh Shah of Edelweiss (India) famous that particular person buyers are asking extra of their banks. Banks themselves, represented by Jose Vinals of Normal Chartered, can earn a living and assist save the world at the similar time, he stated. From doing no harm, Commonplace Chartered is now shifting in the direction of being a pressure for good. He referred to as for benchmarks on inexperienced bonds, tips for company disclosure and higher sustainability built into the financial system.  This remark itself is progress, says Annie Chen (RS Group, Hong Kong). She noted that she could not have imagined listening to a financial institution saying it ought to do good 10 years ago. The Sustainable Finance Initiative in Hong Kong which RS launched a yr earlier helps to spread the word on influence investing amongst household workplaces there and to foment a strong impression investment group. She famous, nevertheless, that many banks in Asia (local and international) nonetheless didn’t have a clear grasp of sustainable investment. Didier von Daeniken agreed. Communication is their largest drawback. Normal Chartered’s research among its Asian shoppers, nevertheless, means that 20 per cent of respondents at the moment are allocating some investment in the direction of the SDGs and that there’s higher understanding of impression investing.

There are different grounds for optimism. Each Annie Chen and Eliza Foo of Temasek International (Singapore) see hope in the evident want for change, particularly among the younger, and in the tempo of change. And there’s a lot at stake. If influence investing actually takes maintain, stated Amit Bouri of the International Influence Investing Community (GIIN), we’d change the means the financial markets work.

Measurement The challenge the convention returned to most frequently, although, was measurement of impression. Eric Rice of Wellington Management Singapore noted little progress on this, but influence is ‘what distinguishes this segment. We won’t get mainstream capital if we don’t determine it out, he warned. Moreover, new era donors are notably eager on impression, stated Giovanni Zenteno from LGT Enterprise Philanthropy. On the plus aspect, should you can present it, money is extra more likely to come your means.

Adam McCarty of Mekong Economics, whom I had marked down as a hard-shell pragmatist from previous periods, has a barely totally different take. We do influence measurement, he stated, because that’s the deal of influence investing. If you would like free or low cost cash, it’s a must to answer for the good you’re doing. Most influence measurement at the second is rudimentary, he advised and extra refined means gained’t emerge until donors demand it. Usually, panellists agreed, influence measurement is donor-driven, though Ronald Abraham of iDinsight in India feels that each side have to take it critically. He sees three essential challenges: first, impression evaluation is sluggish. It may take between one and three years, by which era the programme has changed. Second, the quality of the knowledge is usually poor. Third, it’s costly, though it could actually repay expenditure by the NPO, even if it doesn’t lead to extra funding. Idinsight had labored with Educate Women on a machine-learning venture which has enabled them to work with more youngsters on their price range, regardless of the initial value of the train.

Collaborative philanthropy For those who ask donors whether or not they practise collaboration, all of them say ‘yes’, stated Nadia Roumani of the Institute of Design at Stanford, though a show of arms in a breakout session on the matter revealed that only half a dozen or so out of an viewers of 50-60 are actually pooling assets. Why so few when it’s clear that more may be completed by working with others? The chief purpose given in the session was lack of management. Smaller contributors worry being swamped by larger ones, moreover, it is troublesome to reconcile giving unrestricted grants from the pool with the specific needs of particular person donors? Co-Influence tries to bypass this by allowing smaller contributors to vote on where they want their funds to go within the framework of the programme, stated Anne-Marie Harling of Co-Influence. Individuals also want a specific amount of humility. Erin Hulme of the Gates Basis stated that in the collaboration on polio involving Gates, WHO and UNICEF, the foundation had been prepared to ‘go where the expertise lies’ and did not want to steer. Boon Heong Ng of Temasek Worldwide agreed. Temasek was originally the sole donor of Challenge Silver Display in Singapore which works to fight listening to deficiencies amongst the elderly. Silver Display now includes other corporations, the Ministry of Well being and individuals’s associations, all of whom deliver totally different sorts of expertise.

Regardless of apparent advantages, collaboration remains troublesome, especially amongst establishments.

It’s not just massive funders who can benefit from collaboration. Ludwig Forrest of the King Baudouin Basis (KBF) explained the concept of umbrella foundations. These permit modest donors to pool assets beneath the aegis of a bigger entity like KBF and to provide to causes they have in widespread. It’s a approach of democratising philanthropy, he stated. KBF presently has 750 smaller foundations sheltering underneath its umbrella.

Regardless of obvious advantages, collaboration stays troublesome, especially amongst establishments. Establishing collaborations requires giving a number of thought to the construction, which must be clear, yet flexible sufficient to adapt, stated Nadia Roumani.

Larry Kramer, President of the Hewlett Foundation.

What’s efficient philanthropy? For these – and there have been many – who had been urging the non-profit to be more like the for-profit sector, Larry Kramer of the Hewlett Basis, had some words of warning. ‘It’s an enormous mistake,’ he stated. ‘We all want to be efficient but that’s not enterprise, it’s good organisational considering.’ Non- and for-profit organisations have totally different strategies, totally different areas of work and, most essential, totally different technique of measuring. Enterprise has one easy metric Philanthropy can’t have, however that doesn’t imply it could actually’t be effective. There are three parts to effective philanthropy: have a aim, have a story about the way to obtain it and have a approach to measure progress. The criterion for the last, he argued, is ‘reasonableness under the circumstances.’ Don’t mislead yourselves and don’t drive it. Settle for that there can be some fuzziness. He urged the viewers to assume when it comes to learning, not of success or failure.

Prizes If the ethos of the non-profit sector is – or should be – collaboration, the MacArthur Foundation has discovered competition can typically be helpful. Its 100 and Change prize gives $100 million for any answer to any drawback, defined Celia Conrad. The primary winner in 2017 was the Sesame Workshop. Along with sparking innovation, the applicants, even the unsuccessful ones, can generate invaluable concepts which could possibly be shared. For the winners themselves, the prize money will help deliver in more funds, as has happened for Sesame Workshop. Lisa George from the MacQuarie Group Basis in Australia had launched an identical, though more modest ($10 million) prize to mark its 50th anniversary. Like MacArthur, that they had been stunned by the high quality and breadth of the purposes. The shortlist of finalists had included initiatives as numerous as the Ocean Cleanup, Human Rights Watch and Woman Impact.

It’s a high-stakes recreation although, cautioned Safeena Hussain of Educate Women, a profitable applicant to the Audacious Challenge run by TED for its efforts to deliver 1.5 million women back into the faculty system in India. Whereas the software process may also help NGOs assume by way of what they do, additionally it is time-consuming. ‘If we hadn’t gained, we might have struggled,’ she stated, ‘because we had invested so much in the process for over a year.’ She urged funders to think about the value of the acquisition of their money.

Previous power, new energy The nature of power is changing and donors and buyers want to adjust to cope with the shift, says Jeremy Heimans of Function. Previous power is formal, specialist, non-participatory. It’s what he termed energy as foreign money. Harvey Weinstein is previous power (an unsympathetic instance in case you have been wondering which aspect you should be on). New power is transparent, casual, fluid, participatory, or energy as present, as he put it. Examples embrace #MeToo, Occupy and Airbnb. The longer term might be a battle for mobilisation, he predicted and the drawback philanthropists want to unravel is find out how to work with new power.

Workshops The final day of the convention offered the probability to work in more element in a collection of workshop throughout the morning and afternoon. As with the breakout and plenary periods, these coated a variety of subjects, among them, options journalism and the influence of storytelling, methods to improve the effectiveness of philanthropic follow, utilizing finance as a software to deal with gender-based violence, and figuring out impression funding opportunities in Asia. Each of the ones I attended proved fascinating and involving. In a single, Eric Nee, editor of Stanford Social Innovation Evaluate (SSIR) and Fan Li, his counterpart on the Chinese language version of SSIR, introduced the concept of options journalism. Moderately than providing exposés of issues, as traditional journalism tended to do, Nee defined, options journalism – nicely, the clue is in the identify – focuses on the response to the drawback, goes into element on how the response works and supplies lessons and frameworks, not just inspiration. He and Fan Li also outlined ways on presenting concepts in order that they might persist with the audience, telling tales that have been credible, concrete, simple and arresting.

‘Make expectations clear at the outset, listen more than you talk and be clear and consistent in your dealings with the grantee.’

The workshop on the effectiveness of philanthropy, introduced by Lindsay Louie of the Hewlett Basis, looked at 4 parts of Hewlett’s follow, values, strategy, measurement and grant apply. Louie underlined the importance that Hewlett attaches to analysis, spending two per cent of its finances on the difficulty. Moreover, Hewlett periodically evaluates its own evaluations. Evaluations need to watch three criteria, she steered: utility, acceptability and suitability. In different phrases, assessment needs to fit the intervention in question, it has to make respondents really feel part of the venture and it must be tied to implementation. When it comes to how one can be a great grantmaker, she provided the following: be responsive, show curiosity about the grantee organisation, not just the programme, make expectations clear at the outset, pay attention more than you speak and be clear and constant in your dealings with the grantee.

Consuming the conference As regular, AVPN offered an array of periods and subjects that have been virtually overwhelming in quantity and selection. When you’re catering for as giant and numerous an viewers as the conference attracts, it’s a must to put on an enormous menu.

It was thoughtfully set out, although. The subjects, although assorted, by no means strayed removed from the major themes of the convention. It appeared to me, too, that this yr, it was higher paced, with fewer, but longer periods which allowed larger discussion and there was an urgency and a conviction about proceedings which was putting. There were additionally more – and welcome – modifications of tempo, with a larger number of participatory periods. The standard of the periods, as all the time, depends on the presenters. Everyone could have their very own highlights, in response to taste. For me, James Chen’s and Larry Kramer’s keynotes, the workshops, and the local weather finance and the listening to the voices of grantees breakout periods stood out.

‘If you are giving money away, you’re a philanthropist. In the event you’re expecting inventory market returns, you’re not a philanthropist.’

One panellist remarked that you would put all of the individuals into three bins – those that want money, those that have it to provide and those who mediate in numerous capacities between them. He could also be proper, however those are very huge bins, accommodating many differing kinds and sizes of organisation – funders, non-profits, investment managers of different stripes, researchers, CSR officers and consultants and native and regional social enterprises who have been pitching to the ‘deal share’platform all added to the combine. A trademark of the AVPN conference remains its power and its curiosity. There’s a willingness to satisfy and to strike up conversations that isn’t all the time apparent at different gatherings. Little question individuals convey this with them, however AVPN deserves some credit score for offering the setting and the environment to allow them to do so.

One factor extra: Quite a few audio system appealed to an financial, fairly than a normative, rationale for addressing the points discussed which – for me – felt jarring. True, there were a lot of people in the room accustomed to considering in monetary phrases and each mode of life has its own conceptual body and its personal vocabulary. Perhaps, too, they thought the message of the social sector can be heard more readily by mainstream capital if it have been couched in phrases it might readily grasp. In any respect events, it felt at occasions like listeners have been being urged to take on social issues for the sake of worldwide GDP, slightly than for causes extra primarily human.

Clearly, it is going to take more than two or three days to break the boundaries between the social and mainstream investment worlds. Even those already on the social and impression funding bus – so to speak – weren’t all the time clear about the place to take a seat, who to take a seat with, or even what route the bus should take to its vacation spot. One participant I spoke to had a easy rule of thumb: ‘If you are giving money away, you’re a philanthropist. In case you’re anticipating stock market returns, you’re not a philanthropist.’ But if members are typically hazy about their very own roles and nomenclature and the difficulties of bringing others who are presently outdoors the ambit of social investment (nevertheless outlined) remain unresolved, certainly one of the things the convention made clear is that working in widespread takes time and plenty of conversations. You must start someplace. AVPN’s convention was a firm and essential first step.

The post Energy, curiosity and urgent questions on the AVPN agenda appeared first on Android Smart Gears.

[webronzeferrari-blog]

Energy, curiosity and urgent questions on the AVPN agenda

20 minute read

This text was initially featured on Alliance Magazine here.

The 2019 AVPN conference in Singapore put its cards firmly on the table from the begin.

The main target can be on massive themes: schooling, gender equality, hunger and malnutrition, and climate change – most of all on climate change. From the first session, speaker after speaker reminded us that we solely have 15 years through which to scale back greenhouse fuel emissions before the effects of local weather change turn out to be irreversible.

Amy Khor, Singapore’s Minister for Surroundings and Water Assets

And Asia is at the sharp end. The struggle to combat climate change shall be gained and lost there, stated Maria Athena Ballesteros, of the Growald Household Fund. Amy Khor, Singapore’s Minister for Surroundings and Water Assets, noted that the country had declared 2018 an official yr of climate motion. Rising sea ranges and rising temperatures (the island state is heating up twice as shortly as the rest of the world, she stated) posed a menace to its future. It’s investing in solar power and expanding its public transport community so that eight out of each 10 Singaporeans can be inside strolling distance of a railway station. But, she stated, the authorities could not do it alone. It needed the help of both enterprise and civil society. Fung Wing-ah of BRACE Hong Kong defined that the funding firm had now aligned its whole portfolio on local weather change mitigation and, like Minister Khor, also careworn that the efforts of one sector alone wouldn’t be enough. Enter another key conference theme: all of the issues beneath discussion will require partnerships that contain not just cash but joint motion.

Later in the conference, Christine Heenan of the Rockefeller Foundation additionally touched on both of those in a keynote speech. The challenge is not to find options to local weather change, she argued. These exist already. The problem is to deliver them to scale. That’s the place partnerships come into play, partnerships based on mutual respect, complementary strengths and synergy.

Words to deeds The convention also marked the launch of AVPN’s local weather motion platform. Naina Batra, AVPN chair and CEO, signalled the want for a deeper and extra lively dedication which was evident all by means of proceedings. The platform, she stated, will probably be greater than a bit of symbolism, a board which all members have been invited to signal as an earnest of their solidarity, it should attempt to attach all the sectors, offering funding opportunities and information. However, she added, to achieve success, ‘it needs your engagement’. She spoke of the power of networks, which not solely deliver individuals collectively (her welcoming remarks have been addressed to 1348 delegates from 48 nations, itself a token of the formidable convening power of AVPN), they convey campaigns together and they bridge divides. However convening is just not enough. We have to catalyse and allow action. We need to cooperate, to behave urgently, whereas not dropping endurance and we have to make change irresistible.

Eileen Rockefeller Growald of the Growald Family Fund (GFF) struck a constructive word: ‘we can and are finding climate solutions together,’ she insisted. GFF is seeding social enterprises and innovators and collaborating with them and with funders to further climate options. The obstacles, nevertheless, remain formidable.  Know-how must be delivered to bear more shortly, stated Dan Choon of Cycle Group. Know-how transfer presently takes too lengthy – historically, 45-60 years to get to 20 per cent market penetration. We have to transfer a lot quicker. In the similar session, Britt Groosman of the Environmental Defense Fund spoke of the difficulties of shifting finance in the direction of measures to combat climate change. The subsequent-best factor, she stated, is to induce sectors who produce large-scale emissions, like aviation and delivery to think about carbon pricing, indeed there are indicators that they are doing so. Geoffrey Seeto of New Forests Asia endorsed this from his personal expertise. A variety of airways, one among which is Indigo in India, have agreed to offset their carbon emissions from 2020 and they see funding forestry from the proceeds of pricing carbon as part of doing that. Nevertheless, while funding carbon sequestration at scale is a confirmed technique of local weather change mitigation, only three per cent of local weather finance presently goes into it.

