Raidén, A B and King, A (2023) Added value and numerical measurement of social value: A critical enquiry. Buildings & Cities, 4(1), pp. 767-782. ISSN 2632-6655
Abstract
Social value has evolved rapidly over the last decade or so. Legislation has been a key driver, and added value and numerical measurement are emerging as important focal points. An emerging body of literature in this space draws attention to social value in placemaking, infrastructure and construction work. Using deontological principles of ethics, a critical discussion is presented on the problems associated with numerical measurement of social value as added value. Two key questions are addressed: How does mandating social value by legislation and policy impact good practice? How effectively can numerical measuring of social value evidence the range and diversity of activity and outcomes? This responds to a wider call to take a critical view of both policy and the activities of the sector and advocate a move away from solving immediate problems and development of ever more elaborate tools. The development of a holistic appreciation of the long-term need and outcomes of social value is recommended: the contextual, contingent middle ground.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | added value; ethics; metrics; numerical measurement; placemaking; social impact; social procurement; social value |
| Index terms: | good practice, legislation, added value, evidence, construction work, policy impact, social value, social impact, ethics |
| Subjects: | performance measurement, ethical practice, legal systems, sociology, evaluation and assessment methods, operations management, policy studies, economic analysis |
| Topics: | Urban Studies, Project Management, Legal Issues, Governance, Quality Management, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
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