{"title":"Why are rural communities reluctant to adopt the standard version of SROI?","authors":"Fuminobu Mizutani","doi":"10.14254/2071-789x.2023/16-3/7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Social Return on Investment (SROI) is an evaluation method that is often useful in assessing Not for Profit organizations (NFP). Its standard version has been widely adopted in the United Kingdom. However, there is a reluctance among East Asian rural communities to adopt standard SROI evaluation methods, even though they have been adopted for some NFPs in urban centers in the region in the past. NFPs in rural communities cannot bear the cost of sending representatives to meetings where drafts of potential regulations are discussed. However, the introduction of regulations for evaluating NFPs without representatives from rural communities could lead to the exclusion of pertinent voices key to the discussion. There are several reasons why the hands-on approach currently utilized by SROI evaluation methods appears unsuitable for rural communities. These communities are already aware of their aging populations and they have obligations to the welfare of their members that fall outside the scope of SROI. In addition to this, the main argument why rural communities are reluctant to adopt SROI methods is that it does not bring much benefit to these communities. However, discussing evaluation methods for NFPs could serve as a bridge with stakeholders in rural communities. Paradoxically, a nonstandard version of SROI that is calculated by those outside of NFPs may be a more suitable method for rural communities.","PeriodicalId":51663,"journal":{"name":"Economics & Sociology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Economics & Sociology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14254/2071-789x.2023/16-3/7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Social Return on Investment (SROI) is an evaluation method that is often useful in assessing Not for Profit organizations (NFP). Its standard version has been widely adopted in the United Kingdom. However, there is a reluctance among East Asian rural communities to adopt standard SROI evaluation methods, even though they have been adopted for some NFPs in urban centers in the region in the past. NFPs in rural communities cannot bear the cost of sending representatives to meetings where drafts of potential regulations are discussed. However, the introduction of regulations for evaluating NFPs without representatives from rural communities could lead to the exclusion of pertinent voices key to the discussion. There are several reasons why the hands-on approach currently utilized by SROI evaluation methods appears unsuitable for rural communities. These communities are already aware of their aging populations and they have obligations to the welfare of their members that fall outside the scope of SROI. In addition to this, the main argument why rural communities are reluctant to adopt SROI methods is that it does not bring much benefit to these communities. However, discussing evaluation methods for NFPs could serve as a bridge with stakeholders in rural communities. Paradoxically, a nonstandard version of SROI that is calculated by those outside of NFPs may be a more suitable method for rural communities.
期刊介绍:
Economics and Sociology (ISSN 2306-3459 Online, ISSN 2071-789X Print) is a quarterly international academic open access journal published by Centre of Sociological Research in co-operation with University of Szczecin (Poland), Mykolas Romeris University (Lithuania), Dubcek University of Trencín, Faculty of Social and Economic Relations, (Slovak Republic) and University of Entrepreneurship and Law, (Czech Republic). The general topical framework of our publication include (but is not limited to): advancing socio-economic analysis of societies and economies, institutions and organizations, social groups, networks and relationships.[...] We welcome articles written by professional scholars and practitioners in: economic studies and philosophy of economics, political sciences and political economy, research in history of economics and sociological phenomena, sociology and gender studies, economic and social issues of education, socio-economic and institutional issues in environmental management, business administration and management of SMEs, state governance and socio-economic implications, economic and sociological development of the NGO sector, cultural sociology, urban and rural sociology and demography, migration studies, international issues in business risk and state security, economics of welfare.