Ideas for attracting finance for local weather solutions brainstormed amongst all members in the session ranged from coaching grassroots installers of solar panels, debt aid for governments funding clean power and banks cooperating to offer concessionary ESG bonds.

Breaking boundaries Along with what we have to do, there’s the additional question of the place we’ll get the assets to do it. AVPN COO, Kevin Teo reminded the viewers that, if the SDGs are to be achieved, an estimated $2.5 trillion per yr will probably be needed (he was not the just one to cite this figure over the coming days). Giant buyers, subsequently, will need to make giant investments with proportionally huge influence and the convention title, Breaking Boundaries, signalled the need to attract those buyers – public and personal – into the social and environmental sphere. How to do this shaped one other strand linking convention proceedings. For its half. AVPN has been actively working with buyers in each these sectors, making an attempt to hyperlink personal influence or would-be impression buyers with social businesses on the one aspect and continuing to press forward with the APx coverage discussion board on the different.

Why don’t donors, especially corporate donors, let communities define their own needs quite than simply giving them what they, the donors, have?

James Chen, Founder of Clearly.

In his quest to ‘privatise failure and socialise success’ James Chen referred to as on philanthropists to train their much-touted capability for danger. ‘If you are serious about impact,’ he stated, ‘high risk is where the real returns occur.’ He provided Gates Basis’s work with malaria as a mannequin of catalytic philanthropy and an example of how ‘perseverance and domain expertise’ might have great influence. His personal organisation, Clearly, which aims to deliver low-cost imaginative and prescient correction to poor communities round the world, had overcome initial objections from funders, amongst them the World Financial institution, that there was no proof for the impact of imaginative and prescient correction programmes and no model of the intervention in low-income nations, by providing each in the form of Vision for a Nation, a programme run collectively with the authorities of Rwanda, and a serious research in the Lancet. Each, he stated, had helped to de-risk investment in sight correction.

Suitability and sustainability How are you going to construct a philanthropic culture when the word ‘philanthropy’ is barely understood, or has connotations of charity and patronage because it does in both Myanmar and Indonesia? The questions have been asked in a breakout session on unlocking native philanthropic funding in South-East Asia. In a spot like Myanmar the place investment and philanthropy are both discovering their ft, individuals have to build good companies, not just give away cash from successful ones, argued Aung Htun of Myanmar Investments. Ruel Maranan of the Ayala Foundation (Philippines) agreed, noting that the younger era is extra aware of the concept of social impression, so change is on the method. A more direct means of encouraging giving, believes Victor Hartono of the Djarum Basis in Indonesia, is for governments to offer tax incentives, a problem to which Veronica Colondam of YCAB Foundation in Indonesia would return later in the conference. The restrictive surroundings for philanthropy in that nation has meant, amongst different things, that YCAB took longer to find a suitable technique and type for its operation, since there are not any endowments.

Ertharin Cousin, Energy of Vitamin.

Inevitably, there was a lot speak of sustainability over the three and half days of the convention. It was Ruel Maranan who matched it with the notion of suitability. Why don’t donors, especially corporate donors, let communities define their own wants quite than simply giving them what they, the donors, have? It makes for larger engagement: ‘they [communities] are already involved and open,’ and if all stakeholders are concerned, all of them win, he argued. The theme of suitability also arose in discussion of the question of influence. Victor Hartono urged donors to assume ‘what’s applicable for you’ as well as for beneficiaries. Djarum, which has pioneered a form of vocational faculty that the authorities is now copying, crops timber as part of its local weather change mitigation efforts. It’s inside reach whereas funding in a more refined carbon seize know-how will not be.

The themes of collaboration and ‘feet on the ground’ have been additionally in proof in the session. Hartono spoke of the importance of ‘staying local. You are there, your people are there.’

The malnourished and the hungry 81.7 million youngsters in Asia endure from stunting because of malnutrition, stated Ertharin Cousin, previously of the World Food Programme and now a board member of the Energy of Vitamin. Opening a discussion on investing for higher vitamin, she introduced that the international value of malnutrition is now a staggering $three.5 trillion per yr, leaving apart the value in distress and suffering. We have to reform the international meals system, she stated, and we will’t do it without personal sector funding and involvement. To get it, we’d like agreed metrics outlined based on business rules. One other method, instructed both Martin Brief, CEO of the Energy of Vitamin and Rebecca Boustead of Kellogg, may be appealing to buyers’ bottom line, mentioning the economic effects of the drawback. Ertharin Cousin also sees nothing incorrect in corporations taking advantage of social investments, as long as they work and social benefits accrue.

If self-interest was a approach into the pockets of the personal sector, how might we get governments to take a position extra of their malnourished communities?

For Rebecca Boustead, there are two questions. How can we make meals which is both nutritious and appealing, and how can we get it to small village markets? She spoke of partnerships which Kellogg had with the Breakfast Revolution and with the Sesame Workshop. In the former case, meals was attending to the hard-to-reach and in the second, the message of the significance of vitamin was being conveyed.

If self-interest was a means into the pockets of the personal sector, how might we get governments to take a position extra in their malnourished communities? ‘Engage, engage, engage – with hard data’, was Ertharin Cousin’s recipe. Give them sensible solutions that help them get monetary savings, instructed Rebecca Boustead, a prescription not up to now faraway from that advocated by individuals for use with the personal sector.

Impression investing: time, transparency and demonstration These three issues are wanted to ramp up influence funding throughout all sectors. Whereas it is perhaps true to say, as Richard Ditzio of the Milken Institute, who chaired the subsequent panel discussion, did, that there is spare capital and it needs to spend money on sustainability, there are still obstacles. Didier von Daeniken, additionally of Normal Chartered questioned how banks and monetary institutions might help shoppers translate words like sustainability, influence investing and philanthropy into language they might perceive. Measurement continues to be a sticking level, he noted, as is the lack of knowledge about funding alternatives. Angela Bai of China Alliance of Social Worth Funding (CASVI) and Roy Swan of the Ford Foundation each endorsed this in a later session. Bai added a 3rd challenge: the problem of creating investments scalable.

Doug Lee of D3Jubilee Partners, an impression enterprise fund in South Korea famous a Catch-22 state of affairs arising. First-time funds have the lowest price of return, so buyers draw back, but if funds can’t appeal to buyers, how are they to succeed? Foundations have the added problem of persuading the trustees. Roy Swan associated that it took two years to induce Ford’s trustees to release eight per cent of the foundation’s endowment to dedicate to influence investing! Frank Niederlander of BMW Stiftung Herbert Quandt agreed that endurance is needed and caution. The pioneer buyers, he stated, have to be apostles. They will’t afford to fail.

Many banks in Asia (native and worldwide) nonetheless didn’t have a clear grasp of sustainable funding.

Rashesh Shah (proper) CEO of Edelweiss.

All that stated, there is progress. Rashesh Shah of Edelweiss (India) famous that particular person buyers are asking extra of their banks. Banks themselves, represented by Jose Vinals of Normal Chartered, can earn a living and assist save the world at the similar time, he stated. From doing no harm, Commonplace Chartered is now shifting in the direction of being a pressure for good. He referred to as for benchmarks on inexperienced bonds, tips for company disclosure and higher sustainability built into the financial system.  This remark itself is progress, says Annie Chen (RS Group, Hong Kong). She noted that she could not have imagined listening to a financial institution saying it ought to do good 10 years ago. The Sustainable Finance Initiative in Hong Kong which RS launched a yr earlier helps to spread the word on influence investing amongst household workplaces there and to foment a strong impression investment group. She famous, nevertheless, that many banks in Asia (local and international) nonetheless didn’t have a clear grasp of sustainable investment. Didier von Daeniken agreed. Communication is their largest drawback. Normal Chartered’s research among its Asian shoppers, nevertheless, means that 20 per cent of respondents at the moment are allocating some investment in the direction of the SDGs and that there’s higher understanding of impression investing.

There are different grounds for optimism. Each Annie Chen and Eliza Foo of Temasek International (Singapore) see hope in the evident want for change, particularly among the younger, and in the tempo of change. And there’s a lot at stake. If influence investing actually takes maintain, stated Amit Bouri of the International Influence Investing Community (GIIN), we’d change the means the financial markets work.

Measurement The challenge the convention returned to most frequently, although, was measurement of impression. Eric Rice of Wellington Management Singapore noted little progress on this, but influence is ‘what distinguishes this segment. We won’t get mainstream capital if we don’t determine it out, he warned. Moreover, new era donors are notably eager on impression, stated Giovanni Zenteno from LGT Enterprise Philanthropy. On the plus aspect, should you can present it, money is extra more likely to come your means.

Adam McCarty of Mekong Economics, whom I had marked down as a hard-shell pragmatist from previous periods, has a barely totally different take. We do influence measurement, he stated, because that’s the deal of influence investing. If you would like free or low cost cash, it’s a must to answer for the good you’re doing. Most influence measurement at the second is rudimentary, he advised and extra refined means gained’t emerge until donors demand it. Usually, panellists agreed, influence measurement is donor-driven, though Ronald Abraham of iDinsight in India feels that each side have to take it critically. He sees three essential challenges: first, impression evaluation is sluggish. It may take between one and three years, by which era the programme has changed. Second, the quality of the knowledge is usually poor. Third, it’s costly, though it could actually repay expenditure by the NPO, even if it doesn’t lead to extra funding. Idinsight had labored with Educate Women on a machine-learning venture which has enabled them to work with more youngsters on their price range, regardless of the initial value of the train.

Collaborative philanthropy For those who ask donors whether or not they practise collaboration, all of them say ‘yes’, stated Nadia Roumani of the Institute of Design at Stanford, though a show of arms in a breakout session on the matter revealed that only half a dozen or so out of an viewers of 50-60 are actually pooling assets. Why so few when it’s clear that more may be completed by working with others? The chief purpose given in the session was lack of management. Smaller contributors worry being swamped by larger ones, moreover, it is troublesome to reconcile giving unrestricted grants from the pool with the specific needs of particular person donors? Co-Influence tries to bypass this by allowing smaller contributors to vote on where they want their funds to go within the framework of the programme, stated Anne-Marie Harling of Co-Influence. Individuals also want a specific amount of humility. Erin Hulme of the Gates Basis stated that in the collaboration on polio involving Gates, WHO and UNICEF, the foundation had been prepared to ‘go where the expertise lies’ and did not want to steer. Boon Heong Ng of Temasek Worldwide agreed. Temasek was originally the sole donor of Challenge Silver Display in Singapore which works to fight listening to deficiencies amongst the elderly. Silver Display now includes other corporations, the Ministry of Well being and individuals’s associations, all of whom deliver totally different sorts of expertise.

Regardless of apparent advantages, collaboration remains troublesome, especially amongst establishments.

It’s not just massive funders who can benefit from collaboration. Ludwig Forrest of the King Baudouin Basis (KBF) explained the concept of umbrella foundations. These permit modest donors to pool assets beneath the aegis of a bigger entity like KBF and to provide to causes they have in widespread. It’s a approach of democratising philanthropy, he stated. KBF presently has 750 smaller foundations sheltering underneath its umbrella.

Regardless of obvious advantages, collaboration stays troublesome, especially amongst establishments. Establishing collaborations requires giving a number of thought to the construction, which must be clear, yet flexible sufficient to adapt, stated Nadia Roumani.

Larry Kramer, President of the Hewlett Foundation.

What’s efficient philanthropy? For these – and there have been many – who had been urging the non-profit to be more like the for-profit sector, Larry Kramer of the Hewlett Basis, had some words of warning. ‘It’s an enormous mistake,’ he stated. ‘We all want to be efficient but that’s not enterprise, it’s good organisational considering.’ Non- and for-profit organisations have totally different strategies, totally different areas of work and, most essential, totally different technique of measuring. Enterprise has one easy metric Philanthropy can’t have, however that doesn’t imply it could actually’t be effective. There are three parts to effective philanthropy: have a aim, have a story about the way to obtain it and have a approach to measure progress. The criterion for the last, he argued, is ‘reasonableness under the circumstances.’ Don’t mislead yourselves and don’t drive it. Settle for that there can be some fuzziness. He urged the viewers to assume when it comes to learning, not of success or failure.

Prizes If the ethos of the non-profit sector is – or should be – collaboration, the MacArthur Foundation has discovered competition can typically be helpful. Its 100 and Change prize gives $100 million for any answer to any drawback, defined Celia Conrad. The primary winner in 2017 was the Sesame Workshop. Along with sparking innovation, the applicants, even the unsuccessful ones, can generate invaluable concepts which could possibly be shared. For the winners themselves, the prize money will help deliver in more funds, as has happened for Sesame Workshop. Lisa George from the MacQuarie Group Basis in Australia had launched an identical, though more modest ($10 million) prize to mark its 50th anniversary. Like MacArthur, that they had been stunned by the high quality and breadth of the purposes. The shortlist of finalists had included initiatives as numerous as the Ocean Cleanup, Human Rights Watch and Woman Impact.

It’s a high-stakes recreation although, cautioned Safeena Hussain of Educate Women, a profitable applicant to the Audacious Challenge run by TED for its efforts to deliver 1.5 million women back into the faculty system in India. Whereas the software process may also help NGOs assume by way of what they do, additionally it is time-consuming. ‘If we hadn’t gained, we might have struggled,’ she stated, ‘because we had invested so much in the process for over a year.’ She urged funders to think about the value of the acquisition of their money.

Previous power, new energy The nature of power is changing and donors and buyers want to adjust to cope with the shift, says Jeremy Heimans of Function. Previous power is formal, specialist, non-participatory. It’s what he termed energy as foreign money. Harvey Weinstein is previous power (an unsympathetic instance in case you have been wondering which aspect you should be on). New power is transparent, casual, fluid, participatory, or energy as present, as he put it. Examples embrace #MeToo, Occupy and Airbnb. The longer term might be a battle for mobilisation, he predicted and the drawback philanthropists want to unravel is find out how to work with new power.

Workshops The final day of the convention offered the probability to work in more element in a collection of workshop throughout the morning and afternoon. As with the breakout and plenary periods, these coated a variety of subjects, among them, options journalism and the influence of storytelling, methods to improve the effectiveness of philanthropic follow, utilizing finance as a software to deal with gender-based violence, and figuring out impression funding opportunities in Asia. Each of the ones I attended proved fascinating and involving. In a single, Eric Nee, editor of Stanford Social Innovation Evaluate (SSIR) and Fan Li, his counterpart on the Chinese language version of SSIR, introduced the concept of options journalism. Moderately than providing exposés of issues, as traditional journalism tended to do, Nee defined, options journalism – nicely, the clue is in the identify – focuses on the response to the drawback, goes into element on how the response works and supplies lessons and frameworks, not just inspiration. He and Fan Li also outlined ways on presenting concepts in order that they might persist with the audience, telling tales that have been credible, concrete, simple and arresting.

‘Make expectations clear at the outset, listen more than you talk and be clear and consistent in your dealings with the grantee.’

