Samuel, F and Watson, K (2023) Social value of the built environment. Buildings & Cities, 4(1), pp. 938-947. ISSN 2632-6655
Abstract
The concept of social value has gained significant prominence in recent years in some countries, yet remains misunderstood. There is a recognised need for it to be better defined, interpreted and embedded in planning, design and operation. This will entail measurement and assessment. Social value is increasingly being considered alongside issues of quality of life and wellbeing, to both the individual and the community, but it remains challenging to reconcile social value in a meaningful way with the present value management approaches that dominate the construction and real estate industries. This special issue brings together a series of contributions to current thinking and critical discussion on social value, including empirical research from across the UK, Europe and Australia. It points to both new practices for the planning, design, construction and operation of projects. It identifies a series of gaps in the research, most notably a discussion of social value in the context of real estate, valuation and 'environmental, social and corporate governance' (ESG).
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | built environment; community; placemaking; planning; post-occupancy evaluation; quality of life; social value; spatial politics; urban design; valuation; wellbeing |
| Index terms: | quality of life, politics, social value, urban design, corporate governance, Australia, value management, post-occupancy evaluation, real estate, well-being, built environment, Europe |
| Subjects: | infrastructure and transport systems, Geography, physical geography and landforms, business, management, sociology, evaluation methods, public and environmental health, mental health and wellbeing, urban design, political science, real estate economics |
| Topics: | Urban Studies, Value Management, Quality Management, Geographical Context, Design Practice, Health and Safety, Governance |
| 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