How Our Approaches Relate to Existing Frameworks
IRSA's work builds on and differs from established approaches in capital systems, AI governance, and institutional design. These comparisons clarify what's new.
Capital Models
PSC and regenerative capital vs existing funding models
PSC vs ESG
Why regenerative capital goes beyond environmental, social, and governance metrics
Read comparisonPSC vs Impact Investing
How regenerative capital differs from traditional impact investing approaches
Read comparisonPSC vs Traditional Philanthropy
From terminal grants to perpetual capital cycles
Read comparisonPSC vs Blended Finance
Comparing PSC's perpetual model to blended finance structures
Read comparisonPSC vs Endowments
Why perpetual social capital isn't just another endowment model
Read comparisonPSC vs Microfinance
How regenerative capital approaches differ from microfinance
Read comparisonPSC vs Grants
Comparing terminal grant models to regenerative capital cycles
Read comparisonPSC vs Government Funding
How PSC compares to traditional government funding mechanisms
Read comparisonAlternative Approaches
How IRSA frameworks relate to adjacent movements
AI & Governance
Semantic governance vs existing alignment approaches
Institutional Design
Idea-native architecture vs traditional approaches
Idea-Native vs Document-Centric
Why ideas should be first-class objects, not buried in documents
Read comparisonExplicit Intent vs Implied Norms
How stated purpose survives where culture drifts
Read comparisonILA vs Training Programs
Why structural learning architecture succeeds where 'lessons learned' programs fail
Read comparisonCEA vs Contract Enforcement
How commitment architecture differs from legal contract enforcement
Read comparisonLGIT vs Transitional Justice
How legitimacy cycles analysis extends beyond formal transitional justice frameworks
Read comparisonWant to understand the foundations?
Before diving into comparisons, read the shared diagnosis that underlies all our work.
Read the shared diagnosis