Denny-Smith, G and Loosemore, M (2017) Assessing the impact of australia's indigenous procurement policy using strain theory. In: Chan, P W and Neilson, C J (eds.) Proceedings of 33rd Annual ARCOM Conference, 4-6 September 2017, Fitzwilliam College, Cambridge, UK.
Abstract
The Australian government's new Commonwealth Indigenous Procurement Policy (CIPP) represents a new focus on social procurement to address Indigenous disadvantage. A critical analysis of the CIPP using Steurer's (2010) theoretical framework of governmental corporate social responsibility has therefore been undertaken, highlighting new links between the CIPP and failings of other Indigenous procurement policies in Canada and South Africa. It is found that successful Indigenous economic development utilises quadruple bottom line goals of financial, social, environmental and cultural outcomes, but the Australian government contradicts these by failing to acknowledge the maintenance of cultural activities. A new research agenda and theoretical framework is presented to review the aims of social procurement and social value from an Indigenous perspective, and explore how the procurement of construction goods and services contributes to social outcomes.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | Australia; indigenous; social procurement; social value; strain theory. |
| Index terms: | procurement policy, research agenda, economic development, Australia, Canada, social value, corporate social responsibility, South Africa |
| Subjects: | health safety and environment, Geography, economic development, sociology, research management, public policy |
| Topics: | Urban Studies, Governance, Sustainability, Health and Safety, Geographical Context, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here