The workshop on the effectiveness of philanthropy, introduced by Lindsay Louie of the Hewlett Basis, looked at 4 parts of Hewlett’s follow, values, strategy, measurement and grant apply. Louie underlined the importance that Hewlett attaches to analysis, spending two per cent of its finances on the difficulty. Moreover, Hewlett periodically evaluates its own evaluations. Evaluations need to watch three criteria, she steered: utility, acceptability and suitability. In different phrases, assessment needs to fit the intervention in question, it has to make respondents really feel part of the venture and it must be tied to implementation. When it comes to how one can be a great grantmaker, she provided the following: be responsive, show curiosity about the grantee organisation, not just the programme, make expectations clear at the outset, pay attention more than you speak and be clear and constant in your dealings with the grantee.

Consuming the conference As regular, AVPN offered an array of periods and subjects that have been virtually overwhelming in quantity and selection. When you’re catering for as giant and numerous an viewers as the conference attracts, it’s a must to put on an enormous menu.

It was thoughtfully set out, although. The subjects, although assorted, by no means strayed removed from the major themes of the convention. It appeared to me, too, that this yr, it was higher paced, with fewer, but longer periods which allowed larger discussion and there was an urgency and a conviction about proceedings which was putting. There were additionally more – and welcome – modifications of tempo, with a larger number of participatory periods. The standard of the periods, as all the time, depends on the presenters. Everyone could have their very own highlights, in response to taste. For me, James Chen’s and Larry Kramer’s keynotes, the workshops, and the local weather finance and the listening to the voices of grantees breakout periods stood out.

‘If you are giving money away, you’re a philanthropist. In the event you’re expecting inventory market returns, you’re not a philanthropist.’

One panellist remarked that you would put all of the individuals into three bins – those that want money, those that have it to provide and those who mediate in numerous capacities between them. He could also be proper, however those are very huge bins, accommodating many differing kinds and sizes of organisation – funders, non-profits, investment managers of different stripes, researchers, CSR officers and consultants and native and regional social enterprises who have been pitching to the ‘deal share’platform all added to the combine. A trademark of the AVPN conference remains its power and its curiosity. There’s a willingness to satisfy and to strike up conversations that isn’t all the time apparent at different gatherings. Little question individuals convey this with them, however AVPN deserves some credit score for offering the setting and the environment to allow them to do so.

One factor extra: Quite a few audio system appealed to an financial, fairly than a normative, rationale for addressing the points discussed which – for me – felt jarring. True, there were a lot of people in the room accustomed to considering in monetary phrases and each mode of life has its own conceptual body and its personal vocabulary. Perhaps, too, they thought the message of the social sector can be heard more readily by mainstream capital if it have been couched in phrases it might readily grasp. In any respect events, it felt at occasions like listeners have been being urged to take on social issues for the sake of worldwide GDP, slightly than for causes extra primarily human.

Clearly, it is going to take more than two or three days to break the boundaries between the social and mainstream investment worlds. Even those already on the social and impression funding bus – so to speak – weren’t all the time clear about the place to take a seat, who to take a seat with, or even what route the bus should take to its vacation spot. One participant I spoke to had a easy rule of thumb: ‘If you are giving money away, you’re a philanthropist. In case you’re anticipating stock market returns, you’re not a philanthropist.’ But if members are typically hazy about their very own roles and nomenclature and the difficulties of bringing others who are presently outdoors the ambit of social investment (nevertheless outlined) remain unresolved, certainly one of the things the convention made clear is that working in widespread takes time and plenty of conversations. You must start someplace. AVPN’s convention was a firm and essential first step.

The post Energy, curiosity and urgent questions on the AVPN agenda appeared first on Android Smart Gears.

[isoristudiesus]

Energy, curiosity and urgent questions on the AVPN agenda

20 minute read

This text was initially featured on Alliance Magazine here.

The 2019 AVPN conference in Singapore put its cards firmly on the table from the begin.

The main target can be on massive themes: schooling, gender equality, hunger and malnutrition, and climate change – most of all on climate change. From the first session, speaker after speaker reminded us that we solely have 15 years through which to scale back greenhouse fuel emissions before the effects of local weather change turn out to be irreversible.

Amy Khor, Singapore’s Minister for Surroundings and Water Assets

And Asia is at the sharp end. The struggle to combat climate change shall be gained and lost there, stated Maria Athena Ballesteros, of the Growald Household Fund. Amy Khor, Singapore’s Minister for Surroundings and Water Assets, noted that the country had declared 2018 an official yr of climate motion. Rising sea ranges and rising temperatures (the island state is heating up twice as shortly as the rest of the world, she stated) posed a menace to its future. It’s investing in solar power and expanding its public transport community so that eight out of each 10 Singaporeans can be inside strolling distance of a railway station. But, she stated, the authorities could not do it alone. It needed the help of both enterprise and civil society. Fung Wing-ah of BRACE Hong Kong defined that the funding firm had now aligned its whole portfolio on local weather change mitigation and, like Minister Khor, also careworn that the efforts of one sector alone wouldn’t be enough. Enter another key conference theme: all of the issues beneath discussion will require partnerships that contain not just cash but joint motion.

Later in the conference, Christine Heenan of the Rockefeller Foundation additionally touched on both of those in a keynote speech. The challenge is not to find options to local weather change, she argued. These exist already. The problem is to deliver them to scale. That’s the place partnerships come into play, partnerships based on mutual respect, complementary strengths and synergy.

Words to deeds The convention also marked the launch of AVPN’s local weather motion platform. Naina Batra, AVPN chair and CEO, signalled the want for a deeper and extra lively dedication which was evident all by means of proceedings. The platform, she stated, will probably be greater than a bit of symbolism, a board which all members have been invited to signal as an earnest of their solidarity, it should attempt to attach all the sectors, offering funding opportunities and information. However, she added, to achieve success, ‘it needs your engagement’. She spoke of the power of networks, which not solely deliver individuals collectively (her welcoming remarks have been addressed to 1348 delegates from 48 nations, itself a token of the formidable convening power of AVPN), they convey campaigns together and they bridge divides. However convening is just not enough. We have to catalyse and allow action. We need to cooperate, to behave urgently, whereas not dropping endurance and we have to make change irresistible.

Eileen Rockefeller Growald of the Growald Family Fund (GFF) struck a constructive word: ‘we can and are finding climate solutions together,’ she insisted. GFF is seeding social enterprises and innovators and collaborating with them and with funders to further climate options. The obstacles, nevertheless, remain formidable.  Know-how must be delivered to bear more shortly, stated Dan Choon of Cycle Group. Know-how transfer presently takes too lengthy – historically, 45-60 years to get to 20 per cent market penetration. We have to transfer a lot quicker. In the similar session, Britt Groosman of the Environmental Defense Fund spoke of the difficulties of shifting finance in the direction of measures to combat climate change. The subsequent-best factor, she stated, is to induce sectors who produce large-scale emissions, like aviation and delivery to think about carbon pricing, indeed there are indicators that they are doing so. Geoffrey Seeto of New Forests Asia endorsed this from his personal expertise. A variety of airways, one among which is Indigo in India, have agreed to offset their carbon emissions from 2020 and they see funding forestry from the proceeds of pricing carbon as part of doing that. Nevertheless, while funding carbon sequestration at scale is a confirmed technique of local weather change mitigation, only three per cent of local weather finance presently goes into it.

Ideas for attracting finance for local weather solutions brainstormed amongst all members in the session ranged from coaching grassroots installers of solar panels, debt aid for governments funding clean power and banks cooperating to offer concessionary ESG bonds.

Breaking boundaries Along with what we have to do, there’s the additional question of the place we’ll get the assets to do it. AVPN COO, Kevin Teo reminded the viewers that, if the SDGs are to be achieved, an estimated $2.5 trillion per yr will probably be needed (he was not the just one to cite this figure over the coming days). Giant buyers, subsequently, will need to make giant investments with proportionally huge influence and the convention title, Breaking Boundaries, signalled the need to attract those buyers – public and personal – into the social and environmental sphere. How to do this shaped one other strand linking convention proceedings. For its half. AVPN has been actively working with buyers in each these sectors, making an attempt to hyperlink personal influence or would-be impression buyers with social businesses on the one aspect and continuing to press forward with the APx coverage discussion board on the different.

Why don’t donors, especially corporate donors, let communities define their own needs quite than simply giving them what they, the donors, have?

James Chen, Founder of Clearly.

In his quest to ‘privatise failure and socialise success’ James Chen referred to as on philanthropists to train their much-touted capability for danger. ‘If you are serious about impact,’ he stated, ‘high risk is where the real returns occur.’ He provided Gates Basis’s work with malaria as a mannequin of catalytic philanthropy and an example of how ‘perseverance and domain expertise’ might have great influence. His personal organisation, Clearly, which aims to deliver low-cost imaginative and prescient correction to poor communities round the world, had overcome initial objections from funders, amongst them the World Financial institution, that there was no proof for the impact of imaginative and prescient correction programmes and no model of the intervention in low-income nations, by providing each in the form of Vision for a Nation, a programme run collectively with the authorities of Rwanda, and a serious research in the Lancet. Each, he stated, had helped to de-risk investment in sight correction.

Suitability and sustainability How are you going to construct a philanthropic culture when the word ‘philanthropy’ is barely understood, or has connotations of charity and patronage because it does in both Myanmar and Indonesia? The questions have been asked in a breakout session on unlocking native philanthropic funding in South-East Asia. In a spot like Myanmar the place investment and philanthropy are both discovering their ft, individuals have to build good companies, not just give away cash from successful ones, argued Aung Htun of Myanmar Investments. Ruel Maranan of the Ayala Foundation (Philippines) agreed, noting that the younger era is extra aware of the concept of social impression, so change is on the method. A more direct means of encouraging giving, believes Victor Hartono of the Djarum Basis in Indonesia, is for governments to offer tax incentives, a problem to which Veronica Colondam of YCAB Foundation in Indonesia would return later in the conference. The restrictive surroundings for philanthropy in that nation has meant, amongst different things, that YCAB took longer to find a suitable technique and type for its operation, since there are not any endowments.

Ertharin Cousin, Energy of Vitamin.

Inevitably, there was a lot speak of sustainability over the three and half days of the convention. It was Ruel Maranan who matched it with the notion of suitability. Why don’t donors, especially corporate donors, let communities define their own wants quite than simply giving them what they, the donors, have? It makes for larger engagement: ‘they [communities] are already involved and open,’ and if all stakeholders are concerned, all of them win, he argued. The theme of suitability also arose in discussion of the question of influence. Victor Hartono urged donors to assume ‘what’s applicable for you’ as well as for beneficiaries. Djarum, which has pioneered a form of vocational faculty that the authorities is now copying, crops timber as part of its local weather change mitigation efforts. It’s inside reach whereas funding in a more refined carbon seize know-how will not be.

The themes of collaboration and ‘feet on the ground’ have been additionally in proof in the session. Hartono spoke of the importance of ‘staying local. You are there, your people are there.’

The malnourished and the hungry 81.7 million youngsters in Asia endure from stunting because of malnutrition, stated Ertharin Cousin, previously of the World Food Programme and now a board member of the Energy of Vitamin. Opening a discussion on investing for higher vitamin, she introduced that the international value of malnutrition is now a staggering $three.5 trillion per yr, leaving apart the value in distress and suffering. We have to reform the international meals system, she stated, and we will’t do it without personal sector funding and involvement. To get it, we’d like agreed metrics outlined based on business rules. One other method, instructed both Martin Brief, CEO of the Energy of Vitamin and Rebecca Boustead of Kellogg, may be appealing to buyers’ bottom line, mentioning the economic effects of the drawback. Ertharin Cousin also sees nothing incorrect in corporations taking advantage of social investments, as long as they work and social benefits accrue.

If self-interest was a approach into the pockets of the personal sector, how might we get governments to take a position extra of their malnourished communities?

For Rebecca Boustead, there are two questions. How can we make meals which is both nutritious and appealing, and how can we get it to small village markets? She spoke of partnerships which Kellogg had with the Breakfast Revolution and with the Sesame Workshop. In the former case, meals was attending to the hard-to-reach and in the second, the message of the significance of vitamin was being conveyed.

If self-interest was a means into the pockets of the personal sector, how might we get governments to take a position extra in their malnourished communities? ‘Engage, engage, engage – with hard data’, was Ertharin Cousin’s recipe. Give them sensible solutions that help them get monetary savings, instructed Rebecca Boustead, a prescription not up to now faraway from that advocated by individuals for use with the personal sector.

Impression investing: time, transparency and demonstration These three issues are wanted to ramp up influence funding throughout all sectors. Whereas it is perhaps true to say, as Richard Ditzio of the Milken Institute, who chaired the subsequent panel discussion, did, that there is spare capital and it needs to spend money on sustainability, there are still obstacles. Didier von Daeniken, additionally of Normal Chartered questioned how banks and monetary institutions might help shoppers translate words like sustainability, influence investing and philanthropy into language they might perceive. Measurement continues to be a sticking level, he noted, as is the lack of knowledge about funding alternatives. Angela Bai of China Alliance of Social Worth Funding (CASVI) and Roy Swan of the Ford Foundation each endorsed this in a later session. Bai added a 3rd challenge: the problem of creating investments scalable.

Doug Lee of D3Jubilee Partners, an impression enterprise fund in South Korea famous a Catch-22 state of affairs arising. First-time funds have the lowest price of return, so buyers draw back, but if funds can’t appeal to buyers, how are they to succeed? Foundations have the added problem of persuading the trustees. Roy Swan associated that it took two years to induce Ford’s trustees to release eight per cent of the foundation’s endowment to dedicate to influence investing! Frank Niederlander of BMW Stiftung Herbert Quandt agreed that endurance is needed and caution. The pioneer buyers, he stated, have to be apostles. They will’t afford to fail.

Many banks in Asia (native and worldwide) nonetheless didn’t have a clear grasp of sustainable funding.

Rashesh Shah (proper) CEO of Edelweiss.

All that stated, there is progress. Rashesh Shah of Edelweiss (India) famous that particular person buyers are asking extra of their banks. Banks themselves, represented by Jose Vinals of Normal Chartered, can earn a living and assist save the world at the similar time, he stated. From doing no harm, Commonplace Chartered is now shifting in the direction of being a pressure for good. He referred to as for benchmarks on inexperienced bonds, tips for company disclosure and higher sustainability built into the financial system.  This remark itself is progress, says Annie Chen (RS Group, Hong Kong). She noted that she could not have imagined listening to a financial institution saying it ought to do good 10 years ago. The Sustainable Finance Initiative in Hong Kong which RS launched a yr earlier helps to spread the word on influence investing amongst household workplaces there and to foment a strong impression investment group. She famous, nevertheless, that many banks in Asia (local and international) nonetheless didn’t have a clear grasp of sustainable investment. Didier von Daeniken agreed. Communication is their largest drawback. Normal Chartered’s research among its Asian shoppers, nevertheless, means that 20 per cent of respondents at the moment are allocating some investment in the direction of the SDGs and that there’s higher understanding of impression investing.

There are different grounds for optimism. Each Annie Chen and Eliza Foo of Temasek International (Singapore) see hope in the evident want for change, particularly among the younger, and in the tempo of change. And there’s a lot at stake. If influence investing actually takes maintain, stated Amit Bouri of the International Influence Investing Community (GIIN), we’d change the means the financial markets work.

Measurement The challenge the convention returned to most frequently, although, was measurement of impression. Eric Rice of Wellington Management Singapore noted little progress on this, but influence is ‘what distinguishes this segment. We won’t get mainstream capital if we don’t determine it out, he warned. Moreover, new era donors are notably eager on impression, stated Giovanni Zenteno from LGT Enterprise Philanthropy. On the plus aspect, should you can present it, money is extra more likely to come your means.

