社会住房的社会影响测量:对实施背景、机制和结果的理论研究

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS
Alice Jones, N. Valero-Silva
{"title":"社会住房的社会影响测量:对实施背景、机制和结果的理论研究","authors":"Alice Jones, N. Valero-Silva","doi":"10.1108/QRAM-01-2019-0023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nEnglish social housing providers are increasingly turning to social impact measurement to assess their social value. This paper aims to understand the contextual factors causing this rise in the practice, specifically within this sector; the mechanisms that enable it to be effectively implemented within an individual organisation and the outcomes of successful implementation for individual organisations and more widely across the sector and beyond.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nA realist theory-based approach is applied to the study of a small number of social housing organisations and leaders within the sector to explore the use of social impact measurement. The paper addresses three questions: Why is social impact measurement being adopted in this sector? How is it successfully implemented? And what happens (outcomes) when it is successfully implemented? Addressing these questions necessitates deeper insight into the contextual pressures that have brought to the fore social impact measurement within the sector and the beneficial outcomes the practice provides (or is anticipated to provide) to social housing providers. The methodological approach of Realist Evaluation (Pawson and Tilley, 1997, 2004) is used to structure and analyse the empirical data and findings into a programme theory for social impact measurement. Realist Evaluation provides a programme theory perspective, seeking to answer the question “what works, for whom and in what circumstances?”. In this research, the “whom” refers to English social housing providers and the circumstances are the contextual conditions experienced by the sector over the past decade. The programme theory aims to set out the links between the contextual drivers for social impact measurement, the mechanisms that bring about its implementation and the outcomes that occur as a result. Within this, greater detail on the implementation perspective is provided by developing an implementation theory using a Theory of Change approach (Connell et al., 1995; Fulbright-Anderson et al., 1998). The implementation theory is then embedded within the wider programme theory so as to bring the two elements together, thereby creating a refinement of the overall theory for social impact measurement. In turn, this paper demonstrates its importance (the outcomes that it can achieve for organisations and the sector) and how it can effectively be implemented to bring about those outcomes.\n\n\nFindings\nSocial housing providers use social impact measurement both internally, to determine their organisational priorities and externally, to demonstrate their value to local and national governments and cross-sector partners then to shape and influence resource allocation. The practice itself is shown to be an open and active programme, rather than a fixed calculative practice.\n\n\nResearch limitations/implications\nThe intensive nature of the research means that only a limited number of cases were explored. Further research could test theories developed here against evidence collected from a wider range of cases, e.g. other types of providers or non-adopters.\n\n\nPractical implications\nThe research makes a strong contribution to practice in the form of a re-conceptualisation of how social impact measurement can be shown to be effective, based on a deeper understanding of causal mechanisms, how they interact and the outcomes that result. This is of value to the sector as such information could help other organisations both to understand the value of social impact measurement and to provide practical guidance on how to implement it effectively.\n\n\nSocial implications\nAs the practice of impact measurement continues to develop, practitioners will need to be aware of any changes to these contextual factors and consider questions such as: is the context still supportive of impact measurement? Does the practice need to be adjusted to meet the needs of the current context? For instance, the recent tragedy at Grenfell Tower has led to a reconsideration of the role of social housing; a new Green Paper is currently being drafted (Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government, 2018). This may have a number of implications for social impact measurement, such as a rebalancing of emphasis on outcomes relating to environmental improvements, towards outcomes relating to the well-being of tenants.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nExisting literature is largely limited to technical guides. This paper links theory-based evaluation to practice contributing to social housing practice.\n","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Social impact measurement in social housing: a theory-based investigation into the context, mechanisms and outcomes of implementation\",\"authors\":\"Alice Jones, N. Valero-Silva\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/QRAM-01-2019-0023\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nPurpose\\nEnglish social housing providers are increasingly turning to social impact measurement to assess their social value. This paper aims to understand the contextual factors causing this rise in the practice, specifically within this sector; the mechanisms that enable it to be effectively implemented within an individual organisation and the outcomes of successful implementation for individual organisations and more widely across the sector and beyond.