Michael Beijer Sep 1, 2013:

more context needed The source text says: 'De Vrije Investeringstoezegging is dat gedeelte van de Investeringstoezegging (uw commitment) dat niet tot de Gebonden Investeringstoezegging behoort.'

We need to know in which way these commitments are gebonden vs vrij. That is, are we talking about:

1. mandatory vs voluntary (an entity is obliged to make the investment, or may do so if it wishes)
2. allocated vs unallocated (the investment is reserved for a specific purpose, or has not yet been allocated/reserved)
3. hard/firm vs soft (the entity has made a firm promise to invest, versus a soft promise)

Michael Beijer Sep 1, 2013:

re: soft and hard/firm commitments Hi Bryan,

Although in a different context you might be right, the asker said:

Asker: Thank you Michael. I believe I will go with Voluntary Investment Commitments. I'm now thinking about using Designated Investment Commitments for gebonden investeringstoezeggingen. Since it relates to the investment commitment that has been reserved for a specific purpose and is therefore not 'vrij'.

Hmm. He would need to provide us with more of the original context in order to be able to make a real decision.

Having said that, rereading what he did say, I might also be inclined to opt for something like:

allocated an non-allocated investment commitments
allocated an non-allocated investments
----------------

Bryan Crumpler Aug 31, 2013:

In other words... I'm thinking soft vs. firm commitments. Seems to be a more than reasonable juxtaposition, but as these are "invented" Dutch terms, I'd need something (in Dutch) to cross reference what it is the author is referring to. Just some thoughts, but I'm not confident "voluntary/designated" is the way to go.

Bryan Crumpler Aug 31, 2013:

gebonden Waaraan is de toezegging gebonden??? That was my first thought. Seems to me they're referring to firm investment commitments. Voluntary commitment to me seems way out of context. BTW, only 1 reference at all for this word combination doesn't seem reliable to me. And I've never even heard of a "designated investment commitment." I'd do some more research. Already, it appears these terms are made up in Dutch - meaning they are author-specific or company-specific. Take heed.

Michael Beijer Aug 31, 2013:

possibly useful ref. 'Vrije investeringstoezegging

(...)

Gebonden investeringstoezegging'

http://office.bpfdranken.nl/drkbestuur/beleggingscommissie/d...

screenshot of PDF: http://wordbook.nl/screenshots/gebonden-investeringstoezeggi...

Michael Beijer Aug 31, 2013:

@Dotdarling: My suggestion above (mandatory investment commitment) would have course not work if 'gebonden investeringstoezeggingen' relate to the investment commitment reserved for a specific purpose, which is therefore not 'vrij'.

Michael Beijer Aug 31, 2013:

2 possibly useful refs gebonden investeringstoezegging = mandatory investment commitment

'38. Citelec successfully bid for the 65% stake in Transener for US$234.1 million, the assumption of US$54.2 million of debts transferred to Transener and a mandatory investment commitment of US$37 million.' (http://opil.ouplaw.com/view/10.1093/law:iic/178-2006.case.1/... )

'Natarajan’s predecessor, Jairam Ramesh had suggested redefining CSR by integrating it with environmental management and afforestation.

His ministry issued an office memorandum this April detailing the CER policy that makes it mandatory for companies to report environmental violations to their board and place it on website. It does not prescribe obtaining mandatory investment commitment towards environment impact mitigation.' (http://www.business-standard.com/article/economy-policy/fine... )