Adam McCarty of Mekong Economics, whom I had marked down as a hard-shell pragmatist from previous periods, has a barely totally different take. We do influence measurement, he stated, because that’s the deal of influence investing. If you would like free or low cost cash, it’s a must to answer for the good you’re doing. Most influence measurement at the second is rudimentary, he advised and extra refined means gained’t emerge until donors demand it. Usually, panellists agreed, influence measurement is donor-driven, though Ronald Abraham of iDinsight in India feels that each side have to take it critically. He sees three essential challenges: first, impression evaluation is sluggish. It may take between one and three years, by which era the programme has changed. Second, the quality of the knowledge is usually poor. Third, it’s costly, though it could actually repay expenditure by the NPO, even if it doesn’t lead to extra funding. Idinsight had labored with Educate Women on a machine-learning venture which has enabled them to work with more youngsters on their price range, regardless of the initial value of the train.

Collaborative philanthropy For those who ask donors whether or not they practise collaboration, all of them say ‘yes’, stated Nadia Roumani of the Institute of Design at Stanford, though a show of arms in a breakout session on the matter revealed that only half a dozen or so out of an viewers of 50-60 are actually pooling assets. Why so few when it’s clear that more may be completed by working with others? The chief purpose given in the session was lack of management. Smaller contributors worry being swamped by larger ones, moreover, it is troublesome to reconcile giving unrestricted grants from the pool with the specific needs of particular person donors? Co-Influence tries to bypass this by allowing smaller contributors to vote on where they want their funds to go within the framework of the programme, stated Anne-Marie Harling of Co-Influence. Individuals also want a specific amount of humility. Erin Hulme of the Gates Basis stated that in the collaboration on polio involving Gates, WHO and UNICEF, the foundation had been prepared to ‘go where the expertise lies’ and did not want to steer. Boon Heong Ng of Temasek Worldwide agreed. Temasek was originally the sole donor of Challenge Silver Display in Singapore which works to fight listening to deficiencies amongst the elderly. Silver Display now includes other corporations, the Ministry of Well being and individuals’s associations, all of whom deliver totally different sorts of expertise.

Regardless of apparent advantages, collaboration remains troublesome, especially amongst establishments.

It’s not just massive funders who can benefit from collaboration. Ludwig Forrest of the King Baudouin Basis (KBF) explained the concept of umbrella foundations. These permit modest donors to pool assets beneath the aegis of a bigger entity like KBF and to provide to causes they have in widespread. It’s a approach of democratising philanthropy, he stated. KBF presently has 750 smaller foundations sheltering underneath its umbrella.

Regardless of obvious advantages, collaboration stays troublesome, especially amongst establishments. Establishing collaborations requires giving a number of thought to the construction, which must be clear, yet flexible sufficient to adapt, stated Nadia Roumani.

Larry Kramer, President of the Hewlett Foundation.

What’s efficient philanthropy? For these – and there have been many – who had been urging the non-profit to be more like the for-profit sector, Larry Kramer of the Hewlett Basis, had some words of warning. ‘It’s an enormous mistake,’ he stated. ‘We all want to be efficient but that’s not enterprise, it’s good organisational considering.’ Non- and for-profit organisations have totally different strategies, totally different areas of work and, most essential, totally different technique of measuring. Enterprise has one easy metric Philanthropy can’t have, however that doesn’t imply it could actually’t be effective. There are three parts to effective philanthropy: have a aim, have a story about the way to obtain it and have a approach to measure progress. The criterion for the last, he argued, is ‘reasonableness under the circumstances.’ Don’t mislead yourselves and don’t drive it. Settle for that there can be some fuzziness. He urged the viewers to assume when it comes to learning, not of success or failure.

Prizes If the ethos of the non-profit sector is – or should be – collaboration, the MacArthur Foundation has discovered competition can typically be helpful. Its 100 and Change prize gives $100 million for any answer to any drawback, defined Celia Conrad. The primary winner in 2017 was the Sesame Workshop. Along with sparking innovation, the applicants, even the unsuccessful ones, can generate invaluable concepts which could possibly be shared. For the winners themselves, the prize money will help deliver in more funds, as has happened for Sesame Workshop. Lisa George from the MacQuarie Group Basis in Australia had launched an identical, though more modest ($10 million) prize to mark its 50th anniversary. Like MacArthur, that they had been stunned by the high quality and breadth of the purposes. The shortlist of finalists had included initiatives as numerous as the Ocean Cleanup, Human Rights Watch and Woman Impact.

It’s a high-stakes recreation although, cautioned Safeena Hussain of Educate Women, a profitable applicant to the Audacious Challenge run by TED for its efforts to deliver 1.5 million women back into the faculty system in India. Whereas the software process may also help NGOs assume by way of what they do, additionally it is time-consuming. ‘If we hadn’t gained, we might have struggled,’ she stated, ‘because we had invested so much in the process for over a year.’ She urged funders to think about the value of the acquisition of their money.

Previous power, new energy The nature of power is changing and donors and buyers want to adjust to cope with the shift, says Jeremy Heimans of Function. Previous power is formal, specialist, non-participatory. It’s what he termed energy as foreign money. Harvey Weinstein is previous power (an unsympathetic instance in case you have been wondering which aspect you should be on). New power is transparent, casual, fluid, participatory, or energy as present, as he put it. Examples embrace #MeToo, Occupy and Airbnb. The longer term might be a battle for mobilisation, he predicted and the drawback philanthropists want to unravel is find out how to work with new power.

Workshops The final day of the convention offered the probability to work in more element in a collection of workshop throughout the morning and afternoon. As with the breakout and plenary periods, these coated a variety of subjects, among them, options journalism and the influence of storytelling, methods to improve the effectiveness of philanthropic follow, utilizing finance as a software to deal with gender-based violence, and figuring out impression funding opportunities in Asia. Each of the ones I attended proved fascinating and involving. In a single, Eric Nee, editor of Stanford Social Innovation Evaluate (SSIR) and Fan Li, his counterpart on the Chinese language version of SSIR, introduced the concept of options journalism. Moderately than providing exposés of issues, as traditional journalism tended to do, Nee defined, options journalism – nicely, the clue is in the identify – focuses on the response to the drawback, goes into element on how the response works and supplies lessons and frameworks, not just inspiration. He and Fan Li also outlined ways on presenting concepts in order that they might persist with the audience, telling tales that have been credible, concrete, simple and arresting.

‘Make expectations clear at the outset, listen more than you talk and be clear and consistent in your dealings with the grantee.’

The workshop on the effectiveness of philanthropy, introduced by Lindsay Louie of the Hewlett Basis, looked at 4 parts of Hewlett’s follow, values, strategy, measurement and grant apply. Louie underlined the importance that Hewlett attaches to analysis, spending two per cent of its finances on the difficulty. Moreover, Hewlett periodically evaluates its own evaluations. Evaluations need to watch three criteria, she steered: utility, acceptability and suitability. In different phrases, assessment needs to fit the intervention in question, it has to make respondents really feel part of the venture and it must be tied to implementation. When it comes to how one can be a great grantmaker, she provided the following: be responsive, show curiosity about the grantee organisation, not just the programme, make expectations clear at the outset, pay attention more than you speak and be clear and constant in your dealings with the grantee.

Consuming the conference As regular, AVPN offered an array of periods and subjects that have been virtually overwhelming in quantity and selection. When you’re catering for as giant and numerous an viewers as the conference attracts, it’s a must to put on an enormous menu.

It was thoughtfully set out, although. The subjects, although assorted, by no means strayed removed from the major themes of the convention. It appeared to me, too, that this yr, it was higher paced, with fewer, but longer periods which allowed larger discussion and there was an urgency and a conviction about proceedings which was putting. There were additionally more – and welcome – modifications of tempo, with a larger number of participatory periods. The standard of the periods, as all the time, depends on the presenters. Everyone could have their very own highlights, in response to taste. For me, James Chen’s and Larry Kramer’s keynotes, the workshops, and the local weather finance and the listening to the voices of grantees breakout periods stood out.

‘If you are giving money away, you’re a philanthropist. In the event you’re expecting inventory market returns, you’re not a philanthropist.’

One panellist remarked that you would put all of the individuals into three bins – those that want money, those that have it to provide and those who mediate in numerous capacities between them. He could also be proper, however those are very huge bins, accommodating many differing kinds and sizes of organisation – funders, non-profits, investment managers of different stripes, researchers, CSR officers and consultants and native and regional social enterprises who have been pitching to the ‘deal share’platform all added to the combine. A trademark of the AVPN conference remains its power and its curiosity. There’s a willingness to satisfy and to strike up conversations that isn’t all the time apparent at different gatherings. Little question individuals convey this with them, however AVPN deserves some credit score for offering the setting and the environment to allow them to do so.

One factor extra: Quite a few audio system appealed to an financial, fairly than a normative, rationale for addressing the points discussed which – for me – felt jarring. True, there were a lot of people in the room accustomed to considering in monetary phrases and each mode of life has its own conceptual body and its personal vocabulary. Perhaps, too, they thought the message of the social sector can be heard more readily by mainstream capital if it have been couched in phrases it might readily grasp. In any respect events, it felt at occasions like listeners have been being urged to take on social issues for the sake of worldwide GDP, slightly than for causes extra primarily human.

Clearly, it is going to take more than two or three days to break the boundaries between the social and mainstream investment worlds. Even those already on the social and impression funding bus – so to speak – weren’t all the time clear about the place to take a seat, who to take a seat with, or even what route the bus should take to its vacation spot. One participant I spoke to had a easy rule of thumb: ‘If you are giving money away, you’re a philanthropist. In case you’re anticipating stock market returns, you’re not a philanthropist.’ But if members are typically hazy about their very own roles and nomenclature and the difficulties of bringing others who are presently outdoors the ambit of social investment (nevertheless outlined) remain unresolved, certainly one of the things the convention made clear is that working in widespread takes time and plenty of conversations. You must start someplace. AVPN’s convention was a firm and essential first step.

The post Energy, curiosity and urgent questions on the AVPN agenda appeared first on Android Smart Gears.

[queer-gnome]

Energy, curiosity and urgent questions on the AVPN agenda

20 minute read

This text was initially featured on Alliance Magazine here.

The 2019 AVPN conference in Singapore put its cards firmly on the table from the begin.

The main target can be on massive themes: schooling, gender equality, hunger and malnutrition, and climate change – most of all on climate change. From the first session, speaker after speaker reminded us that we solely have 15 years through which to scale back greenhouse fuel emissions before the effects of local weather change turn out to be irreversible.

Amy Khor, Singapore’s Minister for Surroundings and Water Assets

And Asia is at the sharp end. The struggle to combat climate change shall be gained and lost there, stated Maria Athena Ballesteros, of the Growald Household Fund. Amy Khor, Singapore’s Minister for Surroundings and Water Assets, noted that the country had declared 2018 an official yr of climate motion. Rising sea ranges and rising temperatures (the island state is heating up twice as shortly as the rest of the world, she stated) posed a menace to its future. It’s investing in solar power and expanding its public transport community so that eight out of each 10 Singaporeans can be inside strolling distance of a railway station. But, she stated, the authorities could not do it alone. It needed the help of both enterprise and civil society. Fung Wing-ah of BRACE Hong Kong defined that the funding firm had now aligned its whole portfolio on local weather change mitigation and, like Minister Khor, also careworn that the efforts of one sector alone wouldn’t be enough. Enter another key conference theme: all of the issues beneath discussion will require partnerships that contain not just cash but joint motion.

Later in the conference, Christine Heenan of the Rockefeller Foundation additionally touched on both of those in a keynote speech. The challenge is not to find options to local weather change, she argued. These exist already. The problem is to deliver them to scale. That’s the place partnerships come into play, partnerships based on mutual respect, complementary strengths and synergy.

Words to deeds The convention also marked the launch of AVPN’s local weather motion platform. Naina Batra, AVPN chair and CEO, signalled the want for a deeper and extra lively dedication which was evident all by means of proceedings. The platform, she stated, will probably be greater than a bit of symbolism, a board which all members have been invited to signal as an earnest of their solidarity, it should attempt to attach all the sectors, offering funding opportunities and information. However, she added, to achieve success, ‘it needs your engagement’. She spoke of the power of networks, which not solely deliver individuals collectively (her welcoming remarks have been addressed to 1348 delegates from 48 nations, itself a token of the formidable convening power of AVPN), they convey campaigns together and they bridge divides. However convening is just not enough. We have to catalyse and allow action. We need to cooperate, to behave urgently, whereas not dropping endurance and we have to make change irresistible.

Eileen Rockefeller Growald of the Growald Family Fund (GFF) struck a constructive word: ‘we can and are finding climate solutions together,’ she insisted. GFF is seeding social enterprises and innovators and collaborating with them and with funders to further climate options. The obstacles, nevertheless, remain formidable.  Know-how must be delivered to bear more shortly, stated Dan Choon of Cycle Group. Know-how transfer presently takes too lengthy – historically, 45-60 years to get to 20 per cent market penetration. We have to transfer a lot quicker. In the similar session, Britt Groosman of the Environmental Defense Fund spoke of the difficulties of shifting finance in the direction of measures to combat climate change. The subsequent-best factor, she stated, is to induce sectors who produce large-scale emissions, like aviation and delivery to think about carbon pricing, indeed there are indicators that they are doing so. Geoffrey Seeto of New Forests Asia endorsed this from his personal expertise. A variety of airways, one among which is Indigo in India, have agreed to offset their carbon emissions from 2020 and they see funding forestry from the proceeds of pricing carbon as part of doing that. Nevertheless, while funding carbon sequestration at scale is a confirmed technique of local weather change mitigation, only three per cent of local weather finance presently goes into it.

Ideas for attracting finance for local weather solutions brainstormed amongst all members in the session ranged from coaching grassroots installers of solar panels, debt aid for governments funding clean power and banks cooperating to offer concessionary ESG bonds.

Breaking boundaries Along with what we have to do, there’s the additional question of the place we’ll get the assets to do it. AVPN COO, Kevin Teo reminded the viewers that, if the SDGs are to be achieved, an estimated $2.5 trillion per yr will probably be needed (he was not the just one to cite this figure over the coming days). Giant buyers, subsequently, will need to make giant investments with proportionally huge influence and the convention title, Breaking Boundaries, signalled the need to attract those buyers – public and personal – into the social and environmental sphere. How to do this shaped one other strand linking convention proceedings. For its half. AVPN has been actively working with buyers in each these sectors, making an attempt to hyperlink personal influence or would-be impression buyers with social businesses on the one aspect and continuing to press forward with the APx coverage discussion board on the different.

Why don’t donors, especially corporate donors, let communities define their own needs quite than simply giving them what they, the donors, have?

James Chen, Founder of Clearly.

In his quest to ‘privatise failure and socialise success’ James Chen referred to as on philanthropists to train their much-touted capability for danger. ‘If you are serious about impact,’ he stated, ‘high risk is where the real returns occur.’ He provided Gates Basis’s work with malaria as a mannequin of catalytic philanthropy and an example of how ‘perseverance and domain expertise’ might have great influence. His personal organisation, Clearly, which aims to deliver low-cost imaginative and prescient correction to poor communities round the world, had overcome initial objections from funders, amongst them the World Financial institution, that there was no proof for the impact of imaginative and prescient correction programmes and no model of the intervention in low-income nations, by providing each in the form of Vision for a Nation, a programme run collectively with the authorities of Rwanda, and a serious research in the Lancet. Each, he stated, had helped to de-risk investment in sight correction.

