Bridgeman, J and Loosemore, M (2024) Evaluating social procurement: A theoretically informed and methodologically robust social return on investment (sroi) analysis of a construction training initiative developed to reduce the risk of youth homelessness in Wales. Construction Management and Economics, 42(5), pp. 387-411. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
Despite widespread claims about the benefits of social procurement, there is little robust evidence that emerging social procurement policies are achieving their intended outcomes. Addressing this gap in research, this paper presents a case study of a theoretically informed and methodologically robust evaluative social return on investment (SROI) analysis of a construction training initiative developed in Wales to reduce the risk of youth homelessness. Utilising Sen and Nussbaum's Capability Empowerment Approach, the results contribute to social procurement research by providing much needed empirical legitimacy to an under theorised field. Ensuring that new social procurement initiatives developed by the construction industry are theoretically and empirically sound is critical to ensure they are transparent, robust, testable, reliable and replicable in achieving the social outcomes they purport to deliver.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | social procurement; social value; social impact; social return on investment; employment; young people; homelessness; corporate social responsibility |
| Index terms: | evidence, Wales, legitimacy, empowerment, procurement policy, social value, corporate social responsibility, construction industry, social impact, social return on investment, case study, employment |
| Subjects: | social impact assessment, evaluation and assessment methods, data collection methods, public policy, management, Geography, health safety and environment, sociology, industry analysis |
| Topics: | Health and Safety, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Governance, Urban Studies, Human Resources, Organizational Design |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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