Applying the Sustainable Development Goals as a lens for measuring social value in procurement

Dr. Hachigian received a Partnership Engage Grant to co-develop and pilot a measurement framework to measure social outcomes of procurement processes.

Local, regional, and national governments in Canada and around the world are integrating social objectives into their procurement processes to achieve better value for money. But few of these jurisdictions systematically measure social outcomes in the contract management phase, and even fewer measure the long-term social impacts (Hebb & Hachigian, 2017). The objective of this research is to co-develop and pilot a measurement framework with a member-based social procurement initiative on Vancouver Island. Over 20 local governments have joined the Coastal Community Social Procurement Initiative (CCSPI) and have committed to sharing resources and collaborating on frameworks and tools to advance the integration of social criteria into procurement and tendering practices. The lack of a measurement framework is viewed by the members as a significant barrier to meaningful implementation.

At the heart of the social value measurement challenge is a paradox. The ability to measure social value is critical to the social innovation process, as it promotes learning and serves as a continuous source of improvement (Ebrahim, 2005; Jackson, 2013). But the instrumental approach that guides prevailing social value measurement approaches can also stifle innovation (Nicholls et al., 2015). Transcending this paradox requires measurement approaches that balance standardization with flexibility (Nicholls, 2018; Ruff, 2019). While progress has been made to develop theoretical and practical frameworks for social investors (Ebrahim, 2019; Nicholls, 2018), much less attention has been paid to the procurement context.

This proposed research would contribute to academic scholarship on social value accounting by exploring the potential to extend theory, principles and practices from the investment context to the procurement context. The City of Victoria, as the project partner representing CCSPI and a potential user of the framework, would be involved across all phases of the research. In the design phase, the partner has already contributed to developing the parameters for the framework, including mapping procurement indicators to the UN Sustainable Development Goals. In the research phase, the Partner would participate in interviews, focus groups and a pilot feasibility test and will help to recruit other participants. In the knowledge mobilization phase, the Partner will engage in promotion of the framework's use through participation in webinars and training events and hosting the research on its website and social media.

It is expected that the measurement framework would benefit local governments, procurement officials, suppliers, and the general public in the region by creating an initial step toward a minimum and transparent standard to assess tenders and measure social value in procurement. The framework and accompanying guidance documents would also provide local procurement officials with the ability to connect impacts at the local level to the global sustainability goals. A common approach to measurement would also reduce uncertainty for suppliers and provide them with the confidence they need to embed social value into their own corporate strategies.

Ebrahim, A., (2005) Accountability myopia: Losing sight of organizational learning. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 34(1), 56-87. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0899764004269430

Ebrahim, A. (2019). Measuring social change: Performance and accountability in a complex world. Stanford University Press. 

Hebb, T., & Hachigian, H. (2017). Social value procurement measurement and evaluation: A global review and assessment of social value procurement evaluation toolkit and frameworks. Carleton University. Prepared for the Government of Ontario. https://ccednet-rcdec.ca/sites/ccednet-rcdec.ca/files/ccednet/pdfs/svp-evaluation_final_april_13_2017.pdf 

Jackson, E. T. (2013). Interrogating the theory of change: Evaluating impact investing where it matters most. Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment, 3(2), 95-110. https://doi.org/10.1080/20430795.2013.776257 

Nicholls, A. (2018). A general theory of social impact accounting: Materiality, uncertainty and empowerment. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 9(2), 132-153. https://doi.org/10.1080/19420676.2018.1452785 

Nicholls, A., Nicholls, J., & Paton, R. (2015). Measuring social impact. In A. Nicholls, R. Paton, & J. Emerson (Eds.), Social finance (pp.253–281). Oxford University Press. http://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198703761.003.0010 

Ruff, K. (2019). Good food and good jobs: How construct-based equivalence and bounded flexibility can increase entity-level relevance of social and environmental accounting standards. https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2594421