Suitability and sustainability How are you going to construct a philanthropic culture when the word ‘philanthropy’ is barely understood, or has connotations of charity and patronage because it does in both Myanmar and Indonesia? The questions have been asked in a breakout session on unlocking native philanthropic funding in South-East Asia. In a spot like Myanmar the place investment and philanthropy are both discovering their ft, individuals have to build good companies, not just give away cash from successful ones, argued Aung Htun of Myanmar Investments. Ruel Maranan of the Ayala Foundation (Philippines) agreed, noting that the younger era is extra aware of the concept of social impression, so change is on the method. A more direct means of encouraging giving, believes Victor Hartono of the Djarum Basis in Indonesia, is for governments to offer tax incentives, a problem to which Veronica Colondam of YCAB Foundation in Indonesia would return later in the conference. The restrictive surroundings for philanthropy in that nation has meant, amongst different things, that YCAB took longer to find a suitable technique and type for its operation, since there are not any endowments.

Ertharin Cousin, Energy of Vitamin.

Inevitably, there was a lot speak of sustainability over the three and half days of the convention. It was Ruel Maranan who matched it with the notion of suitability. Why don’t donors, especially corporate donors, let communities define their own wants quite than simply giving them what they, the donors, have? It makes for larger engagement: ‘they [communities] are already involved and open,’ and if all stakeholders are concerned, all of them win, he argued. The theme of suitability also arose in discussion of the question of influence. Victor Hartono urged donors to assume ‘what’s applicable for you’ as well as for beneficiaries. Djarum, which has pioneered a form of vocational faculty that the authorities is now copying, crops timber as part of its local weather change mitigation efforts. It’s inside reach whereas funding in a more refined carbon seize know-how will not be.

The themes of collaboration and ‘feet on the ground’ have been additionally in proof in the session. Hartono spoke of the importance of ‘staying local. You are there, your people are there.’

The malnourished and the hungry 81.7 million youngsters in Asia endure from stunting because of malnutrition, stated Ertharin Cousin, previously of the World Food Programme and now a board member of the Energy of Vitamin. Opening a discussion on investing for higher vitamin, she introduced that the international value of malnutrition is now a staggering $three.5 trillion per yr, leaving apart the value in distress and suffering. We have to reform the international meals system, she stated, and we will’t do it without personal sector funding and involvement. To get it, we’d like agreed metrics outlined based on business rules. One other method, instructed both Martin Brief, CEO of the Energy of Vitamin and Rebecca Boustead of Kellogg, may be appealing to buyers’ bottom line, mentioning the economic effects of the drawback. Ertharin Cousin also sees nothing incorrect in corporations taking advantage of social investments, as long as they work and social benefits accrue.

If self-interest was a approach into the pockets of the personal sector, how might we get governments to take a position extra of their malnourished communities?

For Rebecca Boustead, there are two questions. How can we make meals which is both nutritious and appealing, and how can we get it to small village markets? She spoke of partnerships which Kellogg had with the Breakfast Revolution and with the Sesame Workshop. In the former case, meals was attending to the hard-to-reach and in the second, the message of the significance of vitamin was being conveyed.

If self-interest was a means into the pockets of the personal sector, how might we get governments to take a position extra in their malnourished communities? ‘Engage, engage, engage – with hard data’, was Ertharin Cousin’s recipe. Give them sensible solutions that help them get monetary savings, instructed Rebecca Boustead, a prescription not up to now faraway from that advocated by individuals for use with the personal sector.

Impression investing: time, transparency and demonstration These three issues are wanted to ramp up influence funding throughout all sectors. Whereas it is perhaps true to say, as Richard Ditzio of the Milken Institute, who chaired the subsequent panel discussion, did, that there is spare capital and it needs to spend money on sustainability, there are still obstacles. Didier von Daeniken, additionally of Normal Chartered questioned how banks and monetary institutions might help shoppers translate words like sustainability, influence investing and philanthropy into language they might perceive. Measurement continues to be a sticking level, he noted, as is the lack of knowledge about funding alternatives. Angela Bai of China Alliance of Social Worth Funding (CASVI) and Roy Swan of the Ford Foundation each endorsed this in a later session. Bai added a 3rd challenge: the problem of creating investments scalable.

Doug Lee of D3Jubilee Partners, an impression enterprise fund in South Korea famous a Catch-22 state of affairs arising. First-time funds have the lowest price of return, so buyers draw back, but if funds can’t appeal to buyers, how are they to succeed? Foundations have the added problem of persuading the trustees. Roy Swan associated that it took two years to induce Ford’s trustees to release eight per cent of the foundation’s endowment to dedicate to influence investing! Frank Niederlander of BMW Stiftung Herbert Quandt agreed that endurance is needed and caution. The pioneer buyers, he stated, have to be apostles. They will’t afford to fail.

Many banks in Asia (native and worldwide) nonetheless didn’t have a clear grasp of sustainable funding.

Rashesh Shah (proper) CEO of Edelweiss.

All that stated, there is progress. Rashesh Shah of Edelweiss (India) famous that particular person buyers are asking extra of their banks. Banks themselves, represented by Jose Vinals of Normal Chartered, can earn a living and assist save the world at the similar time, he stated. From doing no harm, Commonplace Chartered is now shifting in the direction of being a pressure for good. He referred to as for benchmarks on inexperienced bonds, tips for company disclosure and higher sustainability built into the financial system.  This remark itself is progress, says Annie Chen (RS Group, Hong Kong). She noted that she could not have imagined listening to a financial institution saying it ought to do good 10 years ago. The Sustainable Finance Initiative in Hong Kong which RS launched a yr earlier helps to spread the word on influence investing amongst household workplaces there and to foment a strong impression investment group. She famous, nevertheless, that many banks in Asia (local and international) nonetheless didn’t have a clear grasp of sustainable investment. Didier von Daeniken agreed. Communication is their largest drawback. Normal Chartered’s research among its Asian shoppers, nevertheless, means that 20 per cent of respondents at the moment are allocating some investment in the direction of the SDGs and that there’s higher understanding of impression investing.

There are different grounds for optimism. Each Annie Chen and Eliza Foo of Temasek International (Singapore) see hope in the evident want for change, particularly among the younger, and in the tempo of change. And there’s a lot at stake. If influence investing actually takes maintain, stated Amit Bouri of the International Influence Investing Community (GIIN), we’d change the means the financial markets work.

Measurement The challenge the convention returned to most frequently, although, was measurement of impression. Eric Rice of Wellington Management Singapore noted little progress on this, but influence is ‘what distinguishes this segment. We won’t get mainstream capital if we don’t determine it out, he warned. Moreover, new era donors are notably eager on impression, stated Giovanni Zenteno from LGT Enterprise Philanthropy. On the plus aspect, should you can present it, money is extra more likely to come your means.

Adam McCarty of Mekong Economics, whom I had marked down as a hard-shell pragmatist from previous periods, has a barely totally different take. We do influence measurement, he stated, because that’s the deal of influence investing. If you would like free or low cost cash, it’s a must to answer for the good you’re doing. Most influence measurement at the second is rudimentary, he advised and extra refined means gained’t emerge until donors demand it. Usually, panellists agreed, influence measurement is donor-driven, though Ronald Abraham of iDinsight in India feels that each side have to take it critically. He sees three essential challenges: first, impression evaluation is sluggish. It may take between one and three years, by which era the programme has changed. Second, the quality of the knowledge is usually poor. Third, it’s costly, though it could actually repay expenditure by the NPO, even if it doesn’t lead to extra funding. Idinsight had labored with Educate Women on a machine-learning venture which has enabled them to work with more youngsters on their price range, regardless of the initial value of the train.

Collaborative philanthropy For those who ask donors whether or not they practise collaboration, all of them say ‘yes’, stated Nadia Roumani of the Institute of Design at Stanford, though a show of arms in a breakout session on the matter revealed that only half a dozen or so out of an viewers of 50-60 are actually pooling assets. Why so few when it’s clear that more may be completed by working with others? The chief purpose given in the session was lack of management. Smaller contributors worry being swamped by larger ones, moreover, it is troublesome to reconcile giving unrestricted grants from the pool with the specific needs of particular person donors? Co-Influence tries to bypass this by allowing smaller contributors to vote on where they want their funds to go within the framework of the programme, stated Anne-Marie Harling of Co-Influence. Individuals also want a specific amount of humility. Erin Hulme of the Gates Basis stated that in the collaboration on polio involving Gates, WHO and UNICEF, the foundation had been prepared to ‘go where the expertise lies’ and did not want to steer. Boon Heong Ng of Temasek Worldwide agreed. Temasek was originally the sole donor of Challenge Silver Display in Singapore which works to fight listening to deficiencies amongst the elderly. Silver Display now includes other corporations, the Ministry of Well being and individuals’s associations, all of whom deliver totally different sorts of expertise.

Regardless of apparent advantages, collaboration remains troublesome, especially amongst establishments.

It’s not just massive funders who can benefit from collaboration. Ludwig Forrest of the King Baudouin Basis (KBF) explained the concept of umbrella foundations. These permit modest donors to pool assets beneath the aegis of a bigger entity like KBF and to provide to causes they have in widespread. It’s a approach of democratising philanthropy, he stated. KBF presently has 750 smaller foundations sheltering underneath its umbrella.

Regardless of obvious advantages, collaboration stays troublesome, especially amongst establishments. Establishing collaborations requires giving a number of thought to the construction, which must be clear, yet flexible sufficient to adapt, stated Nadia Roumani.

Larry Kramer, President of the Hewlett Foundation.

What’s efficient philanthropy? For these – and there have been many – who had been urging the non-profit to be more like the for-profit sector, Larry Kramer of the Hewlett Basis, had some words of warning. ‘It’s an enormous mistake,’ he stated. ‘We all want to be efficient but that’s not enterprise, it’s good organisational considering.’ Non- and for-profit organisations have totally different strategies, totally different areas of work and, most essential, totally different technique of measuring. Enterprise has one easy metric Philanthropy can’t have, however that doesn’t imply it could actually’t be effective. There are three parts to effective philanthropy: have a aim, have a story about the way to obtain it and have a approach to measure progress. The criterion for the last, he argued, is ‘reasonableness under the circumstances.’ Don’t mislead yourselves and don’t drive it. Settle for that there can be some fuzziness. He urged the viewers to assume when it comes to learning, not of success or failure.

Prizes If the ethos of the non-profit sector is – or should be – collaboration, the MacArthur Foundation has discovered competition can typically be helpful. Its 100 and Change prize gives $100 million for any answer to any drawback, defined Celia Conrad. The primary winner in 2017 was the Sesame Workshop. Along with sparking innovation, the applicants, even the unsuccessful ones, can generate invaluable concepts which could possibly be shared. For the winners themselves, the prize money will help deliver in more funds, as has happened for Sesame Workshop. Lisa George from the MacQuarie Group Basis in Australia had launched an identical, though more modest ($10 million) prize to mark its 50th anniversary. Like MacArthur, that they had been stunned by the high quality and breadth of the purposes. The shortlist of finalists had included initiatives as numerous as the Ocean Cleanup, Human Rights Watch and Woman Impact.

It’s a high-stakes recreation although, cautioned Safeena Hussain of Educate Women, a profitable applicant to the Audacious Challenge run by TED for its efforts to deliver 1.5 million women back into the faculty system in India. Whereas the software process may also help NGOs assume by way of what they do, additionally it is time-consuming. ‘If we hadn’t gained, we might have struggled,’ she stated, ‘because we had invested so much in the process for over a year.’ She urged funders to think about the value of the acquisition of their money.

Previous power, new energy The nature of power is changing and donors and buyers want to adjust to cope with the shift, says Jeremy Heimans of Function. Previous power is formal, specialist, non-participatory. It’s what he termed energy as foreign money. Harvey Weinstein is previous power (an unsympathetic instance in case you have been wondering which aspect you should be on). New power is transparent, casual, fluid, participatory, or energy as present, as he put it. Examples embrace #MeToo, Occupy and Airbnb. The longer term might be a battle for mobilisation, he predicted and the drawback philanthropists want to unravel is find out how to work with new power.

Workshops The final day of the convention offered the probability to work in more element in a collection of workshop throughout the morning and afternoon. As with the breakout and plenary periods, these coated a variety of subjects, among them, options journalism and the influence of storytelling, methods to improve the effectiveness of philanthropic follow, utilizing finance as a software to deal with gender-based violence, and figuring out impression funding opportunities in Asia. Each of the ones I attended proved fascinating and involving. In a single, Eric Nee, editor of Stanford Social Innovation Evaluate (SSIR) and Fan Li, his counterpart on the Chinese language version of SSIR, introduced the concept of options journalism. Moderately than providing exposés of issues, as traditional journalism tended to do, Nee defined, options journalism – nicely, the clue is in the identify – focuses on the response to the drawback, goes into element on how the response works and supplies lessons and frameworks, not just inspiration. He and Fan Li also outlined ways on presenting concepts in order that they might persist with the audience, telling tales that have been credible, concrete, simple and arresting.

‘Make expectations clear at the outset, listen more than you talk and be clear and consistent in your dealings with the grantee.’

The workshop on the effectiveness of philanthropy, introduced by Lindsay Louie of the Hewlett Basis, looked at 4 parts of Hewlett’s follow, values, strategy, measurement and grant apply. Louie underlined the importance that Hewlett attaches to analysis, spending two per cent of its finances on the difficulty. Moreover, Hewlett periodically evaluates its own evaluations. Evaluations need to watch three criteria, she steered: utility, acceptability and suitability. In different phrases, assessment needs to fit the intervention in question, it has to make respondents really feel part of the venture and it must be tied to implementation. When it comes to how one can be a great grantmaker, she provided the following: be responsive, show curiosity about the grantee organisation, not just the programme, make expectations clear at the outset, pay attention more than you speak and be clear and constant in your dealings with the grantee.

Consuming the conference As regular, AVPN offered an array of periods and subjects that have been virtually overwhelming in quantity and selection. When you’re catering for as giant and numerous an viewers as the conference attracts, it’s a must to put on an enormous menu.

It was thoughtfully set out, although. The subjects, although assorted, by no means strayed removed from the major themes of the convention. It appeared to me, too, that this yr, it was higher paced, with fewer, but longer periods which allowed larger discussion and there was an urgency and a conviction about proceedings which was putting. There were additionally more – and welcome – modifications of tempo, with a larger number of participatory periods. The standard of the periods, as all the time, depends on the presenters. Everyone could have their very own highlights, in response to taste. For me, James Chen’s and Larry Kramer’s keynotes, the workshops, and the local weather finance and the listening to the voices of grantees breakout periods stood out.

‘If you are giving money away, you’re a philanthropist. In the event you’re expecting inventory market returns, you’re not a philanthropist.’

