2026 Guide | AI in Financial Services
ESG ImpactArticles

Common Elements Among Impact Investing Frameworks

Published: August 23, 2021
Modified: August 14, 2025
Key Takeaways

The three main components of ESG impact measurement

There are three widely referenced frameworks (see table below) to derive a baseline of the impact components. The second column in the figure summarizes the frameworks’ descriptions of the key defining features of impact investments, while the third column lists the mechanisms by which investors can create impact through investment processes. Finally, the fourth column outlines how these frameworks require the impact created by investments to be measured.

Reviewing the frameworks described above, we find that despite varying approaches, there are some common elements prescribed across all three. What the GIIN describes as intentionality is observed in the other two frameworks with the IMP using “what is the goal” as a key evaluation criterion, and Kölbel et al.’s framework focusing on “causality”.

Next we observe that all three frameworks include creating a measurable and observable change that would not be possible without the investment in consideration as a key criteria for it to qualify as an impact investment. A commonly used term for this is “additionality”.

Finally, there is a focus across all three frameworks on who the investment is impacting, and helping provide capital to enable companies to “grow”. This points towards the importance of inclusivity in who the impact capital is being supplied to and who the final beneficiaries will be.

We therefore conclude that the baseline for all the frameworks consists of the intentionality, additionality, and inclusivity of the impact resulting from the investment decisions under consideration. We present these three impact components in detail in the table below.

Research and Insights

Latest news and articles

Regulatory Compliance

When the Rules Are Clear but the Expectations Are Not: Navigating Global Norms Screening in a Fragmented Supervisory Landscape

Across the EU, Financial Market Participants (FMPs) face an increasingly urgent compliance challenge, one that sits not in the complexity of the rules themselves, but in the absence of agreement on how to apply them. The regulatory texts that require global norms screening (SFDR's Principal Adverse Impact indicators, the ESMA Naming Rules, Paris-Aligned and Climate…

AI

AI in Financial Services: The decisions that separate winners from the rest

Learn how AI is reshaping financial services decision-making and what separates the firms that get it right.

Climate, Regulatory Compliance

The Scope 3 Illusion: Why European Financial Sector Emissions Are Now “Rising”

At first glance, recent data from the global financial sector contains a paradox: despite years of aggressive green regulations, the carbon intensity of European financial institutions appears to be rising steadily. But this "surge" is an illusion. The financial sector is not necessarily getting dirtier; its emissions are finally becoming visible. Exposing the emissions that…