Social return on investment

Last updated

Social return on investment (SROI) is a principles-based method for measuring extra-financial value (such as environmental or social value) not otherwise reflected or involved in conventional financial accounts. The method can be used by any entity to evaluate impact on stakeholders, identify ways to improve performance, and enhance the performance of investments.

Contents

The SROI method as it has been standardized by Social Value UK, formerly called the Social Return on Investment (SROI) Network, [1] provides a consistent quantitative approach to understanding and managing the impacts of a project, business, organisation, fund or policy. It accounts for stakeholders' views of impact, and puts financial 'proxy' values on all those impacts identified by stakeholders which do not typically have market values. The aim is to include the values of people that are often excluded from markets in the same terms as used in markets, that is money, in order to give people a voice in resource allocation decisions.

A network was formed in 2008 to facilitate the continued evolution of the method. Globally, there are some 2000 members of this network, called Social Value International (formerly the SROI Network).

Development

While the term SROI exists in cost–benefit analysis (CBA), a methodology for calculating social return on investment in the context of social enterprise was first documented in 2000 by REDF, [2] formerly the Roberts Enterprise Development Fund. This is a San Francisco-based philanthropic fund which makes long-term grants available to organizations that run businesses for social benefit. Since then the approach has evolved to take into account developments in corporate sustainability reporting as well as development in the field of accounting for social and environmental impact. Interest has been fuelled by the increasing recognition of the importance of metrics to manage impacts that are not included in traditional profit and loss accounts, and the need for these metrics to focus on outcomes over outputs. While SROI builds upon the logic of cost-benefit analysis, it is different in that it is explicitly designed to inform the practical decision-making of enterprise managers and investors focused on optimizing their social and environmental impacts. By contrast, cost-benefit analysis is a technique rooted in social science that is most often used by funders outside an organization to determine whether their investment or grant is economically efficient, although economic efficiency also encompasses social and environmental considerations.

In 2002, the Hewlett Foundation's Blended Value Project was brought forward by a group of practitioners from the US, Canada, UK and Netherlands who had been implementing SROI analyses together to draft an update to the methodology. A member of this group coauthored a guidance-style article in the California Management Review on the subject around this time. [3] A larger group met again in 2006 to do another revision which was published in 2006 in the book Social Return on Investment: a Guide to SROI. New Economics Foundation in the UK began exploring ways in which SROI could be tested and developed in a UK context, publishing a DIY Guide to Social Return on Investment in 2007.

The UK government's Office of the Third Sector and the Scottish Government commissioned a project beginning in 2007 which continues to develop guidelines that allow social businesses seeking government grants to account for their impact using a consistent, verifiable method. This resulted in another formal revision to the method, produced by a consortium led by Social Value UK, published in the 2009 Guide to SROI, since updated in 2012. [4]

Developments in the UK led to agreement between Social Value International and Social Value UK on seven core principles. These are:

There is a strong emphasis on the first principle, involving stakeholders. [6]

The third principle, 'Value the things that matter', includes the use of financial proxies and monetisation of value, and is unique to the SROI approach. These seven principles were renamed "Social Value Principles" by Social Value International in 2017, and guidance standards for each are being produced.

Several software providers exist to support users to collect and manage data for SROI analysis.

In 2009–2010 proponents affiliated with Social Value UK proposed to establish linkages between SROI analysis and IRIS, [7] an initiative to create a common set of terms and definitions for describing the social and environmental performance of an organization.

Some organisations that have used SROI have found it to be a useful tool for organizational learning. [2]

Primary purpose

While in financial management the term ROI refers to a single ratio, unlike Social Earnings Ratio (S/E Ratio), SROI analysis does not necessarily refer not to one single ratio but more to a way of reporting on value creation. It bases the assessment of value in part on the perception and experience of stakeholders, finds indicators of what has changed and tells the story of this change and, where possible, uses monetary values for these indicators. It is an emerging management discipline: a skill set for the measurement and communication of non-financial value. Therefore, the approach distinguishes between "SROI" and "SROI Analysis". The latter implies: a) a specific process by which the number was calculated, b) context information to enable accurate interpretation of the number itself, and c) additional non-monetized social value and information about the number's substance and context. [8]

The principles

There are seven principles of SROI. [9] [10] These are:

1. Involve stakeholders (i.e. everyone who has a 'stake' or an interest in the subject of the SROI)
Inform what gets measured and how this is measured and valued in an account of social value by involving stakeholders
2. Understand what changes (for those stakeholders)
Articulate how change is created and evaluate this through evidence gathered, recognising positive and negative changes as well as those that are intended and unintended
3. Value what matters (also known as the 'monetisation principle' – see below)
Making decisions about allocating resources between different options needs to recognise the values of stakeholders. Value refers to the relative importance of different outcomes. It is informed by stakeholders' preferences
4. Only include what is material
Determine what information and evidence must be included in the accounts to give a true and fair picture, such that stakeholders can draw reasonable conclusions about impact
5. Do not over-claim
Only claim the value that activities are responsible for creating
6. Be transparent
Demonstrate the basis on which the analysis may be considered accurate and honest, and show that it will be reported to and discussed with stakeholders
7. Verify the result
Ensure appropriate independent assurance.