One panellist remarked that you would put all of the individuals into three bins – those that want money, those that have it to provide and those who mediate in numerous capacities between them. He could also be proper, however those are very huge bins, accommodating many differing kinds and sizes of organisation – funders, non-profits, investment managers of different stripes, researchers, CSR officers and consultants and native and regional social enterprises who have been pitching to the ‘deal share’platform all added to the combine. A trademark of the AVPN conference remains its power and its curiosity. There’s a willingness to satisfy and to strike up conversations that isn’t all the time apparent at different gatherings. Little question individuals convey this with them, however AVPN deserves some credit score for offering the setting and the environment to allow them to do so.

One factor extra: Quite a few audio system appealed to an financial, fairly than a normative, rationale for addressing the points discussed which – for me – felt jarring. True, there were a lot of people in the room accustomed to considering in monetary phrases and each mode of life has its own conceptual body and its personal vocabulary. Perhaps, too, they thought the message of the social sector can be heard more readily by mainstream capital if it have been couched in phrases it might readily grasp. In any respect events, it felt at occasions like listeners have been being urged to take on social issues for the sake of worldwide GDP, slightly than for causes extra primarily human.

Clearly, it is going to take more than two or three days to break the boundaries between the social and mainstream investment worlds. Even those already on the social and impression funding bus – so to speak – weren’t all the time clear about the place to take a seat, who to take a seat with, or even what route the bus should take to its vacation spot. One participant I spoke to had a easy rule of thumb: ‘If you are giving money away, you’re a philanthropist. In case you’re anticipating stock market returns, you’re not a philanthropist.’ But if members are typically hazy about their very own roles and nomenclature and the difficulties of bringing others who are presently outdoors the ambit of social investment (nevertheless outlined) remain unresolved, certainly one of the things the convention made clear is that working in widespread takes time and plenty of conversations. You must start someplace. AVPN’s convention was a firm and essential first step.

The post Energy, curiosity and urgent questions on the AVPN agenda appeared first on Android Smart Gears.

[punkestboy-blog]

Energy, curiosity and urgent questions on the AVPN agenda

20 minute read

This text was initially featured on Alliance Magazine here.

The 2019 AVPN conference in Singapore put its cards firmly on the table from the begin.

The main target can be on massive themes: schooling, gender equality, hunger and malnutrition, and climate change – most of all on climate change. From the first session, speaker after speaker reminded us that we solely have 15 years through which to scale back greenhouse fuel emissions before the effects of local weather change turn out to be irreversible.

Amy Khor, Singapore’s Minister for Surroundings and Water Assets

And Asia is at the sharp end. The struggle to combat climate change shall be gained and lost there, stated Maria Athena Ballesteros, of the Growald Household Fund. Amy Khor, Singapore’s Minister for Surroundings and Water Assets, noted that the country had declared 2018 an official yr of climate motion. Rising sea ranges and rising temperatures (the island state is heating up twice as shortly as the rest of the world, she stated) posed a menace to its future. It’s investing in solar power and expanding its public transport community so that eight out of each 10 Singaporeans can be inside strolling distance of a railway station. But, she stated, the authorities could not do it alone. It needed the help of both enterprise and civil society. Fung Wing-ah of BRACE Hong Kong defined that the funding firm had now aligned its whole portfolio on local weather change mitigation and, like Minister Khor, also careworn that the efforts of one sector alone wouldn’t be enough. Enter another key conference theme: all of the issues beneath discussion will require partnerships that contain not just cash but joint motion.

Later in the conference, Christine Heenan of the Rockefeller Foundation additionally touched on both of those in a keynote speech. The challenge is not to find options to local weather change, she argued. These exist already. The problem is to deliver them to scale. That’s the place partnerships come into play, partnerships based on mutual respect, complementary strengths and synergy.

Words to deeds The convention also marked the launch of AVPN’s local weather motion platform. Naina Batra, AVPN chair and CEO, signalled the want for a deeper and extra lively dedication which was evident all by means of proceedings. The platform, she stated, will probably be greater than a bit of symbolism, a board which all members have been invited to signal as an earnest of their solidarity, it should attempt to attach all the sectors, offering funding opportunities and information. However, she added, to achieve success, ‘it needs your engagement’. She spoke of the power of networks, which not solely deliver individuals collectively (her welcoming remarks have been addressed to 1348 delegates from 48 nations, itself a token of the formidable convening power of AVPN), they convey campaigns together and they bridge divides. However convening is just not enough. We have to catalyse and allow action. We need to cooperate, to behave urgently, whereas not dropping endurance and we have to make change irresistible.

Eileen Rockefeller Growald of the Growald Family Fund (GFF) struck a constructive word: ‘we can and are finding climate solutions together,’ she insisted. GFF is seeding social enterprises and innovators and collaborating with them and with funders to further climate options. The obstacles, nevertheless, remain formidable.  Know-how must be delivered to bear more shortly, stated Dan Choon of Cycle Group. Know-how transfer presently takes too lengthy – historically, 45-60 years to get to 20 per cent market penetration. We have to transfer a lot quicker. In the similar session, Britt Groosman of the Environmental Defense Fund spoke of the difficulties of shifting finance in the direction of measures to combat climate change. The subsequent-best factor, she stated, is to induce sectors who produce large-scale emissions, like aviation and delivery to think about carbon pricing, indeed there are indicators that they are doing so. Geoffrey Seeto of New Forests Asia endorsed this from his personal expertise. A variety of airways, one among which is Indigo in India, have agreed to offset their carbon emissions from 2020 and they see funding forestry from the proceeds of pricing carbon as part of doing that. Nevertheless, while funding carbon sequestration at scale is a confirmed technique of local weather change mitigation, only three per cent of local weather finance presently goes into it.

Ideas for attracting finance for local weather solutions brainstormed amongst all members in the session ranged from coaching grassroots installers of solar panels, debt aid for governments funding clean power and banks cooperating to offer concessionary ESG bonds.

Breaking boundaries Along with what we have to do, there’s the additional question of the place we’ll get the assets to do it. AVPN COO, Kevin Teo reminded the viewers that, if the SDGs are to be achieved, an estimated $2.5 trillion per yr will probably be needed (he was not the just one to cite this figure over the coming days). Giant buyers, subsequently, will need to make giant investments with proportionally huge influence and the convention title, Breaking Boundaries, signalled the need to attract those buyers – public and personal – into the social and environmental sphere. How to do this shaped one other strand linking convention proceedings. For its half. AVPN has been actively working with buyers in each these sectors, making an attempt to hyperlink personal influence or would-be impression buyers with social businesses on the one aspect and continuing to press forward with the APx coverage discussion board on the different.

Why don’t donors, especially corporate donors, let communities define their own needs quite than simply giving them what they, the donors, have?

James Chen, Founder of Clearly.

In his quest to ‘privatise failure and socialise success’ James Chen referred to as on philanthropists to train their much-touted capability for danger. ‘If you are serious about impact,’ he stated, ‘high risk is where the real returns occur.’ He provided Gates Basis’s work with malaria as a mannequin of catalytic philanthropy and an example of how ‘perseverance and domain expertise’ might have great influence. His personal organisation, Clearly, which aims to deliver low-cost imaginative and prescient correction to poor communities round the world, had overcome initial objections from funders, amongst them the World Financial institution, that there was no proof for the impact of imaginative and prescient correction programmes and no model of the intervention in low-income nations, by providing each in the form of Vision for a Nation, a programme run collectively with the authorities of Rwanda, and a serious research in the Lancet. Each, he stated, had helped to de-risk investment in sight correction.

Suitability and sustainability How are you going to construct a philanthropic culture when the word ‘philanthropy’ is barely understood, or has connotations of charity and patronage because it does in both Myanmar and Indonesia? The questions have been asked in a breakout session on unlocking native philanthropic funding in South-East Asia. In a spot like Myanmar the place investment and philanthropy are both discovering their ft, individuals have to build good companies, not just give away cash from successful ones, argued Aung Htun of Myanmar Investments. Ruel Maranan of the Ayala Foundation (Philippines) agreed, noting that the younger era is extra aware of the concept of social impression, so change is on the method. A more direct means of encouraging giving, believes Victor Hartono of the Djarum Basis in Indonesia, is for governments to offer tax incentives, a problem to which Veronica Colondam of YCAB Foundation in Indonesia would return later in the conference. The restrictive surroundings for philanthropy in that nation has meant, amongst different things, that YCAB took longer to find a suitable technique and type for its operation, since there are not any endowments.

Ertharin Cousin, Energy of Vitamin.

Inevitably, there was a lot speak of sustainability over the three and half days of the convention. It was Ruel Maranan who matched it with the notion of suitability. Why don’t donors, especially corporate donors, let communities define their own wants quite than simply giving them what they, the donors, have? It makes for larger engagement: ‘they [communities] are already involved and open,’ and if all stakeholders are concerned, all of them win, he argued. The theme of suitability also arose in discussion of the question of influence. Victor Hartono urged donors to assume ‘what’s applicable for you’ as well as for beneficiaries. Djarum, which has pioneered a form of vocational faculty that the authorities is now copying, crops timber as part of its local weather change mitigation efforts. It’s inside reach whereas funding in a more refined carbon seize know-how will not be.

The themes of collaboration and ‘feet on the ground’ have been additionally in proof in the session. Hartono spoke of the importance of ‘staying local. You are there, your people are there.’

The malnourished and the hungry 81.7 million youngsters in Asia endure from stunting because of malnutrition, stated Ertharin Cousin, previously of the World Food Programme and now a board member of the Energy of Vitamin. Opening a discussion on investing for higher vitamin, she introduced that the international value of malnutrition is now a staggering $three.5 trillion per yr, leaving apart the value in distress and suffering. We have to reform the international meals system, she stated, and we will’t do it without personal sector funding and involvement. To get it, we’d like agreed metrics outlined based on business rules. One other method, instructed both Martin Brief, CEO of the Energy of Vitamin and Rebecca Boustead of Kellogg, may be appealing to buyers’ bottom line, mentioning the economic effects of the drawback. Ertharin Cousin also sees nothing incorrect in corporations taking advantage of social investments, as long as they work and social benefits accrue.

If self-interest was a approach into the pockets of the personal sector, how might we get governments to take a position extra of their malnourished communities?

For Rebecca Boustead, there are two questions. How can we make meals which is both nutritious and appealing, and how can we get it to small village markets? She spoke of partnerships which Kellogg had with the Breakfast Revolution and with the Sesame Workshop. In the former case, meals was attending to the hard-to-reach and in the second, the message of the significance of vitamin was being conveyed.

If self-interest was a means into the pockets of the personal sector, how might we get governments to take a position extra in their malnourished communities? ‘Engage, engage, engage – with hard data’, was Ertharin Cousin’s recipe. Give them sensible solutions that help them get monetary savings, instructed Rebecca Boustead, a prescription not up to now faraway from that advocated by individuals for use with the personal sector.

Impression investing: time, transparency and demonstration These three issues are wanted to ramp up influence funding throughout all sectors. Whereas it is perhaps true to say, as Richard Ditzio of the Milken Institute, who chaired the subsequent panel discussion, did, that there is spare capital and it needs to spend money on sustainability, there are still obstacles. Didier von Daeniken, additionally of Normal Chartered questioned how banks and monetary institutions might help shoppers translate words like sustainability, influence investing and philanthropy into language they might perceive. Measurement continues to be a sticking level, he noted, as is the lack of knowledge about funding alternatives. Angela Bai of China Alliance of Social Worth Funding (CASVI) and Roy Swan of the Ford Foundation each endorsed this in a later session. Bai added a 3rd challenge: the problem of creating investments scalable.

Doug Lee of D3Jubilee Partners, an impression enterprise fund in South Korea famous a Catch-22 state of affairs arising. First-time funds have the lowest price of return, so buyers draw back, but if funds can’t appeal to buyers, how are they to succeed? Foundations have the added problem of persuading the trustees. Roy Swan associated that it took two years to induce Ford’s trustees to release eight per cent of the foundation’s endowment to dedicate to influence investing! Frank Niederlander of BMW Stiftung Herbert Quandt agreed that endurance is needed and caution. The pioneer buyers, he stated, have to be apostles. They will’t afford to fail.

Many banks in Asia (native and worldwide) nonetheless didn’t have a clear grasp of sustainable funding.

Rashesh Shah (proper) CEO of Edelweiss.

All that stated, there is progress. Rashesh Shah of Edelweiss (India) famous that particular person buyers are asking extra of their banks. Banks themselves, represented by Jose Vinals of Normal Chartered, can earn a living and assist save the world at the similar time, he stated. From doing no harm, Commonplace Chartered is now shifting in the direction of being a pressure for good. He referred to as for benchmarks on inexperienced bonds, tips for company disclosure and higher sustainability built into the financial system.  This remark itself is progress, says Annie Chen (RS Group, Hong Kong). She noted that she could not have imagined listening to a financial institution saying it ought to do good 10 years ago. The Sustainable Finance Initiative in Hong Kong which RS launched a yr earlier helps to spread the word on influence investing amongst household workplaces there and to foment a strong impression investment group. She famous, nevertheless, that many banks in Asia (local and international) nonetheless didn’t have a clear grasp of sustainable investment. Didier von Daeniken agreed. Communication is their largest drawback. Normal Chartered’s research among its Asian shoppers, nevertheless, means that 20 per cent of respondents at the moment are allocating some investment in the direction of the SDGs and that there’s higher understanding of impression investing.

There are different grounds for optimism. Each Annie Chen and Eliza Foo of Temasek International (Singapore) see hope in the evident want for change, particularly among the younger, and in the tempo of change. And there’s a lot at stake. If influence investing actually takes maintain, stated Amit Bouri of the International Influence Investing Community (GIIN), we’d change the means the financial markets work.

Measurement The challenge the convention returned to most frequently, although, was measurement of impression. Eric Rice of Wellington Management Singapore noted little progress on this, but influence is ‘what distinguishes this segment. We won’t get mainstream capital if we don’t determine it out, he warned. Moreover, new era donors are notably eager on impression, stated Giovanni Zenteno from LGT Enterprise Philanthropy. On the plus aspect, should you can present it, money is extra more likely to come your means.

Adam McCarty of Mekong Economics, whom I had marked down as a hard-shell pragmatist from previous periods, has a barely totally different take. We do influence measurement, he stated, because that’s the deal of influence investing. If you would like free or low cost cash, it’s a must to answer for the good you’re doing. Most influence measurement at the second is rudimentary, he advised and extra refined means gained’t emerge until donors demand it. Usually, panellists agreed, influence measurement is donor-driven, though Ronald Abraham of iDinsight in India feels that each side have to take it critically. He sees three essential challenges: first, impression evaluation is sluggish. It may take between one and three years, by which era the programme has changed. Second, the quality of the knowledge is usually poor. Third, it’s costly, though it could actually repay expenditure by the NPO, even if it doesn’t lead to extra funding. Idinsight had labored with Educate Women on a machine-learning venture which has enabled them to work with more youngsters on their price range, regardless of the initial value of the train.

Collaborative philanthropy For those who ask donors whether or not they practise collaboration, all of them say ‘yes’, stated Nadia Roumani of the Institute of Design at Stanford, though a show of arms in a breakout session on the matter revealed that only half a dozen or so out of an viewers of 50-60 are actually pooling assets. Why so few when it’s clear that more may be completed by working with others? The chief purpose given in the session was lack of management. Smaller contributors worry being swamped by larger ones, moreover, it is troublesome to reconcile giving unrestricted grants from the pool with the specific needs of particular person donors? Co-Influence tries to bypass this by allowing smaller contributors to vote on where they want their funds to go within the framework of the programme, stated Anne-Marie Harling of Co-Influence. Individuals also want a specific amount of humility. Erin Hulme of the Gates Basis stated that in the collaboration on polio involving Gates, WHO and UNICEF, the foundation had been prepared to ‘go where the expertise lies’ and did not want to steer. Boon Heong Ng of Temasek Worldwide agreed. Temasek was originally the sole donor of Challenge Silver Display in Singapore which works to fight listening to deficiencies amongst the elderly. Silver Display now includes other corporations, the Ministry of Well being and individuals’s associations, all of whom deliver totally different sorts of expertise.