\\n\\n\\nDesign/methodology/approach\\nA realist theory-based approach is applied to the study of a small number of social housing organisations and leaders within the sector to explore the use of social impact measurement. The paper addresses three questions: Why is social impact measurement being adopted in this sector? How is it successfully implemented? And what happens (outcomes) when it is successfully implemented? Addressing these questions necessitates deeper insight into the contextual pressures that have brought to the fore social impact measurement within the sector and the beneficial outcomes the practice provides (or is anticipated to provide) to social housing providers. The methodological approach of Realist Evaluation (Pawson and Tilley, 1997, 2004) is used to structure and analyse the empirical data and findings into a programme theory for social impact measurement. Realist Evaluation provides a programme theory perspective, seeking to answer the question “what works, for whom and in what circumstances?”. In this research, the “whom” refers to English social housing providers and the circumstances are the contextual conditions experienced by the sector over the past decade. The programme theory aims to set out the links between the contextual drivers for social impact measurement, the mechanisms that bring about its implementation and the outcomes that occur as a result. Within this, greater detail on the implementation perspective is provided by developing an implementation theory using a Theory of Change approach (Connell et al., 1995; Fulbright-Anderson et al., 1998). The implementation theory is then embedded within the wider programme theory so as to bring the two elements together, thereby creating a refinement of the overall theory for social impact measurement. In turn, this paper demonstrates its importance (the outcomes that it can achieve for organisations and the sector) and how it can effectively be implemented to bring about those outcomes.\\n\\n\\nFindings\\nSocial housing providers use social impact measurement both internally, to determine their organisational priorities and externally, to demonstrate their value to local and national governments and cross-sector partners then to shape and influence resource allocation. The practice itself is shown to be an open and active programme, rather than a fixed calculative practice.\\n\\n\\nResearch limitations/implications\\nThe intensive nature of the research means that only a limited number of cases were explored. Further research could test theories developed here against evidence collected from a wider range of cases, e.g. other types of providers or non-adopters.\\n\\n\\nPractical implications\\nThe research makes a strong contribution to practice in the form of a re-conceptualisation of how social impact measurement can be shown to be effective, based on a deeper understanding of causal mechanisms, how they interact and the outcomes that result. This is of value to the sector as such information could help other organisations both to understand the value of social impact measurement and to provide practical guidance on how to implement it effectively.\\n\\n\\nSocial implications\\nAs the practice of impact measurement continues to develop, practitioners will need to be aware of any changes to these contextual factors and consider questions such as: is the context still supportive of impact measurement? Does the practice need to be adjusted to meet the needs of the current context? For instance, the recent tragedy at Grenfell Tower has led to a reconsideration of the role of social housing; a new Green Paper is currently being drafted (Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government, 2018). This may have a number of implications for social impact measurement, such as a rebalancing of emphasis on outcomes relating to environmental improvements, towards outcomes relating to the well-being of tenants.\\n\\n\\nOriginality/value\\nExisting literature is largely limited to technical guides. This paper links theory-based evaluation to practice contributing to social housing practice.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":2,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-04-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/QRAM-01-2019-0023\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/QRAM-01-2019-0023","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

