Bankable and Extractable: A Two-Axis Map of Capital Exclusion and the Case for Recyclable Philanthropic Capital

Roshan Ghadamian
Additional contact information
Roshan Ghadamian: Institute for Regenerative Systems Architecture

IRSA Working Papers from Institute for Regenerative Systems Architecture

Abstract: Frameworks that describe the landscape of capital—the returns continuum, the spectrum of capital, blended value—array instruments along a single dimension: the return a financier expects. We argue this is one axis short. Traditional finance underwrites two independent questions and requires an affirmative answer to both: can the venture service a fixed, priced, scheduled claim (bankability), and is there a financial surplus a financier can capture (extractability)? Debt requires the first; equity requires the second. The market therefore serves only the quadrant where both hold, and equity reaches partway into a second quadrant for the exitable few. The remainder—most small, seasonal, thin-margin, non-standard and mission ventures—is exiled, served if at all by one-shot grants. We show that a recoverable grant (philanthropic capital deployed with the expectation but not the obligation of return) is the unique instrument indifferent to both axes, and that its economic payoff is exactly the geometric series T(R) = 1/(1-R) in the recovery rate R—a quantity convex in R, so that the last points of recovery dominate. We formalise the recyclable pool as an engine (high-R, self-regenerating) subsidising a consumption tranche (low-R, high-impact), and characterise its sustainability. We then take the model to data: classifying every financially-reporting Australian charity (n = 44,196) on the two axes—using market-facing earned income as an observable proxy for extractability, which is structurally near zero across a legally non-distributing sector—we find the exiled region is not rhetoric but the sector's dominant reality. Half of all charities by count are bankable yet non-commercial, and a donation-funded core of 10,551 organisations ($10.1 bn in annual revenue) is the sharpest target for recoverable capital; the classification reconciles to the regulator's published aggregates within 2–4% across four years. The pattern replicates in the United States: classifying 283,771 full-990 public charities on the identical axes, the same bankable, non-commercial cell is again the largest by entity count (49%), reconciling to IRS aggregates within 3.7%—the exiled region is a structural feature of how capital is underwritten, not an artefact of one country. We also identify the binding gap: no empirical recovery benchmark for recoverable-grant capital exists in either country—the one input the model most needs, and the one a pool at scale would be first to generate.

Keywords: recoverable grants; catalytic capital; missing middle; blended finance; credit rationing; philanthropy; impact investing (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: D53 G21 G23 L31 O16 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2026-07
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=7102699 (application/pdf)
Our link check indicates that this URL is bad, the error code is: 403 Forbidden
https://www.irsa.institute/papers/Bankable_v1.0.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:evk:wpaper:bankable

DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.7102699

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in IRSA Working Papers from Institute for Regenerative Systems Architecture
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Roshan Ghadamian ().