Regardless of apparent advantages, collaboration remains troublesome, especially amongst establishments.

It’s not just massive funders who can benefit from collaboration. Ludwig Forrest of the King Baudouin Basis (KBF) explained the concept of umbrella foundations. These permit modest donors to pool assets beneath the aegis of a bigger entity like KBF and to provide to causes they have in widespread. It’s a approach of democratising philanthropy, he stated. KBF presently has 750 smaller foundations sheltering underneath its umbrella.

Regardless of obvious advantages, collaboration stays troublesome, especially amongst establishments. Establishing collaborations requires giving a number of thought to the construction, which must be clear, yet flexible sufficient to adapt, stated Nadia Roumani.

Larry Kramer, President of the Hewlett Foundation.

What’s efficient philanthropy? For these – and there have been many – who had been urging the non-profit to be more like the for-profit sector, Larry Kramer of the Hewlett Basis, had some words of warning. ‘It’s an enormous mistake,’ he stated. ‘We all want to be efficient but that’s not enterprise, it’s good organisational considering.’ Non- and for-profit organisations have totally different strategies, totally different areas of work and, most essential, totally different technique of measuring. Enterprise has one easy metric Philanthropy can’t have, however that doesn’t imply it could actually’t be effective. There are three parts to effective philanthropy: have a aim, have a story about the way to obtain it and have a approach to measure progress. The criterion for the last, he argued, is ‘reasonableness under the circumstances.’ Don’t mislead yourselves and don’t drive it. Settle for that there can be some fuzziness. He urged the viewers to assume when it comes to learning, not of success or failure.

Prizes If the ethos of the non-profit sector is – or should be – collaboration, the MacArthur Foundation has discovered competition can typically be helpful. Its 100 and Change prize gives $100 million for any answer to any drawback, defined Celia Conrad. The primary winner in 2017 was the Sesame Workshop. Along with sparking innovation, the applicants, even the unsuccessful ones, can generate invaluable concepts which could possibly be shared. For the winners themselves, the prize money will help deliver in more funds, as has happened for Sesame Workshop. Lisa George from the MacQuarie Group Basis in Australia had launched an identical, though more modest ($10 million) prize to mark its 50th anniversary. Like MacArthur, that they had been stunned by the high quality and breadth of the purposes. The shortlist of finalists had included initiatives as numerous as the Ocean Cleanup, Human Rights Watch and Woman Impact.

It’s a high-stakes recreation although, cautioned Safeena Hussain of Educate Women, a profitable applicant to the Audacious Challenge run by TED for its efforts to deliver 1.5 million women back into the faculty system in India. Whereas the software process may also help NGOs assume by way of what they do, additionally it is time-consuming. ‘If we hadn’t gained, we might have struggled,’ she stated, ‘because we had invested so much in the process for over a year.’ She urged funders to think about the value of the acquisition of their money.

Previous power, new energy The nature of power is changing and donors and buyers want to adjust to cope with the shift, says Jeremy Heimans of Function. Previous power is formal, specialist, non-participatory. It’s what he termed energy as foreign money. Harvey Weinstein is previous power (an unsympathetic instance in case you have been wondering which aspect you should be on). New power is transparent, casual, fluid, participatory, or energy as present, as he put it. Examples embrace #MeToo, Occupy and Airbnb. The longer term might be a battle for mobilisation, he predicted and the drawback philanthropists want to unravel is find out how to work with new power.

Workshops The final day of the convention offered the probability to work in more element in a collection of workshop throughout the morning and afternoon. As with the breakout and plenary periods, these coated a variety of subjects, among them, options journalism and the influence of storytelling, methods to improve the effectiveness of philanthropic follow, utilizing finance as a software to deal with gender-based violence, and figuring out impression funding opportunities in Asia. Each of the ones I attended proved fascinating and involving. In a single, Eric Nee, editor of Stanford Social Innovation Evaluate (SSIR) and Fan Li, his counterpart on the Chinese language version of SSIR, introduced the concept of options journalism. Moderately than providing exposés of issues, as traditional journalism tended to do, Nee defined, options journalism – nicely, the clue is in the identify – focuses on the response to the drawback, goes into element on how the response works and supplies lessons and frameworks, not just inspiration. He and Fan Li also outlined ways on presenting concepts in order that they might persist with the audience, telling tales that have been credible, concrete, simple and arresting.

‘Make expectations clear at the outset, listen more than you talk and be clear and consistent in your dealings with the grantee.’

The workshop on the effectiveness of philanthropy, introduced by Lindsay Louie of the Hewlett Basis, looked at 4 parts of Hewlett’s follow, values, strategy, measurement and grant apply. Louie underlined the importance that Hewlett attaches to analysis, spending two per cent of its finances on the difficulty. Moreover, Hewlett periodically evaluates its own evaluations. Evaluations need to watch three criteria, she steered: utility, acceptability and suitability. In different phrases, assessment needs to fit the intervention in question, it has to make respondents really feel part of the venture and it must be tied to implementation. When it comes to how one can be a great grantmaker, she provided the following: be responsive, show curiosity about the grantee organisation, not just the programme, make expectations clear at the outset, pay attention more than you speak and be clear and constant in your dealings with the grantee.

Consuming the conference As regular, AVPN offered an array of periods and subjects that have been virtually overwhelming in quantity and selection. When you’re catering for as giant and numerous an viewers as the conference attracts, it’s a must to put on an enormous menu.

It was thoughtfully set out, although. The subjects, although assorted, by no means strayed removed from the major themes of the convention. It appeared to me, too, that this yr, it was higher paced, with fewer, but longer periods which allowed larger discussion and there was an urgency and a conviction about proceedings which was putting. There were additionally more – and welcome – modifications of tempo, with a larger number of participatory periods. The standard of the periods, as all the time, depends on the presenters. Everyone could have their very own highlights, in response to taste. For me, James Chen’s and Larry Kramer’s keynotes, the workshops, and the local weather finance and the listening to the voices of grantees breakout periods stood out.

‘If you are giving money away, you’re a philanthropist. In the event you’re expecting inventory market returns, you’re not a philanthropist.’

One panellist remarked that you would put all of the individuals into three bins – those that want money, those that have it to provide and those who mediate in numerous capacities between them. He could also be proper, however those are very huge bins, accommodating many differing kinds and sizes of organisation – funders, non-profits, investment managers of different stripes, researchers, CSR officers and consultants and native and regional social enterprises who have been pitching to the ‘deal share’platform all added to the combine. A trademark of the AVPN conference remains its power and its curiosity. There’s a willingness to satisfy and to strike up conversations that isn’t all the time apparent at different gatherings. Little question individuals convey this with them, however AVPN deserves some credit score for offering the setting and the environment to allow them to do so.

One factor extra: Quite a few audio system appealed to an financial, fairly than a normative, rationale for addressing the points discussed which – for me – felt jarring. True, there were a lot of people in the room accustomed to considering in monetary phrases and each mode of life has its own conceptual body and its personal vocabulary. Perhaps, too, they thought the message of the social sector can be heard more readily by mainstream capital if it have been couched in phrases it might readily grasp. In any respect events, it felt at occasions like listeners have been being urged to take on social issues for the sake of worldwide GDP, slightly than for causes extra primarily human.

Clearly, it is going to take more than two or three days to break the boundaries between the social and mainstream investment worlds. Even those already on the social and impression funding bus – so to speak – weren’t all the time clear about the place to take a seat, who to take a seat with, or even what route the bus should take to its vacation spot. One participant I spoke to had a easy rule of thumb: ‘If you are giving money away, you’re a philanthropist. In case you’re anticipating stock market returns, you’re not a philanthropist.’ But if members are typically hazy about their very own roles and nomenclature and the difficulties of bringing others who are presently outdoors the ambit of social investment (nevertheless outlined) remain unresolved, certainly one of the things the convention made clear is that working in widespread takes time and plenty of conversations. You must start someplace. AVPN’s convention was a firm and essential first step.

The post Energy, curiosity and urgent questions on the AVPN agenda appeared first on Android Smart Gears.

[yesmermaidenisaac-blog]

Energy, curiosity and urgent questions on the AVPN agenda

20 minute read

This text was initially featured on Alliance Magazine here.

The 2019 AVPN conference in Singapore put its cards firmly on the table from the begin.

The main target can be on massive themes: schooling, gender equality, hunger and malnutrition, and climate change – most of all on climate change. From the first session, speaker after speaker reminded us that we solely have 15 years through which to scale back greenhouse fuel emissions before the effects of local weather change turn out to be irreversible.

Amy Khor, Singapore’s Minister for Surroundings and Water Assets

And Asia is at the sharp end. The struggle to combat climate change shall be gained and lost there, stated Maria Athena Ballesteros, of the Growald Household Fund. Amy Khor, Singapore’s Minister for Surroundings and Water Assets, noted that the country had declared 2018 an official yr of climate motion. Rising sea ranges and rising temperatures (the island state is heating up twice as shortly as the rest of the world, she stated) posed a menace to its future. It’s investing in solar power and expanding its public transport community so that eight out of each 10 Singaporeans can be inside strolling distance of a railway station. But, she stated, the authorities could not do it alone. It needed the help of both enterprise and civil society. Fung Wing-ah of BRACE Hong Kong defined that the funding firm had now aligned its whole portfolio on local weather change mitigation and, like Minister Khor, also careworn that the efforts of one sector alone wouldn’t be enough. Enter another key conference theme: all of the issues beneath discussion will require partnerships that contain not just cash but joint motion.

Later in the conference, Christine Heenan of the Rockefeller Foundation additionally touched on both of those in a keynote speech. The challenge is not to find options to local weather change, she argued. These exist already. The problem is to deliver them to scale. That’s the place partnerships come into play, partnerships based on mutual respect, complementary strengths and synergy.

Words to deeds The convention also marked the launch of AVPN’s local weather motion platform. Naina Batra, AVPN chair and CEO, signalled the want for a deeper and extra lively dedication which was evident all by means of proceedings. The platform, she stated, will probably be greater than a bit of symbolism, a board which all members have been invited to signal as an earnest of their solidarity, it should attempt to attach all the sectors, offering funding opportunities and information. However, she added, to achieve success, ‘it needs your engagement’. She spoke of the power of networks, which not solely deliver individuals collectively (her welcoming remarks have been addressed to 1348 delegates from 48 nations, itself a token of the formidable convening power of AVPN), they convey campaigns together and they bridge divides. However convening is just not enough. We have to catalyse and allow action. We need to cooperate, to behave urgently, whereas not dropping endurance and we have to make change irresistible.

Eileen Rockefeller Growald of the Growald Family Fund (GFF) struck a constructive word: ‘we can and are finding climate solutions together,’ she insisted. GFF is seeding social enterprises and innovators and collaborating with them and with funders to further climate options. The obstacles, nevertheless, remain formidable.  Know-how must be delivered to bear more shortly, stated Dan Choon of Cycle Group. Know-how transfer presently takes too lengthy – historically, 45-60 years to get to 20 per cent market penetration. We have to transfer a lot quicker. In the similar session, Britt Groosman of the Environmental Defense Fund spoke of the difficulties of shifting finance in the direction of measures to combat climate change. The subsequent-best factor, she stated, is to induce sectors who produce large-scale emissions, like aviation and delivery to think about carbon pricing, indeed there are indicators that they are doing so. Geoffrey Seeto of New Forests Asia endorsed this from his personal expertise. A variety of airways, one among which is Indigo in India, have agreed to offset their carbon emissions from 2020 and they see funding forestry from the proceeds of pricing carbon as part of doing that. Nevertheless, while funding carbon sequestration at scale is a confirmed technique of local weather change mitigation, only three per cent of local weather finance presently goes into it.

Ideas for attracting finance for local weather solutions brainstormed amongst all members in the session ranged from coaching grassroots installers of solar panels, debt aid for governments funding clean power and banks cooperating to offer concessionary ESG bonds.

Breaking boundaries Along with what we have to do, there’s the additional question of the place we’ll get the assets to do it. AVPN COO, Kevin Teo reminded the viewers that, if the SDGs are to be achieved, an estimated $2.5 trillion per yr will probably be needed (he was not the just one to cite this figure over the coming days). Giant buyers, subsequently, will need to make giant investments with proportionally huge influence and the convention title, Breaking Boundaries, signalled the need to attract those buyers – public and personal – into the social and environmental sphere. How to do this shaped one other strand linking convention proceedings. For its half. AVPN has been actively working with buyers in each these sectors, making an attempt to hyperlink personal influence or would-be impression buyers with social businesses on the one aspect and continuing to press forward with the APx coverage discussion board on the different.

Why don’t donors, especially corporate donors, let communities define their own needs quite than simply giving them what they, the donors, have?

James Chen, Founder of Clearly.

In his quest to ‘privatise failure and socialise success’ James Chen referred to as on philanthropists to train their much-touted capability for danger. ‘If you are serious about impact,’ he stated, ‘high risk is where the real returns occur.’ He provided Gates Basis’s work with malaria as a mannequin of catalytic philanthropy and an example of how ‘perseverance and domain expertise’ might have great influence. His personal organisation, Clearly, which aims to deliver low-cost imaginative and prescient correction to poor communities round the world, had overcome initial objections from funders, amongst them the World Financial institution, that there was no proof for the impact of imaginative and prescient correction programmes and no model of the intervention in low-income nations, by providing each in the form of Vision for a Nation, a programme run collectively with the authorities of Rwanda, and a serious research in the Lancet. Each, he stated, had helped to de-risk investment in sight correction.

Suitability and sustainability How are you going to construct a philanthropic culture when the word ‘philanthropy’ is barely understood, or has connotations of charity and patronage because it does in both Myanmar and Indonesia? The questions have been asked in a breakout session on unlocking native philanthropic funding in South-East Asia. In a spot like Myanmar the place investment and philanthropy are both discovering their ft, individuals have to build good companies, not just give away cash from successful ones, argued Aung Htun of Myanmar Investments. Ruel Maranan of the Ayala Foundation (Philippines) agreed, noting that the younger era is extra aware of the concept of social impression, so change is on the method. A more direct means of encouraging giving, believes Victor Hartono of the Djarum Basis in Indonesia, is for governments to offer tax incentives, a problem to which Veronica Colondam of YCAB Foundation in Indonesia would return later in the conference. The restrictive surroundings for philanthropy in that nation has meant, amongst different things, that YCAB took longer to find a suitable technique and type for its operation, since there are not any endowments.

Ertharin Cousin, Energy of Vitamin.

Inevitably, there was a lot speak of sustainability over the three and half days of the convention. It was Ruel Maranan who matched it with the notion of suitability. Why don’t donors, especially corporate donors, let communities define their own wants quite than simply giving them what they, the donors, have? It makes for larger engagement: ‘they [communities] are already involved and open,’ and if all stakeholders are concerned, all of them win, he argued. The theme of suitability also arose in discussion of the question of influence. Victor Hartono urged donors to assume ‘what’s applicable for you’ as well as for beneficiaries. Djarum, which has pioneered a form of vocational faculty that the authorities is now copying, crops timber as part of its local weather change mitigation efforts. It’s inside reach whereas funding in a more refined carbon seize know-how will not be.