目的:英国的社会住房提供者越来越多地转向社会影响测量来评估其社会价值。本文旨在了解在实践中导致这种上升的背景因素,特别是在这个部门内;使其能够在单个组织内有效实施的机制,以及单个组织成功实施的结果,以及更广泛地在整个行业内外实施的结果。设计/方法/方法基于现实主义理论的方法被应用于对少数社会住房组织和部门内的领导者的研究,以探索社会影响测量的使用。本文解决了三个问题:为什么社会影响测量被采用在这个部门?它是如何成功实施的?成功实施后会发生什么(结果)?解决这些问题需要更深入地了解背景压力,这些压力使该部门的社会影响测量脱颖而出,并为社会住房提供者提供(或预期提供)有益的结果。现实主义评价的方法论方法(Pawson和Tilley, 1997,2004)用于构建和分析实证数据和发现,形成社会影响测量的方案理论。现实主义评估提供了一个程序理论的视角,试图回答“什么有效,对谁有效,在什么情况下有效?”在这项研究中,“谁”指的是英国的社会住房提供者,环境是该部门在过去十年中所经历的背景条件。计划理论旨在阐明社会影响测量的背景驱动因素、实现其实施的机制和结果之间的联系。在此基础上,通过使用变革理论方法(Connell et al., 1995;Fulbright-Anderson et al., 1998)。然后将执行理论嵌入到更广泛的方案理论中,以便将这两个要素结合在一起,从而对社会影响测量的总体理论进行改进。反过来,本文展示了它的重要性(它可以为组织和部门实现的结果)以及如何有效地实施它来实现这些结果。社会住房提供者在内部使用社会影响测量,以确定其组织优先事项,并在外部使用社会影响测量,向地方和国家政府以及跨部门合作伙伴展示其价值,然后塑造和影响资源分配。实践本身是一个开放和积极的程序,而不是一个固定的计算实践。研究的局限性/意义研究的密集性意味着只探讨了有限数量的病例。进一步的研究可以根据从更广泛的案例(例如,其他类型的提供者或非采用者)收集的证据来检验这里提出的理论。实践意义:基于对因果机制、它们如何相互作用以及结果的更深入理解,该研究以重新概念化社会影响测量如何被证明是有效的形式,对实践做出了重大贡献。这对该行业是有价值的,因为这些信息可以帮助其他组织了解社会影响测量的价值,并为如何有效实施社会影响测量提供实用指导。社会影响随着影响测量实践的不断发展,从业者将需要意识到这些背景因素的任何变化,并考虑诸如:背景是否仍然支持影响测量?实践是否需要调整以满足当前背景的需要?例如,最近发生在格伦费尔大厦(Grenfell Tower)的悲剧促使人们重新思考社会住房的作用;目前正在起草新的绿皮书(住房、社区和地方政府部,2018年)。这可能会对社会影响测量产生一些影响,例如重新平衡强调与环境改善相关的结果,转向与租户福祉相关的结果。原创性/价值现有文献主要局限于技术指南。本文将理论评价与实践相结合,为社会住房实践提供参考。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Social impact measurement in social housing: a theory-based investigation into the context, mechanisms and outcomes of implementation
Purpose English social housing providers are increasingly turning to social impact measurement to assess their social value. This paper aims to understand the contextual factors causing this rise in the practice, specifically within this sector; the mechanisms that enable it to be effectively implemented within an individual organisation and the outcomes of successful implementation for individual organisations and more widely across the sector and beyond. Design/methodology/approach A realist theory-based approach is applied to the study of a small number of social housing organisations and leaders within the sector to explore the use of social impact measurement. The paper addresses three questions: Why is social impact measurement being adopted in this sector? How is it successfully implemented? And what happens (outcomes) when it is successfully implemented? Addressing these questions necessitates deeper insight into the contextual pressures that have brought to the fore social impact measurement within the sector and the beneficial outcomes the practice provides (or is anticipated to provide) to social housing providers. The methodological approach of Realist Evaluation (Pawson and Tilley, 1997, 2004) is used to structure and analyse the empirical data and findings into a programme theory for social impact measurement. Realist Evaluation provides a programme theory perspective, seeking to answer the question “what works, for whom and in what circumstances?”. In this research, the “whom” refers to English social housing providers and the circumstances are the contextual conditions experienced by the sector over the past decade. The programme theory aims to set out the links between the contextual drivers for social impact measurement, the mechanisms that bring about its implementation and the outcomes that occur as a result. Within this, greater detail on the implementation perspective is provided by developing an implementation theory using a Theory of Change approach (Connell et al., 1995; Fulbright-Anderson et al., 1998). The implementation theory is then embedded within the wider programme theory so as to bring the two elements together, thereby creating a refinement of the overall theory for social impact measurement. In turn, this paper demonstrates its importance (the outcomes that it can achieve for organisations and the sector) and how it can effectively be implemented to bring about those outcomes. Findings Social housing providers use social impact measurement both internally, to determine their organisational priorities and externally, to demonstrate their value to local and national governments and cross-sector partners then to shape and influence resource allocation. The practice itself is shown to be an open and active programme, rather than a fixed calculative practice. Research limitations/implications The intensive nature of the research means that only a limited number of cases were explored. Further research could test theories developed here against evidence collected from a wider range of cases, e.g. other types of providers or non-adopters. Practical implications The research makes a strong contribution to practice in the form of a re-conceptualisation of how social impact measurement can be shown to be effective, based on a deeper understanding of causal mechanisms, how they interact and the outcomes that result. This is of value to the sector as such information could help other organisations both to understand the value of social impact measurement and to provide practical guidance on how to implement it effectively. Social implications As the practice of impact measurement continues to develop, practitioners will need to be aware of any changes to these contextual factors and consider questions such as: is the context still supportive of impact measurement? Does the practice need to be adjusted to meet the needs of the current context? For instance, the recent tragedy at Grenfell Tower has led to a reconsideration of the role of social housing; a new Green Paper is currently being drafted (Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government, 2018). This may have a number of implications for social impact measurement, such as a rebalancing of emphasis on outcomes relating to environmental improvements, towards outcomes relating to the well-being of tenants. Originality/value Existing literature is largely limited to technical guides. This paper links theory-based evaluation to practice contributing to social housing practice.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信