Monetisation principle

The translation of extra-financial value into monetary terms is considered an important part of SROI analysis by some practitioners, and problematic when it is made a universal requirement by others. Essentially, the monetisation principle assumes that price is a proxy for value.

While prices represent exchange value – the market price at which demand equals supply – they do not completely represent all the value to either the seller or the consumer. In other words, they do not capture economic surplus (consumer or producer surplus). They also do not include the positive or negative value (i.e., externalities) for others who may be affected by an exchange. Moreover, prices will depend in part on the distribution of income and wealth: different distributions result in different prices which result in different proxies for value. Hence market prices do not always accurately reflect what people value.

Proponents of SROI argue that using monetary proxies (market prices or other monetary proxies) for social, economic and environmental value offers several practical benefits:

Despite these benefits, on the down side there is concern that monetization lets a user of SROI analysis "off the hook" by too easily allowing comparison of the end number at the expense of understanding the actual method by which it was arrived at: thus a working paper by Arvidson et al (2010) "aims to encourage greater rigour and attention to how SROI principles are applied". [5] :16

Further applications

The SROI methodology has been further adapted for use in planning and prioritization of climate change adaptation and development interventions. For example, the Participatory Social Return on Investment (PSROI) framework builds on the economic principles of SROI and CBA and integrates them with the theoretical and methodological foundations of participatory action research (PAR), critical systems thinking, and Resilience Theory and strength-based approaches such as appreciative inquiry and asset-based community development to create a framework for the planning and costing of adaptation to climate change in agricultural systems. [11]

PSROI thus represents the convergence of two theoretical tracks: adaptation prioritization, planning and selection, and the economics of adaptation. The main divergence, then, between SROI and PSROI is that while SROI typically analyzes pre-defined interventions, PSROI involves a participatory intervention prioritization process that is antecedent to SROI-style economic analyses.

Potential limitations

Variations

Some SROI users employ a version of the method that does not require that all impacts be assigned a financial proxy. Instead the "numerator" includes monetized, quantitative but not monetized, qualitative, and narrative types of information about value.

See also

Related Research Articles

Finance refers to monetary resources and to the study and discipline of money, currency, assets and liabilities. As a subject of study, it is related to but distinct from economics, which is the study of the production, distribution, and consumption of goods and services. Based on the scope of financial activities in financial systems, the discipline can be divided into personal, corporate, and public finance.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Triple bottom line</span> Accounting framework

The triple bottom line is an accounting framework with three parts: social, environmental and economic. Some organizations have adopted the TBL framework to evaluate their performance in a broader perspective to create greater business value. Business writer John Elkington claims to have coined the phrase in 1994.

Cost–benefit analysis (CBA), sometimes also called benefit–cost analysis, is a systematic approach to estimating the strengths and weaknesses of alternatives. It is used to determine options which provide the best approach to achieving benefits while preserving savings in, for example, transactions, activities, and functional business requirements. A CBA may be used to compare completed or potential courses of action, and to estimate or evaluate the value against the cost of a decision, project, or policy. It is commonly used to evaluate business or policy decisions, commercial transactions, and project investments. For example, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission must conduct cost-benefit analyses before instituting regulations or deregulations.

Monetization is, broadly speaking, the process of converting something into money. The term has a broad range of uses. In banking, the term refers to the process of converting or establishing something into legal tender. While it usually refers to the coining of currency or the printing of banknotes by central banks, it may also take the form of a promissory currency. The term "monetization" may also be used informally to refer to exchanging possessions for cash or cash equivalents, including selling a security interest, charging fees for something that used to be free, or attempting to make money on goods or services that were previously unprofitable or had been considered to have the potential to earn profits. And data monetization refers to a spectrum of ways information assets can be converted into economic value.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Social impact assessment</span> Reviews infrastructure and development

Social impact assessment (SIA) is a methodology to review the social effects of infrastructure projects and other development interventions. Although SIA is usually applied to planned interventions, the same techniques can be used to evaluate the social impact of unplanned events, for example, disasters, demographic change, and epidemics. SIA is important in applied anthropology, as its main goal is to deliver positive social outcomes and eliminate any possible negative or long term effects.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Economic analysis of climate change</span> Using economic tools to investigate climate change

An economic analysis of climate change uses economic tools and models to calculate the magnitude and distribution of damages caused by climate change. It can also give guidance for the best policies for mitigation and adaptation to climate change from an economic perspective. There are many economic models and frameworks. For example, in a cost–benefit analysis, the trade offs between climate change impacts, adaptation, and mitigation are made explicit. For this kind of analysis, integrated assessment models (IAMs) are useful. Those models link main features of society and economy with the biosphere and atmosphere into one modelling framework. The total economic impacts from climate change are difficult to estimate. In general, they increase the more the global surface temperature increases.

In the field of accounting, when reporting the financial statements of a company, accounting constraints are boundaries, limitations, or guidelines.

Environmental accounting is a subset of accounting proper, its target being to incorporate both economic and environmental information. It can be conducted at the corporate level or at the level of a national economy through the System of Integrated Environmental and Economic Accounting, a satellite system to the National Accounts of Countries.

