Impact investment, investing in projects that bring positive environmental and social benefits, although relatively unfamiliar to Chinese people, has gradually entered everyday discourse with the popularization of the ESG concept. Kevin Owocki, the founder of Gitcoin, emphasizes in his book "GreenPill" that the construction of public goods will lead web3 to provide positive value to human society, which coincides with the concept of impact investment.
But impact investment is easier said than done. How do we evaluate the positive or negative impact of a project? How do we shift the attention of profit-driven capital to the value of the environment and society? How do we mobilize the power of the public and the government to drive corporate strategy change?
Perhaps the more fundamental question is that criticism from the left has always believed that there is an irreconcilable contradiction between the capitalist system itself and environmental protection and gender equality. Is it possible to reform it within its own system? Or, as futile as trying to pull one's own hair to reach the sky? In any case, web3 opens up new space for thinking and practice. In this podcast, host Kevin Owocki, along with Li Jin from Variant Fund and Matthew Frehlich from Protocol Labs, delves into the various dimensions of this issue.
Introduction#
💡Impact investment is investing in projects that bring positive environmental and social benefits. Although relatively unfamiliar to Chinese people, it has gradually entered everyday discourse with the popularization of the ESG concept. Kevin Owocki, the founder of Gitcoin, emphasizes in his book "GreenPill" that the construction of public goods will lead web3 to provide positive value to human society, which coincides with the concept of impact investment.
However, impact investment is easier said than done. How do we evaluate the positive or negative impact of a project? How do we shift the attention of profit-driven capital to the value of the environment and society? How do we mobilize the power of the public and the government to drive corporate strategy change?
Perhaps the more fundamental question is that criticism from the left has always believed that there is an irreconcilable contradiction between the capitalist system itself and environmental protection and gender equality. Is it possible to reform it within its own system? Or, as futile as trying to pull one's own hair to reach the sky? In any case, web3 opens up new space for thinking and practice. In this podcast, host Kevin Owocki, along with Li Jin from Variant Fund and Matthew Frehlich from Protocol Labs, delves into the various dimensions of this issue.
Embedding Impact in KPIs#
Owocki poses an open-ended question to the guests: How can we promote impact investment in the web3 space?
Frehlich believes that to create a sustainable financing market for impact investment, on one end, you need pools of capital that align with values and are sustainable for reinvestment over long cycles, which means some level of value capture. On the other end, you need projects, people, and organizations to allocate resources to renewable causes, such as open-source software, carbon offset, and journalism. There is a real need to allocate our smartest people and most driven teams to these projects, but to make it happen, we need pools of capital that align with values and the right teams.
Jin suggests looking beyond web3 and seeing the bigger picture of impact investment. Impact investment is about pursuing positive social and environmental impact beyond traditional financial returns. Traditionally, the driving force behind most capital has been profit. To make impact investment happen, the evaluation of impact should be tied to financial returns and incorporated into the main KPIs of companies or projects.
Regarding Frehlich's view on efficient market hypothesis, Jin points out that we should not overlook the phenomenon of market failure around us. Markets are not always efficient, and supply and demand are not always cleared at the most socially beneficial points. Market failures can arise from externalities that are not internalized, imbalances in market power distort the market itself, or information asymmetry, among other factors. By placing the consideration of impact outside of financial incentives, it already explains why we don't have more impact investment, because impact is set as a separate KPI distinct from financial returns. So we should embed impact in the consideration of financial returns and then optimize that consideration.
Frehlich agrees with this perspective.
99% of Emissions Reduction Comes from Government Mandates#
When it comes to global climate issues, companies are undoubtedly the most important direct stakeholders, but how to drive companies to look beyond profits is a micro-behavioral question. Both the host and guests point to the public and the government as the driving forces.
Jin states that some companies have already shifted their strategies towards green emissions reduction. Exploring the motivations behind their transformation and how to extend this change to other areas of impact investment will be interesting topics.
Jin analyzes that there are two explanations for the attitude shift towards climate issues. Either it is a cultural shift where corporate leadership accepts responsibility for addressing climate change and voluntarily implements carbon reduction, or it is because consumers care so much about climate change that companies and brands that demonstrate a sense of responsibility towards climate issues in their consumption habits are favored, and therefore companies comply with consumer pressure to maximize profits.
Owocki adds that in the carbon credit market, 99% of carbon credits are purchased due to government mandates, meaning only 1% is voluntary. (Jin agrees with this statement.) The next question is how to make companies voluntarily purchase carbon credits in order to expand the carbon credit market.
Regarding government regulation, Frehlich believes that in democratic politics, the root lies in the public transmitting values through voting and representation in parliament.
