Why Are Rural Communities Reluctant to Adopt the Standard Version of SROI?

• Autorzy: Fuminobu Mizutani
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

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. (original abstract)

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Non-profit organisations; Investment; Local community; Rural population

PL

Organizacje non-profit; Inwestycje; Społeczności lokalne; Ludność wiejska

• Czasopismo: Economics & Sociology
• Rocznik: 2023
• Tom: 16
• Numer: nr 3
• Strony: 125--137

Twórcy

autor

Fuminobu Mizutani

• Department of Business Administration, Kanto Gakuin University, Yokohama, Japan

Bibliografia

• Addy, C., Chorengel, M. Colling, M., &Etzel, M. (2019). Calculating the value of impact investing an evidence-based way to estimate social and environmental returns. Harvard Business Review, 97(1), 102-109.
• Angrosino, M. (2007). Doing Ethnographic and Observational Research (Sage Publications, London).
• Arnott, D., Chadwick, D. R., Wynne-Jones, S., Dandy, N., & Jones, D. L. (2021). Importance of building bridging and linking social capital in adapting to changes in UK agricultural policy. Journal of Rural Studies, 83, 1-10.
• Bauman, Z. (2001). Community: Seeking Safety in an Insecure World (Polity Press, Cambridge).
• Bellucci, M., Nitti, C., Franchi, S., Testi, E., & Bagnoli, L. (2019). Accounting for social return on investment (SROI): The costs and benefits of family-centered care by the Ronald McDonald House Charities. Social Enterprise Journal, 15(1), 46-75.
• Bockarjova, M., Botzen, W. J. W., Bulkeley, H. A., & Toxopeus, H. (2022). Estimating the social value of nature-based solutions in European cities, Scientific Reports, 12:19833. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-23983-3
• Bosco, A., Schneider, J., & Broome, E. (2019). The social value of the arts for care home residents in England: A social return on investment (SROI) analysis of the Imagine Arts Programme. Maturitas, 124, 15-24.
• Brinkmann, S., & Kvale, S. (2018). Doing Interview, Second Edition (SAGE Publications, London).
• Cattaneo, A., Nelson, A., & McMenomy, T. (2021). Global mapping of urban-rural catchment areas reveals unequal access to services. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(2), 1-8. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2011990118
• Chetty, R., Jackson, M. O., Kuchler, T., Stroebel, J., HendrenN., Fluegge, R. B., ...Wernerfelt, N. (2022). Social capital Ⅰ: Measurement and associations with economic mobility. Nature, 608, 108-121.
• Epstein, M. J., & Yuthas, K. (2014). Measuring and Improving Social Impact: A Guide for Nonprofits, Companies and Impact Investors (Routledge, Sheffield).
• Eriksen, T. H. (2017). What is Anthropology?, Second Edition (Pluto Press, London).
• Fifield, A. (2015, May 26). With rural Japan shrinking and aging, a small town seeks to stem the trend. Washington Post.
• Fleischman, R. K. (2013). A review of critical histories of accounting. In R. K. Fleischman,W. Funnell, & S. P. Walker (eds.), Critical Histories of Accounting: Sinister Inscriptions in the Modern Era (Routledge, Oxon), pp. 15-54.
• Haerpfer, C., Inglehart, R., Moreno, A., Welzel, C., Kizilova, K., Diez-Medrano, J., ... Puranen, B. (eds.) (2022). World Values Survey: Round Seven - Country - Poolede Datafile, Version 5.0 (JD Systems Institute & WVSA Secretariat, Madrid & Vienna). doi: 10.14281/18241.20
• Horta, O., O'Brien, G. D., & Teran, D. (2022). The definition of consequentialism: A Survey. Utilitas, 34, 368-385.
• Ito, K. (2017). Social Impact Measurement and Its Application as SIBs in Japan. (Parallel Session B2 - 02) Retrieved from Institute for Social Entrepreneurship in Asia website: https://isea-group.net/files/Parallel%20Session%20B2%20-%2002%20-%20SROI%20as%20a%20Tool%20for%20Evaluating%20and%20Enhancing%20Social%20Enterprise%20Performance%20(Japan).pdf
• Jachimowicz, J. M., Chafik, S., Prabhu, J. C., & Weber, E. U. (2017). Community trust reduces myopic decisions of low-income individuals. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(21), 5401-5406. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1617395114
• King, B., Fielke, S., Bayne, K., Klerkx, L., & Nettle, R. (2021). Navigating shades of social capital and trust to leverage opportunities for rural innovation. Journal of Rural Studies, 68, 123-134.
• Kitamoto, A. (2023). Geoshape [Taniguminagase (035000)] (Center for Open Data in the Humanities, Tokyo) Retrieved from https://geoshape.ex.nii.ac.jp/ka/resource/21/214010350.html (In Japanese)
