What social value do indigenous contractors create?

Denny-Smith, G; Williams, M; Loosemore, M; Riza Yosia, S and Piggott, L (2024) What social value do indigenous contractors create? Construction Management and Economics, 42(1), pp. 16-34. ISSN 01446193

Abstract

Governments have developed Indigenous procurement policies (IPPs) in Australia and other colonised countries with Indigenous populations to collaboratively close socioeconomic inequities experienced by Indigenous communities. These policies are widely used in the construction industry because of the volume of government spending on this sector and its significant social impact. However, recent research argues that Indigenous peoples' notions of social value are not reflected in IPP designs, implementation, or evaluation frameworks. To investigate this claim, this research uses a holistic Aboriginal evaluation framework called 'Ngaa-bi-nya' to investigate how IPPs promote social value creation. Using community-based participatory research principles, semi-structured interviews were held with owners and senior managers of Indigenous construction companies in Australia. Findings highlight how social value is created by IPPs when Indigenous contractors use strategic actions to improve Indigenous socioeconomic outcomes, social and cultural development, create stronger connections in the construction industry and promote self-determination. The findings provide new conceptual and operational insights into how IPPs can create social value through partnerships with Indigenous contractors. The insights can be used by buyers and builders to strengthen social value in their supply chains through new ways of collaborative working to support social value creation. They also highlight potential risks of continuing to design and assess social value without the involvement of stakeholders for whom it is intended.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: indigenous procurement; Ngaa-bi-nya; public procurement; social procurement; social value; Australia
Index terms: implementation, construction industry, social impact, social value, owner, partnership, Australia, indigenous community, population, self-determination, construction company, builder, procurement policy, manager, community-based, interview, evaluation
Subjects: Geography, communities and social development, industry analysis, partnership management, demography, cross-cultural studies, sociology, human factors and perception, practitioner, data collection methods, organization, contractual arrangements, data analysis and analytics, public policy
Topics: Research Practice, Geographical Context, Business Strategy, Governance, Procurement, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, Urban Studies
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