The themes of collaboration and ‘feet on the ground’ have been additionally in proof in the session. Hartono spoke of the importance of ‘staying local. You are there, your people are there.’

The malnourished and the hungry 81.7 million youngsters in Asia endure from stunting because of malnutrition, stated Ertharin Cousin, previously of the World Food Programme and now a board member of the Energy of Vitamin. Opening a discussion on investing for higher vitamin, she introduced that the international value of malnutrition is now a staggering $three.5 trillion per yr, leaving apart the value in distress and suffering. We have to reform the international meals system, she stated, and we will’t do it without personal sector funding and involvement. To get it, we’d like agreed metrics outlined based on business rules. One other method, instructed both Martin Brief, CEO of the Energy of Vitamin and Rebecca Boustead of Kellogg, may be appealing to buyers’ bottom line, mentioning the economic effects of the drawback. Ertharin Cousin also sees nothing incorrect in corporations taking advantage of social investments, as long as they work and social benefits accrue.

If self-interest was a approach into the pockets of the personal sector, how might we get governments to take a position extra of their malnourished communities?

For Rebecca Boustead, there are two questions. How can we make meals which is both nutritious and appealing, and how can we get it to small village markets? She spoke of partnerships which Kellogg had with the Breakfast Revolution and with the Sesame Workshop. In the former case, meals was attending to the hard-to-reach and in the second, the message of the significance of vitamin was being conveyed.

If self-interest was a means into the pockets of the personal sector, how might we get governments to take a position extra in their malnourished communities? ‘Engage, engage, engage – with hard data’, was Ertharin Cousin’s recipe. Give them sensible solutions that help them get monetary savings, instructed Rebecca Boustead, a prescription not up to now faraway from that advocated by individuals for use with the personal sector.

Impression investing: time, transparency and demonstration These three issues are wanted to ramp up influence funding throughout all sectors. Whereas it is perhaps true to say, as Richard Ditzio of the Milken Institute, who chaired the subsequent panel discussion, did, that there is spare capital and it needs to spend money on sustainability, there are still obstacles. Didier von Daeniken, additionally of Normal Chartered questioned how banks and monetary institutions might help shoppers translate words like sustainability, influence investing and philanthropy into language they might perceive. Measurement continues to be a sticking level, he noted, as is the lack of knowledge about funding alternatives. Angela Bai of China Alliance of Social Worth Funding (CASVI) and Roy Swan of the Ford Foundation each endorsed this in a later session. Bai added a 3rd challenge: the problem of creating investments scalable.

Doug Lee of D3Jubilee Partners, an impression enterprise fund in South Korea famous a Catch-22 state of affairs arising. First-time funds have the lowest price of return, so buyers draw back, but if funds can’t appeal to buyers, how are they to succeed? Foundations have the added problem of persuading the trustees. Roy Swan associated that it took two years to induce Ford’s trustees to release eight per cent of the foundation’s endowment to dedicate to influence investing! Frank Niederlander of BMW Stiftung Herbert Quandt agreed that endurance is needed and caution. The pioneer buyers, he stated, have to be apostles. They will’t afford to fail.

Many banks in Asia (native and worldwide) nonetheless didn’t have a clear grasp of sustainable funding.

Rashesh Shah (proper) CEO of Edelweiss.

All that stated, there is progress. Rashesh Shah of Edelweiss (India) famous that particular person buyers are asking extra of their banks. Banks themselves, represented by Jose Vinals of Normal Chartered, can earn a living and assist save the world at the similar time, he stated. From doing no harm, Commonplace Chartered is now shifting in the direction of being a pressure for good. He referred to as for benchmarks on inexperienced bonds, tips for company disclosure and higher sustainability built into the financial system.  This remark itself is progress, says Annie Chen (RS Group, Hong Kong). She noted that she could not have imagined listening to a financial institution saying it ought to do good 10 years ago. The Sustainable Finance Initiative in Hong Kong which RS launched a yr earlier helps to spread the word on influence investing amongst household workplaces there and to foment a strong impression investment group. She famous, nevertheless, that many banks in Asia (local and international) nonetheless didn’t have a clear grasp of sustainable investment. Didier von Daeniken agreed. Communication is their largest drawback. Normal Chartered’s research among its Asian shoppers, nevertheless, means that 20 per cent of respondents at the moment are allocating some investment in the direction of the SDGs and that there’s higher understanding of impression investing.

There are different grounds for optimism. Each Annie Chen and Eliza Foo of Temasek International (Singapore) see hope in the evident want for change, particularly among the younger, and in the tempo of change. And there’s a lot at stake. If influence investing actually takes maintain, stated Amit Bouri of the International Influence Investing Community (GIIN), we’d change the means the financial markets work.

Measurement The challenge the convention returned to most frequently, although, was measurement of impression. Eric Rice of Wellington Management Singapore noted little progress on this, but influence is ‘what distinguishes this segment. We won’t get mainstream capital if we don’t determine it out, he warned. Moreover, new era donors are notably eager on impression, stated Giovanni Zenteno from LGT Enterprise Philanthropy. On the plus aspect, should you can present it, money is extra more likely to come your means.

Adam McCarty of Mekong Economics, whom I had marked down as a hard-shell pragmatist from previous periods, has a barely totally different take. We do influence measurement, he stated, because that’s the deal of influence investing. If you would like free or low cost cash, it’s a must to answer for the good you’re doing. Most influence measurement at the second is rudimentary, he advised and extra refined means gained’t emerge until donors demand it. Usually, panellists agreed, influence measurement is donor-driven, though Ronald Abraham of iDinsight in India feels that each side have to take it critically. He sees three essential challenges: first, impression evaluation is sluggish. It may take between one and three years, by which era the programme has changed. Second, the quality of the knowledge is usually poor. Third, it’s costly, though it could actually repay expenditure by the NPO, even if it doesn’t lead to extra funding. Idinsight had labored with Educate Women on a machine-learning venture which has enabled them to work with more youngsters on their price range, regardless of the initial value of the train.

Collaborative philanthropy For those who ask donors whether or not they practise collaboration, all of them say ‘yes’, stated Nadia Roumani of the Institute of Design at Stanford, though a show of arms in a breakout session on the matter revealed that only half a dozen or so out of an viewers of 50-60 are actually pooling assets. Why so few when it’s clear that more may be completed by working with others? The chief purpose given in the session was lack of management. Smaller contributors worry being swamped by larger ones, moreover, it is troublesome to reconcile giving unrestricted grants from the pool with the specific needs of particular person donors? Co-Influence tries to bypass this by allowing smaller contributors to vote on where they want their funds to go within the framework of the programme, stated Anne-Marie Harling of Co-Influence. Individuals also want a specific amount of humility. Erin Hulme of the Gates Basis stated that in the collaboration on polio involving Gates, WHO and UNICEF, the foundation had been prepared to ‘go where the expertise lies’ and did not want to steer. Boon Heong Ng of Temasek Worldwide agreed. Temasek was originally the sole donor of Challenge Silver Display in Singapore which works to fight listening to deficiencies amongst the elderly. Silver Display now includes other corporations, the Ministry of Well being and individuals’s associations, all of whom deliver totally different sorts of expertise.

Regardless of apparent advantages, collaboration remains troublesome, especially amongst establishments.

It’s not just massive funders who can benefit from collaboration. Ludwig Forrest of the King Baudouin Basis (KBF) explained the concept of umbrella foundations. These permit modest donors to pool assets beneath the aegis of a bigger entity like KBF and to provide to causes they have in widespread. It’s a approach of democratising philanthropy, he stated. KBF presently has 750 smaller foundations sheltering underneath its umbrella.

Regardless of obvious advantages, collaboration stays troublesome, especially amongst establishments. Establishing collaborations requires giving a number of thought to the construction, which must be clear, yet flexible sufficient to adapt, stated Nadia Roumani.

Larry Kramer, President of the Hewlett Foundation.

What’s efficient philanthropy? For these – and there have been many – who had been urging the non-profit to be more like the for-profit sector, Larry Kramer of the Hewlett Basis, had some words of warning. ‘It’s an enormous mistake,’ he stated. ‘We all want to be efficient but that’s not enterprise, it’s good organisational considering.’ Non- and for-profit organisations have totally different strategies, totally different areas of work and, most essential, totally different technique of measuring. Enterprise has one easy metric Philanthropy can’t have, however that doesn’t imply it could actually’t be effective. There are three parts to effective philanthropy: have a aim, have a story about the way to obtain it and have a approach to measure progress. The criterion for the last, he argued, is ‘reasonableness under the circumstances.’ Don’t mislead yourselves and don’t drive it. Settle for that there can be some fuzziness. He urged the viewers to assume when it comes to learning, not of success or failure.

Prizes If the ethos of the non-profit sector is – or should be – collaboration, the MacArthur Foundation has discovered competition can typically be helpful. Its 100 and Change prize gives $100 million for any answer to any drawback, defined Celia Conrad. The primary winner in 2017 was the Sesame Workshop. Along with sparking innovation, the applicants, even the unsuccessful ones, can generate invaluable concepts which could possibly be shared. For the winners themselves, the prize money will help deliver in more funds, as has happened for Sesame Workshop. Lisa George from the MacQuarie Group Basis in Australia had launched an identical, though more modest ($10 million) prize to mark its 50th anniversary. Like MacArthur, that they had been stunned by the high quality and breadth of the purposes. The shortlist of finalists had included initiatives as numerous as the Ocean Cleanup, Human Rights Watch and Woman Impact.

It’s a high-stakes recreation although, cautioned Safeena Hussain of Educate Women, a profitable applicant to the Audacious Challenge run by TED for its efforts to deliver 1.5 million women back into the faculty system in India. Whereas the software process may also help NGOs assume by way of what they do, additionally it is time-consuming. ‘If we hadn’t gained, we might have struggled,’ she stated, ‘because we had invested so much in the process for over a year.’ She urged funders to think about the value of the acquisition of their money.

Previous power, new energy The nature of power is changing and donors and buyers want to adjust to cope with the shift, says Jeremy Heimans of Function. Previous power is formal, specialist, non-participatory. It’s what he termed energy as foreign money. Harvey Weinstein is previous power (an unsympathetic instance in case you have been wondering which aspect you should be on). New power is transparent, casual, fluid, participatory, or energy as present, as he put it. Examples embrace #MeToo, Occupy and Airbnb. The longer term might be a battle for mobilisation, he predicted and the drawback philanthropists want to unravel is find out how to work with new power.

Workshops The final day of the convention offered the probability to work in more element in a collection of workshop throughout the morning and afternoon. As with the breakout and plenary periods, these coated a variety of subjects, among them, options journalism and the influence of storytelling, methods to improve the effectiveness of philanthropic follow, utilizing finance as a software to deal with gender-based violence, and figuring out impression funding opportunities in Asia. Each of the ones I attended proved fascinating and involving. In a single, Eric Nee, editor of Stanford Social Innovation Evaluate (SSIR) and Fan Li, his counterpart on the Chinese language version of SSIR, introduced the concept of options journalism. Moderately than providing exposés of issues, as traditional journalism tended to do, Nee defined, options journalism – nicely, the clue is in the identify – focuses on the response to the drawback, goes into element on how the response works and supplies lessons and frameworks, not just inspiration. He and Fan Li also outlined ways on presenting concepts in order that they might persist with the audience, telling tales that have been credible, concrete, simple and arresting.

‘Make expectations clear at the outset, listen more than you talk and be clear and consistent in your dealings with the grantee.’

The workshop on the effectiveness of philanthropy, introduced by Lindsay Louie of the Hewlett Basis, looked at 4 parts of Hewlett’s follow, values, strategy, measurement and grant apply. Louie underlined the importance that Hewlett attaches to analysis, spending two per cent of its finances on the difficulty. Moreover, Hewlett periodically evaluates its own evaluations. Evaluations need to watch three criteria, she steered: utility, acceptability and suitability. In different phrases, assessment needs to fit the intervention in question, it has to make respondents really feel part of the venture and it must be tied to implementation. When it comes to how one can be a great grantmaker, she provided the following: be responsive, show curiosity about the grantee organisation, not just the programme, make expectations clear at the outset, pay attention more than you speak and be clear and constant in your dealings with the grantee.

Consuming the conference As regular, AVPN offered an array of periods and subjects that have been virtually overwhelming in quantity and selection. When you’re catering for as giant and numerous an viewers as the conference attracts, it’s a must to put on an enormous menu.

It was thoughtfully set out, although. The subjects, although assorted, by no means strayed removed from the major themes of the convention. It appeared to me, too, that this yr, it was higher paced, with fewer, but longer periods which allowed larger discussion and there was an urgency and a conviction about proceedings which was putting. There were additionally more – and welcome – modifications of tempo, with a larger number of participatory periods. The standard of the periods, as all the time, depends on the presenters. Everyone could have their very own highlights, in response to taste. For me, James Chen’s and Larry Kramer’s keynotes, the workshops, and the local weather finance and the listening to the voices of grantees breakout periods stood out.

‘If you are giving money away, you’re a philanthropist. In the event you’re expecting inventory market returns, you’re not a philanthropist.’

One panellist remarked that you would put all of the individuals into three bins – those that want money, those that have it to provide and those who mediate in numerous capacities between them. He could also be proper, however those are very huge bins, accommodating many differing kinds and sizes of organisation – funders, non-profits, investment managers of different stripes, researchers, CSR officers and consultants and native and regional social enterprises who have been pitching to the ‘deal share’platform all added to the combine. A trademark of the AVPN conference remains its power and its curiosity. There’s a willingness to satisfy and to strike up conversations that isn’t all the time apparent at different gatherings. Little question individuals convey this with them, however AVPN deserves some credit score for offering the setting and the environment to allow them to do so.

One factor extra: Quite a few audio system appealed to an financial, fairly than a normative, rationale for addressing the points discussed which – for me – felt jarring. True, there were a lot of people in the room accustomed to considering in monetary phrases and each mode of life has its own conceptual body and its personal vocabulary. Perhaps, too, they thought the message of the social sector can be heard more readily by mainstream capital if it have been couched in phrases it might readily grasp. In any respect events, it felt at occasions like listeners have been being urged to take on social issues for the sake of worldwide GDP, slightly than for causes extra primarily human.

Clearly, it is going to take more than two or three days to break the boundaries between the social and mainstream investment worlds. Even those already on the social and impression funding bus – so to speak – weren’t all the time clear about the place to take a seat, who to take a seat with, or even what route the bus should take to its vacation spot. One participant I spoke to had a easy rule of thumb: ‘If you are giving money away, you’re a philanthropist. In case you’re anticipating stock market returns, you’re not a philanthropist.’ But if members are typically hazy about their very own roles and nomenclature and the difficulties of bringing others who are presently outdoors the ambit of social investment (nevertheless outlined) remain unresolved, certainly one of the things the convention made clear is that working in widespread takes time and plenty of conversations. You must start someplace. AVPN’s convention was a firm and essential first step.

The post Energy, curiosity and urgent questions on the AVPN agenda appeared first on Android Smart Gears.