• Lee, J., Oh, Y., Yoo, S., & Suh, K. (2021). Vulnerability assessment of rural aging community for abandoned farmlands in South Korea. Land Use Policy, 108, 105544.
• Liu, J. (2016). Ageing in rural China: Migration and care circulation. Journal of Chinese Sociology, 3(Article No. 9). doi: 10.1186/s40711-016-003
• MAFF (2022). 2020 Census of Agriculture and Forestry. Retrieved from e-Stat website https://www.e-stat.go.jp/en/stat-search/files?page=1&layout=datalist&toukei=00500209&tstat=000001032920&cycle=7&year=20200&month=0&tclass1=000001147146&tclass2=000001163067
• MAFF (2021). 2020 Census of Agriculture and Forestry. Retrieved from e-Stat website https://www.e-stat.go.jp/stat-search/files?page=1&layout=datalist&toukei=00500209&tstat=000001032920&cycle=7&year=20200&month=0&tclass1=000001147146&tclass2=000001155386&tclass3=000001155488&tclass4val=0 (In Japanese)
• Maier, F., Schober, C. Simsa, R., & Millner, R. (2015), SROI as a method for evaluation research: Understanding merits and limitations, Voluntas, 26(5), 1805-1830. doi:10.1007/s11266-014-9490-x
• MacKrell, P., & Pemberton, S. (2018). New representations of rural space: Eastern European migrants and the denial of poverty and deprivation in the English countryside, Journal of Rural Studies, 59, 49-57.
• McCosker, A. (ed.)(2020). Improving the Digital Inclusion of Older Australians. (Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne). Retrieved from the Department of Social Sevices website https://www.dss.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/03_2021/improving-digital-inclusion-older-australians-social-impact-be-connected-16-june-2020.pdf
• Nicholls, J., Lawlor, E., Neitzert, E., & Goodspeed, T. (2012). A Guide to Social Return on Investment, Second Edition (The SROI Network, Liverpool).
• OECD (2020). Rural Well-Being: Geography of Opportunities (OECD Rural Studies) (OECD Publishing, Paris).
• Oosterhoff, B., Metzger, A., & Alvis, L. (2019). Similarities and differences in adolescents'organized and civic activity networks across rural and non-rural communities. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 49, 1464-1480.
• Plummer, K. (2022). Sociology: The Basics, Third Edition (Routledge, Oxon).
• Sandberg, B., & Robichau, R. W. (2022). The hybridization of meaningful nonprofit work: An exploratory study of the effects of marketization on nonprofit managers' sense of meaningfulness in work. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 51(3), 606-632.
• Shinsei Office of Motosu City (2023). Population and Number of Households of Each Address. Retrieved from Motosu City website https://www.city.motosu.lg.jp/0000000129.html (In Japanese)
• Shogenji, S. (ed.) (2021). Agricultural of the 21st Century (Baifukan, Tokyo). (In Japanese)
• Simón-Moya, V. & Rodríguez-García, M. (2021). The Emergence of Social Entrepreneurship: Individuals and Social Ventures as Agents of Change (Springer, Cham).
• Sueyoshi, T., Qu, J., Li, A., & Liu, X. (2021). A new approach for evaluating technology inequality and diffusion barriers: The concept of efficiency Gini coefficient and its application in Chinese provinces. Energy, 15, 121256.
• Terman, J. N., Feiock, R. C., & Youm, J. (2020). When collaboration is risky business: The influence of collaboration risks on formal and informal collaboration. American Review of Public Administration, 50(1), 33-44.
• Ravenscroft, S., & Williams, P. F. (2021). Sustaining discreditable accounting research through ignorance: The mainstream elite's response to the 2008 financial crisis. Accounting, Society and Organizations, 95, 101280.
• Koike, T. (2020). Why was Retrospective Evaluation Born? ("Retrospective" Evaluation Seminar in Order to Think and Decide by Ourselves No. 2) Retrieved from Fukuoka Prefecture NPO Volunteer Center website: https://www.nvc.pref.fukuoka.lg.jp/files/StrengthDetail_2373_file.pdf (In Japanese)
• Vagner, L., Valaskova, K., Durana, P., & Lazaroiu, G. (2021). Earnings management: A bibliometric analysis, Economics and Sociology, 14(1), 249-262. doi: 10.14254/2071-789X.2021/14-1/16
• Xu, H., Zhang, C., & Huang, Y. (2023). Social trust, social capital, and subjective well-being of rural residents: Micro-empirical evidence based on the Chinese General Social Survey (CGSS). Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 10(Article Number 49 (2023)), 1-13. doi: 10.1057/s41599-023-01532-1

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.14254/2071-789X.2023/16-3/7