Jin believes that not only consumers can exert pressure, but on the other end of the corporate spectrum, investors also have a significant say. Capital owners, as a special small group, largely determine which startups in the United States receive funding and thus grasp the overall direction of technological innovation. Obviously, this group does not have social representation. There is a widely circulated joke that a VC in Silicon Valley invested in a bubble tea delivery store, and people make fun of it because it solves the problem of a small group of wealthy people instead of addressing more widespread issues. This brings us back to the topic of web3, which has a mechanism to democratize investment. In theory, anyone can participate in the investment process. People can pool funds on the blockchain through investment clubs or DAOs and vote with their feet and money. They can guide the investment of the treasury, such as Nouns DAO. When ordinary people can decide on investment choices, there will be a huge transformation in the types of innovation and the impact they generate.
(The above content ends at 21:35)
(The following section starts at 48:14)
Frehlich emphasizes that web3 forces us to think about resource allocation and distribution and **fundamental questions about what capitalism and markets are, which leads to community participation. What if we use DAOs instead of governments or NGOs for resource allocation? Will we be more effective in solving problems from the grassroots rather than a more centralized position? Some experiments have already emerged, such as quadratic voting, and Gitcoin's exploration is great, and Optimism is also experimenting.
Reflecting on Impact#
Returning to more fundamental questions, what kind of impact do we want to see from investments, and if this impact cannot be quantified, it is also difficult to generate clear investment prospects.
Jin quotes a friend's complaint that even for seemingly clear businesses like carbon reduction, where the amount of carbon dioxide absorbed by a tree can be quantified, the market conditions are still chaotic. There are so many types of solutions, paired with different levels of carbon offset, and a lack of transparency, etc. Considering the different types of impact markets we need to address, such as poverty alleviation and job creation, it becomes even more difficult to prove impact and track every step of the process to verify whether the impact of a project is positive.
Jin says that from the history of the investment industry, we have thought that we have had a positive impact on the world, but in reality, there are complex and unpredictable consequences, some of which are negative. For example, dating apps, which are great in theory and help people find soulmates, but in reality, they have changed people's psychology and behavior in unforeseen ways. Does it increase people's happiness or weaken it? Does it increase the chances of finding true love or the opposite? It is very difficult to measure. These startups have received funding and achieved market success, but the real impact is very complex and subtle, and even impossible to accurately calculate.
Frehlich acknowledges that we cannot grasp all the variables because they are nonlinear changes, but perhaps we can grasp some of the linear effects, even if we don't know the exact statistics. For example, the carbon emissions market may have significant misallocation of resources, but we are slowly improving. We are dealing with an imperfect system, but we are constantly iterating, developing tools, building infrastructure, and optimizing methodologies to make them better. Does this constitute a reason for investment?
Jin resonates with this and says that it is a worthwhile endeavor, in fact, one of the most important endeavors in the world. From the beginning, we need to have philosophical thinking about what we care about and want to see in the world before we can start thinking about allocating funds in that direction.
Jin shares her recent blog post "The Justice of Web3," which was inspired by Rawls' "A Theory of Justice." It explores how to allocate resources in the most socially optimal way when resources are scarce, which leads to the ideas of fairness and justice. This is actually the starting point of our entire conversation. People always rush to pursue various forms of impact without going through this basic reflection.
Link to this podcast episode:
Subscribe to the podcast: https://availableon.com/greenpill
The Network State website: https://thenetworkstate.com/ (includes books and podcast resources)
Infinite Carrots and Human Prosperity | Green Pill
Proof of Humanity: Exploring Decentralized Identity Verification and Digital Democratic Governance
Designing New Collective Decision-Making Mechanisms | Greenpill
As a Workstream initiated in the Uncommons community, "GreenPill Podcast Study Group" adopts a collaborative approach and encourages more people to get involved. Specifically, we are recruiting the following roles:
Course Representatives
Listen to the podcast, produce post-listening notes, and publish them on the Uncommons community media account.
It's not about translation! It's about expanding and summarizing based on understanding the content.
Share your notes and understanding at the study group meeting.
Bounties will be awarded based on the duration of the podcast, at a rate of 3 USDT per minute.
Layout Editors
Based on the content and column information produced by the course representatives, do the layout.
Each article is 15 USDT.
If you are interested in any of the above roles, please sign up on our Dework page:
https://app.dework.xyz/greenpill
If you are interested in our Workstream, please copy and open our Notion page:
https://greenpillcn.notion.site/GreenPill-62cbfc461cb44fd0a55f62a8104928bc
Our related output content will continue to be published on the Uncommons community's relevant media platforms, so please stay tuned.
Uncommons is a public sphere where a collective of Commons Builders explores Crypto Thoughts together.
Uncommons is a community of crypto enthusiasts, social builders, and internet citizens who are committed to the construction of public goods. It was formerly known as the GreenPill Chinese community.
Uncommons is an encrypted humanistic brand incubated by Plank.
Notion Community Collaboration Document: https://uncommons.notion.site
Telegram Face-to-Face Digital Garden: https://t.me/theuncommons
Twitter Global Publicity: https://twitter.com/Un__commons