当今我们的社会面临由气候极端变化、资源紧缺、教育发展不均衡、环境污染等多方面带来的问题，严重影响了我国经济高质量发展与人民福祉提升的进程。仅靠政府的政策制定与监督管理或者拨款以及单一的慈善捐赠方式，已经不足以弥补解决社会问题所需要的资金缺口。2007年，洛克菲勒基金会提出了“影响力投资”的概念，这是一种投资方式更是一种社会创新方式，原因在于它打破了传统投资只盲目追求经济效益而带来大量环境污染、贫富差距加大等社会问题的弊端，而是在投资中注重社会价值的实现。影响力投资既有盈利的目标，也关注投资行为带来的社会和环境价值。影响力投资是公益、投资和政策的结合体，吸引了希望集合社会力量参与改善公共治理的生态环境，形成新的治理秩序，以更高效的方法解决社会问题的政府主体、希望重塑资本使命，追求企业价值和经济新的增长点的企业主体以及追求自我造血和可持续发展的新路径的慈善组织主体，三者相互配合也相互制约，形成稳定的多元主体协作关系，保持各自的工作方法独立性但又有关注领域的重叠性，影响力投资将三方主体紧密联系。

中国正处于大力推进社会创新的关键时期，积极探索社会治理新方式，影响力投资作为商业和公益结合的社会治理的工具，将带来新的变革。影响力投资研究在西方国家发展较为成熟，但在国内研究目前多数是在对国外文献的梳理和总结的基础上，对概念、发展意义、影响力评估工具的研究，国内对影响力投资的发展模式和多元主体协同机制的案例研究较少。本文在进一步厘清影响力投资发展历程、概念的基础上，从协同治理理论视角出发，契合中国影响力投资多元主体协同的本质，构建我国影响力投资协同模型，分析并总结政府和国资基金、市场股权投资机构和公益基金会不同投资主体主导的影响力投资模式协同机制和运作模式以及在社会治理中发挥的作用机制。运用多案例比较分析方法剖析三种模式呈现出的共同特点及差异性，最终对影响力投资模式中协同过程呈现出的不足之处提出发展建议，为影响力投资在中国社会治理中的参与探索可能的空间和路径。

当今我们的社会面临由气候极端变化、资源紧缺、教育发展不均衡、环境污染等多方面带来的问题，严重影响了我国经济高质量发展与人民福祉提升的进程。仅靠政府的政策制定与监督管理或者拨款以及单一的慈善捐赠方式，已经不足以弥补解决社会问题所需要的资金缺口。2007年，洛克菲勒基金会提出了“影响力投资”的概念，这是一种投资方式更是一种社会创新方式，原因在于它打破了传统投资只盲目追求经济效益而带来大量环境污染、贫富差距加大等社会问题的弊端，而是在投资中注重社会价值的实现。影响力投资既有盈利的目标，也关注投资行为带来的社会和环境价值。影响力投资是公益、投资和政策的结合体，吸引了希望集合社会力量参与改善公共治理的生态环境，形成新的治理秩序，以更高效的方法解决社会问题的政府主体、希望重塑资本使命，追求企业价值和经济新的增长点的企业主体以及追求自我造血和可持续发展的新路径的慈善组织主体，三者相互配合也相互制约，形成稳定的多元主体协作关系，保持各自的工作方法独立性但又有关注领域的重叠性，影响力投资将三方主体紧密联系。

中国正处于大力推进社会创新的关键时期，积极探索社会治理新方式，影响力投资作为商业和公益结合的社会治理的工具，将带来新的变革。影响力投资研究在西方国家发展较为成熟，但在国内研究目前多数是在对国外文献的梳理和总结的基础上，对概念、发展意义、影响力评估工具的研究，国内对影响力投资的发展模式和多元主体协同机制的案例研究较少。本文在进一步厘清影响力投资发展历程、概念的基础上，从协同治理理论视角出发，契合中国影响力投资多元主体协同的本质，构建我国影响力投资协同模型，分析并总结政府和国资基金、市场股权投资机构和公益基金会不同投资主体主导的影响力投资模式协同机制和运作模式以及在社会治理中发挥的作用机制。运用多案例比较分析方法剖析三种模式呈现出的共同特点及差异性，最终对影响力投资模式中协同过程呈现出的不足之处提出发展建议，为影响力投资在中国社会治理中的参与探索可能的空间和路径。

Our society today is facing problems brought about by extreme climate change, resource scarcity, imbalanced education development, environmental pollution, and other factors, which seriously affect the process of high-quality economic development and improvement of people's well-being in China. Relying solely on government policy formulation, supervision and management, or funding, as well as a single charitable donation method, is no longer sufficient to fill the funding gap required to solve social problems. In 2007, the Rockefeller Foundation put forward the concept of "influence investment", which is not only an investment mode but also a social innovation mode. The reason is that it breaks the drawbacks of traditional investment that only blindly pursues economic benefits and brings about a large number of social problems such as environmental pollution and the widening gap between the rich and the poor. Instead, it focuses on the realization of social values in investment. Influence investment has both the goal of profitability and the focus on the social and environmental value brought by investment behavior. Influence investment is a combination of public welfare, investment, and policy, attracting government entities who hope to gather social forces to participate in improving the ecological environment of public governance, forming a new governance order, solving social problems with more efficient methods, reshaping capital missions, pursuing corporate value and new economic growth points, as well as charitable organization entities who pursue new paths of self-help and sustainable development, The three complement and constrain each other, forming a stable multi subject collaborative relationship, maintaining the independence of their respective work methods but overlapping areas of concern. Influence investment will closely connect the three parties.

China is currently in a critical period of vigorously promoting social innovation, actively exploring new ways of social governance. Impact investment, as a tool for combining business and public welfare in social governance and social change, will bring new changes. The research on influence investment has developed relatively mature in Western countries, but currently in China, most of the research is based on the sorting and summary of foreign literature, focusing on the concept, development significance, and impact evaluation tools. There are few case studies on the development model and multi subject collaboration mechanism of influence investment in China. On the basis of further clarifying the development process and concepts of influence investment, this article starts from the perspective of collaborative governance theory, aligns with the essence of the multi subject collaboration of China's influence investment, constructs a model of China's influence investment collaboration, analyzes and summarizes state-owned asset funds The collaborative motivation and operational mode of influence investment models led by different investment entities of market equity investment institutions and public welfare foundations, as well as their role mechanisms in social governance. Using a multi case comparative analysis method to analyze the common characteristics and differences presented by the three models, and ultimately proposing development suggestions for the shortcomings of the collaborative process in the influence investment model, exploring possible space and paths for the participation of influence investment in Chinese social governance.