Priorities of impact investing in environmental protection projects: the case of the future post-war reconstruction of Ukraine
Abstract
The purpose of this article is to identify environmental protection projects for priority impact investing on the example of the future post-war reconstruction of Ukraine. To evaluate priorities, it is proposed to use the results of a survey of ten independent experts in the field of environmental projects and ecology, belonging to the public, private and non-profit sectors of Ukraine. The survey includes an assessment of environmental protection projects based on the importance and effectiveness of their impact, the characteristics of stakeholders, the duration and risks of the projects, their contribution to the environment and sustainable development. The obtained scores are ranked based on the criteria of Laplace, Wald, Hurwitz, Savage, and Bord and Condorcet rules. In accordance with this, the most priority projects for impact investing are environmental protection projects aimed at land reclamation, conservation and protection, forest restoration, implementation of the national system of trading quotas for greenhouse gas emissions, and eco-modernization of industrial and infrastructural enterprises. This indicates the need for a comprehensive multi-vector approach to the selection of priority areas for impact investing. The lessons learned will be useful for the effective direction or selection of investment projects, their forecasting and analysis.
Keyword : impact investment, environmental protection projects, prioritization, post-war reconstruction, Ukraine, decision-making theory
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
References
Čeryová, D., Bullová, T., Adamičková, I., Turčeková, N., & Bielik, P. (2020). Potential of investments into renewable energy sources. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 18(2), 57–63. https://doi.org/10.21511/ppm.18(2).2020.06
Dziawgo, L., & Dziawgo, E. (2016). Ecological evolution of financial market: Ecologically responsible investment. In M. Bilgin, H. Danis, E. Demir, & U. Can (Eds), Business challenges in the changing economic landscape (Vol. 1, pp. 167–178). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-22596-8_11
Ikram, M., Ferasso, M., Sroufe, R., & Zhang, Q. (2021). Assessing green technology indicators for cleaner production and sustainable investments in a developing country context. Journal of Cleaner Production, 322, 129090. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.129090
Impact Frontiers. (n.d.). Five dimensions of impact. Retrieved September 18, 2022, from https://impactfrontiers.org/norms/five-dimensions-of-impact/
Melnyk, L., Kubatko, O., Piven, V., Klymenko, K., & Rybina, L. (2021). Digital and economic transformations for sustainable development promotion: A case of OECD countries. Environmental Economics, 12(1), 140–148. https://doi.org/10.21511/ee.12(1).2021.12
Ministry of Environmental Protection and Natural Resources of Ukraine. (n.d.). Dashboard with data on environmental threats. Retrieved September 10, 2022, from https://ecozagroza.gov.ua/en
National Recovery Council. (2021). Ukraine’s National recovery plan. Retrieved September 8, 2022. https://uploads-ssl.webflow.com/621f88db25fbf24758792dd8/62c166751fcf41105380a733_NRC%20Ukraine%27s%20Recovery%20Plan%20blueprint_ENG.pdf
National Recovery Council. (2022). Recovery Plan of Ukraine (draft). Materials of the working group “Environmental safety”. https://uploads-ssl.webflow.com/621f88db25fbf24758792dd8/62dacb5a1f01740ae90479d9_22.07.2022_Ecosafety_Eng.pdf
Nitzan, S., & Baharad, E. (2003). The Borda rule, Condorcet consistency and Condorcet stability. Economic Theory, 22, 685–688. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00199-002-0318-3
Plastun, A., Makarenko, I., Yelnikova, Y., & Makarenko, S. (2019). Environmental, social and governance investment standardization: Moving towards sustainable economy. Environmental Economics, 10(1), 12–22. https://doi.org/10.21511/ee.10(1).2019.02
Quaicoe, A., & Eleke-Aboagye, P. Q. (2021). Behavioral factors affecting investment decision-making in bank stocks on the Ghana stock exchange. Qualitative Research in Financial Markets, 13(4), 425–439. https://doi.org/10.1108/QRFM-05-2020-0084
Riyazahmed, K. (2021). Investment motives and preferences – An empirical inquiry during COVID-19. Investment Management and Financial Innovations, 18(2), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.21511/imfi.18(2).2021.01
Rohov, H., Prykhodko, S., Kolodiziev, O., Sybirtsev, V., & Krupka, I. (2021). Factors of national environmental performance in sustainability management aspect. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 19(3), 70–84. https://doi.org/10.21511/ppm.19(3).2021.07
Shevchenko, H., Petrushenko, M., Burkynskyi, B., & Khumarova, N. (2021). SDGs and the ability to manage change within the European green deal: The case of Ukraine. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 19(1), 53–67. https://doi.org/10.21511/ppm.19(1).2021.05
Shivaprasad, S. P., Geetha, E., Raghavendra, K. L., & Rajeev, M. (2022). Choosing the right options trading strategy: Risk-return trade-off and performance in different market conditions. Investment Management and Financial Innovations, 19(2), 37–50. https://doi.org/10.21511/imfi.19(2).2022.04
Shkarupa, O., Kalchenko, Y., & Shkarupa, I. (2019). Developing the system of instruments for business sector in order to transfer the environmental innovations effectively: Case of Ukraine. Environmental Economics, 10(1), 113–121. https://doi.org/10.21511/ee.10(1).2019.09
Slepecký, J., Vorontsova, A., Plastun, A., Makarenko, I., & Zhyhlei, I. (2022). Net investment position and the stock market: The case of traditional and ESG indices. Investment Management and Financial Innovations, 19(2), 51–66. https://doi.org/10.21511/imfi.19(2).2022.05
State environmental inspectorate of Ukraine. (n.d.). Retrieved September 8, 2022, from https://eng.dei.gov.ua/
Steiauf, T., & Schäfer, H. (2014). From integration to impact – a new investment climate for Germany’s SRI landscape. Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment, 4(1), 38–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/20430795.2014.887347
Stojcetovic, B., Nikolic, D., Velinov, V., & Bogdanovic, D. (2016). Application of integrated strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats and analytic hierarchy process methodology to renewable energy project selection in Serbia. Journal of Renewable and Sustainable Energy, 8(3), 035906. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4950950
Tsai, W.-H., Chou, W.-C., & Hsu, W. (2009). The sustainability balanced scorecard as a framework for selecting socially responsible investment: An effective MCDM model. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 60(10), 1396–1410. https://doi.org/10.1057/jors.2008.91
Ulansky, V., & Raza, A. (2021). Generalization of minimax and maximin criteria in a game against nature for the case of a partial a priori uncertainty. Heliyon, 7(7), e07498. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07498
Vorontsova, A., Makarenko, I., Petrushenko, Yu., Ostapchuk, T., & Boiko, O. (2021, September). Categories of responsible investment: Bibliometric Landscape. In The 11th International Conference on Intelligent Data Acquisition and Advanced Computing Systems: Technology and Application (IDAACS). Cracow, Poland. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/IDAACS53288.2021.9660993
Zulfikar, Z. (2022). Bibliometric analysis of stock market performance throughout the COVID-19 outbreak. Investment Management and Financial Innovations, 19(2), 14–23. https://doi.org/10.21511/imfi.19(2).2022.02