The dissonance of two societal trends -- the resurgence of venture investing and the rise in environmentally and socially responsible enterprises -- has given birth to the notion of "patient capital."
Much like its gastronomical brethren movement, slow food, patient capital is a backlash against institutionalization -- in this case, of money as a means of earning, well, a fast buck. Rather, say its adherents, money should be a means of creating wealth -- the kind that enriches society, the environment, and our collective soul just as much as investors' financial standing.
I guess it isn't against the law to take less than the maximum return in order to produce a more positive overall social outcome. Rather than making more and giving some away, why not settle for a less than maximal rate of return and create greater positive effects through the enterprise itself. I see this for example in the philanthropic consulting field. You can set up a firm to make the most possible money helping people be generous, or you can generously set up a firm that barely gets by setting a good example. The difference between a social venture and a nonprofit may be a matter of degree, marked by a choice, one side or the other, of legal entity.
P
