Executive summary
Every investor motivated by positive social or environmental change faces the core question: “What is the most useful thing I can do with this capital?” This report provides an orientation tool to help capital owners navigate various strategies. The central matrix is anchored by two independent axes. The first is intent, ranging from mitigating financial risks (responsible) to prioritising outcomes with no financial return expectations (philanthropy). The second axis is the lens, representing the scope of change sought: focusing on individual assets, broader markets and sectors, or real-economy systems.

Introduction
The report rests on the assumption that all investment has social or environmental impact, whether intended or not. Impact is not a simple linear progression; for instance, an investor actively mitigating harm across a large portfolio may contribute more to positive change than one pursuing a poorly executed impact strategy. The orientation tool is designed to help investors locate current activities and identify adjacent possibilities across different issue areas, including climate, nature, human rights, and housing.

The spectrum of capital
Investors typically deploy capital across a spectrum of intents, including traditional, responsible, sustainable, impact, and philanthropy. These are viewed as layers rather than silos. For example, a “responsible” approach might involve negative screening for reasons of financial materiality. “Sustainable” investing actively favours assets that contribute to positive outcomes, such as renewable energy, while expecting market-rate returns. “Impact” investing targets underserved needs, such as off-grid solar for rural communities, where the social outcome is a deliberate, measured objective.

Three lenses of investor influence
Investor influence is categorised into three nested lenses. The asset lens focuses on individual organisations or projects, where change is often understood as tangible outputs like homes powered. The market or sector lens aims to alter conditions so that entities not directly financed by the investor also behave differently. This might involve setting shared standards, such as the Green Bond Principles. Finally, the systems lens attends to the structural conditions and rules of the real economy, requiring a combination of investment, advocacy, and coalition-building to shift underlying conditions rather than merely operating within them.

How investors contribute: four common mechanisms
Investors typically influence change through four core mechanisms. First, “signal” involves public communication, such as a coal divestment announcement, which can influence pricing or discourse. Second, “engage actively” utilises investor voice, networks, and expertise to influence stakeholder behaviour. Third, “grow new or underserved markets” involves deploying capital into unproven models to demonstrate viability. Fourth, “provide financial flexibility” adapts terms, such as accepting lower returns or providing guarantees, to unlock impactful projects that are not commercially attractive on standard terms.

Navigating capital strategies: orientation matrix
The matrix illustrates how contribution mechanisms manifest when specific intents meet certain lenses. Real-world cases highlight diverse approaches. PFZW/PGGM, a Dutch pension fund, moved beyond its portfolio to help build market infrastructure, including a shared taxonomy for SDG-aligned investments. HESTA manages systemic risks for members in health and community services and has contributed to Australian biodiversity legislation. Triodos Bank uses commercial lending to prove the viability of sectors like wind energy and co-founded the Global Alliance for Banking on Values. Builders Vision, through its Oceans strategy, has invested over USD 260 million across 158 partners by 2025. CO_ conducted more than 70 interviews to build a causal map of Mexico’s education system before selecting 33 initiatives from over 1,360 screened.

Navigating options
Several factors shape an investor’s strategy, including financial constraints like fiduciary duties or liquidity needs. The scale of assets often dictates the range of available strategies, though small funders can influence systems by joining coalitions. Proving contribution becomes increasingly difficult when moving from assets to systems, as attribution is harder to quantify. Additionally, the availability of intermediaries, like wealth managers, can limit the strategies presented to an investor. The UN Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI) provides a concrete example of this convergence, with over 5,000 signatories managing USD 139.6 trillion in assets now offered distinct guidance for managing system-level risks.

Moving forward
The report offers five starter prompts for practitioners. Investors should map current investments against priority issues to identify their current location on the matrix. They should then compare this map against their intentions to identify any “default” positions. It is crucial to evaluate whether intermediaries can provide the desired strategies and to assess which contribution mechanisms are being relied upon most. Finally, investors are encouraged to identify others working in adjacent matrix cells to find opportunities for collaboration and partnership.