The following outline is provided as an overview of and topical guide to finance:

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Socially responsible investing</span> Any investment strategy combining both financial performance and social/ethical impact.

Socially responsible investing (SRI) is any investment strategy which seeks to consider financial return alongside ethical, social or environmental goals. The areas of concern recognized by SRI practitioners are often linked to environmental, social and governance (ESG) topics. Impact investing can be considered a subset of SRI that is generally more proactive and focused on the conscious creation of social or environmental impact through investment. Eco-investing is SRI with a focus on environmentalism.

Return on investment (ROI) or return on costs (ROC) is the ratio between net income and investment. A high ROI means the investment's gains compare favourably to its cost. As a performance measure, ROI is used to evaluate the efficiency of an investment or to compare the efficiencies of several different investments. In economic terms, it is one way of relating profits to capital invested.

Environmental, social, and governance (ESG) is shorthand for an investing principle that prioritizes environmental issues, social issues, and corporate governance. Investing with ESG considerations is sometimes referred to as responsible investing or, in more proactive cases, impact investing.

Earth Economics is a 501(c)(3) non-profit formally established in 2004 and headquartered in Tacoma, Washington, United States. The organisation uses natural capital valuation to help decision makers and local stakeholders to understand the value of natural capital assets. By identifying, monetising, and valuing natural capital and ecosystem services.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Corporate finance</span> Framework for corporate funding, capital structure, and investments

Corporate finance is the area of finance that deals with the sources of funding, and the capital structure of businesses, the actions that managers take to increase the value of the firm to the shareholders, and the tools and analysis used to allocate financial resources. The primary goal of corporate finance is to maximize or increase shareholder value.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Management accounting principles</span> Management accounting case

Management accounting principles (MAP) were developed to serve the core needs of internal management to improve decision support objectives, internal business processes, resource application, customer value, and capacity utilization needed to achieve corporate goals in an optimal manner. Another term often used for management accounting principles for these purposes is managerial costing principles. The two management accounting principles are:

  1. Principle of Causality and,
  2. Principle of Analogy.

Social accounting is the process of communicating the social and environmental effects of organizations' economic actions to particular interest groups within society and to society at large. Social Accounting is different from public interest accounting as well as from critical accounting.

Triple bottom line cost-benefit analysis (TBL-CBA) is an evidence-based economic method that combines cost–benefit analysis (CBA) and life-cycle cost analysis (LCCA) across the triple bottom line (TBL) to weigh costs and benefits to project stakeholders. The TBL-CBA process quantifies total net present value, return on investment, and project payback. TBL-CBA uses location-specific data to give asset owners and design professionals the flexibility and capability to provide a rigorous analysis of investment alternatives through all stages of planning and design.

Sustainable return on investment (S-ROI) is a methodology for identifying and quantifying environmental, societal, and economic impacts of investment in projects and initiatives.

Susana Mourato is a professor of environmental economics at the London School of Economics and Political Science. She holds a leader position at the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.

References

  1. Social Value UK, Who we are, accessed 28 April 2024
  2. 1 2 3 Millar, Ross; Hall, Kelly (2012). "Social Return on Investment (SROI) and Performance Measurement". Public Management Review. 15 (6): 923–941. doi:10.1080/14719037.2012.698857. S2CID   152905797.
  3. "Guidelines for Social Return on Investment | California Management Review". cmr.berkeley.edu. Retrieved 2021-12-12.
  4. Social Value UK, Standards and Guidance, accessed 28 April 2024
  5. 1 2 3 4 Arvidson et al. (2010), The Ambitions and Challenges of SROI, TSRC Working Paper 49, pp. 9-10
  6. Miller, A., Understanding social value: The importance of including stakeholders, SEE Change Magazine, published on 17 May 2014, accessed on 30 August 2024
  7. IRIS: Impact Reporting and Investment Standards
  8. How Has SROI Helped Me?
  9. A Guide to Social Return on Investment, Society Media (2009) p. 9
  10. Social Return on Investment Position Paper, New Philanthropy Capital (2010) p. 2
  11. Sova C, Chaudhury A, Helfgott A, Corner-Dolloff C (2012). "Community-based adaptation costing: An integrated framework for the participatory costing of community-based adaptations to climate change in agriculture", Working Paper No. 16., CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11027-014-9600-5 Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS): Cali, Colombia.
  12. Social Return on Investment Position Paper, New Philanthropy Capital (2010) p. 6
  13. Gair, C (2009), SROI Act II: A Call to Action for Next Generation SROI, REDF, pp. 6-7.
  14. Arvidson, M., Lyon, F., McKay, S. and Moro, D., The ambitions and challenges of SROI, Third Sector Research Centre Working Paper 49, University of Birmingham, p. 12, published December 2010, accessed 10 May 2024
  15. Pratono, A.H.; Suyanto; Marciano, D.; Zurbrugg, C. (2009). "Social return on investment for community-based enterprise in Surabaya City" (PDF). The Hong Kong Journal of Social Work . 52 (1/2): 93–114. doi:10.1142/S0219246217000079.