Denny-Smith, G; Loosemore, M; Barwick, D; Sunindijo, R and Piggott, L (2019) Decolonising indigenous social impact research using community-based methods. In: Gorse, C and Neilson, C J (eds.) Proceedings of 35th Annual ARCOM Conference, 2-4 September 2019, Leeds Beckett University, Leeds, UK.
Abstract
Indigenous procurement policies are utilised in countries with large Indigenous populations to encourage the construction sector to provide new training and employment opportunities for Indigenous people who suffer from economic and social disadvantage. However, the success of these policies is often distorted by the failure of social impact assessments to account for culturally-specific perceptions of social value held by Indigenous communities. This not only distorts the allocation of funds to Indigenous communities but represents another form of marginalisation and loss of voice for the communities these policies are meant to help. Drawing on contextual discourse into the history of Indigenous research, this methodological paper shows how theories of community-based research (CBR) are a valuable tool to reconceptualise approaches to measuring Indigenous social value in an Indigenous social procurement policy context. Working in partnership with the peak body for Aboriginal business in New South Wales, the results from five culturally appropriate focus groups (yarning discussion groups), with fifty Indigenous business owners from several industries, show that social impact research in Indigenous contexts must respect Indigenous people and knowledges and prioritise Indigenous people’s experiences of Indigenous social procurement, rather than focusing on simplistic policy targets. It is concluded that the approach developed here can be operationalised in the field to better understand the nature of Indigenous social value and the impact created by Indigenous procurement policies in Australia and other countries with disadvantaged Indigenous populations. This paper has significant potential to inform future social impact research globally, on how academia can engage with the communities who social procurement is targeted at helping.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | community-based research; indigenous; social impact measurement; social procurement; social value. |
| Index terms: | history, construction sector, social impact, population, social impact assessment, social value, New South Wales, academia, partnership, owner, drawing, employment, Australia, community-based, procurement policy, focus group, indigenous community |
| Subjects: | communities and social development, industry analysis, cross-cultural studies, educational institutions, sociology, demography, partnership management, social equity, Geography, management, architectural and construction history, public policy, technical documentation, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Education, Human Resources, Design Practice, Urban Studies, Sustainability, Governance, Stakeholder Management, Research Practice, Geographical Context |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
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