social impact measurements

8/12/2019 Social Impact Measurements

1/33


2/33

1. Introduction

-n the last decade responsi&le corporate &ehaviour has &een a maor topic of &oth

academic and pu&lic discourse. "onse/uently, tools have &een developed for &oth

the mana$in$ and reportin$ of the )ide ran$e of corporate responsi&ility activities.

'his paper outlines a classification system for the cate$ori(ation of contemporary

measurement methods developed to measure social impact. 'he term social impact

is used for the impact of a corporation on society on the economic, environmental

and social dimension. 0hereas environmental accountin$ methods have &een

em&raced &y &oth academic analysis and a )ide ran$e of corporations 1Burritt and

#a!a 2334, #chalte$$er et al. 23325, the landscape of social impact methods has

yet to &e cate$ori(ed. 'he purpose that the cate$ori(ation performed in this paper

serves is t)ofold. +irstly, it allo)s for the analysis of status /uo of the social

impact methods for corporate social responsi&ility 1"#R5. #econdly, it aids the

"#R mana$er in the navi$ation throu$h the )ide ran$e of e6istin$ tools.

%nalo$ous to financial accountin$ methods, environmental and social accountin$

methods aim to measure the impact of corporate activities on society. #uch social

and environmental impacts are often not e6pressed &y the mar!et, do not have a

mar!et value and are therefore often i$nored &y corporations 1El!in$ton 777,

#chalte$$er and Burritt 2333, am&erton 23385. 9o)ever, accountin$ methods

provide crucial information for mana$erial decision:ma!in$ 1accountin$ for

decision:ma!in$5 and for internal and e6ternal reportin$ 1accountin$ for control5

1;immerman 23375. 0hereas environmental accountin$ methods are relatively)idespread, as sho)n &y their fre/uent occurrence in annual reports, "#R

activities often e6tend to more numerous dimensions than the environmental one,

)ith impact on &oth the economy and society. 'he lac! of consensus on the

definition of social impact and the &est )ay to measure it hampers &oth the

academic de&ate on social impact, as )ell as the usa$e of social impact methods

1Maas and Boons 2335. 'his paper is a first attempt at increasin$ the consensus

&y analysin$ social impact and cate$ori(in$ the contemporary social impact

methods.

2. From a single towards a multiple bottom line

%lthou$h "#R is )idely used, numerous terms refer to the social &ehaviour ofcorporations, such as community involvement, corporate responsiveness,

corporate citi(enship, corporate social performance, and many others 1Matten et

al. 2335 as

?...an action that appears to further some social good, beyond the interest of the

corporation and that which is required by law. -t is important to reco$ni(e that

these actions are not specific to the private sector 1"lar! et al. 233A5, as &oth

2


3/33

$overnments and non:profit or$anisations underta!e actions to provide value for

society. 'he demands for more tan$i&le accounta&ility in these sectors have also

increased their attention on the need for social impact methods 1ondon 23375.

'raditionally, it )as &elieved that value is either economic 1created &y for:profit

or$anisations5 or social 1created &y non:profit or non$overnmental or$anisations5

10eis&rod 7, Ben:=er and 9oomissen 7725. -n ali$nment )ith this &elief it is

not surprisin$ to find that social impacts are often not e6plicitly included in

valuation studies or are even i$nored. Moreover, e6istin$ research puts most

emphasis on the &usiness case or the pay&ac! results of social initiatives for

corporations, instead of an emphasis on the impact of social initiatives 1+ry et al.

72, Mar$olis and 0alsh 2335. 9o)ever,Emerson 1233


4/33

+i$ure -nternal involvement in the corporate $oals 1&ased on El!in$ton et

al. 23345

-t is important to note that the involvement of a )ide variety of constituents )ithin

the corporation does not $uarantee socially responsi&le &ehaviour. 'he de&ate on

the intentions of corporations in their en$a$ement in "#R can &e cate$ori(ed in

three perspectives. 0hereas the first perspective faithfully pursues +riedmans

ar$ument that a &usiness its &usiness is &usiness 1+riedman 7>3, Matten et al.

233


5/33

%erm efinition#ocial impact

1Burd$e and

Fanclay 7745

By social impacts )e mean the conse/uences to human populations of

any pu&lic or private actions that alter the )ays in )hich people live,

)or!, play, relate to one another, or$anise to meet their needs and$enerally act as a mem&er of society.

#ocial impact

1atanG 75

By social impact, )e mean any of the $reat variety of chan$es in

physiolo$ical states and su&ective feelin$s, motives and emotions,co$nitions and &eliefs, values and &ehaviour, that occur in an

individual, human or animal, as a result of the real, implied, or

ima$ined presence or actions of other individuals.

-mpact

1"lar! et al.233A5

By impact )e mean the portion of the total outcome that happened as a

result of the activity of the venture, a&ove and &eyond )hat )ouldhave happened any)ay.

#ocial Falue

1Emerson et al.23335

#ocial value is created )hen resources, inputs, processes or policies are

com&ined to $enerate improvements in the lives of individuals orsociety as a )hole.

#ocial -mpact

1+reuden&ur$745

#ocial impact refers to impacts 1or effects, or conse/uences5 that are

li!ely to &e e6perienced &y an e/ually &road ran$e of social $roups as aresult of some course of action.

#ocial -mpact1Hentile 23335

#ocial impacts are the )ider societal concerns that reflects and respectsthe comple6 interdependency &et)een &usiness practice and society.

#ocial -mpact1-%-%ii&y

0i!ipedia23375

#ocial impacts are intended and unintended social conse/uences, &othpositive and ne$ative, of planned interventions 1policies, pro$rams,

plans, proects5 and any social chan$e processes invo!ed &y thoseinterventions.

'a&le Definitions of social impact and related terms

9ere, the definition of #ocial -mpact as developed &y "lar! et al. 1233A5 is used

by impact we mean the portion of the total outcome that happened as a result of

the activity of an organisation, above and beyond what would have happened

anyway.

'his definition is &ased on the so called -mpact Falue "hain 1see +i$ure 25 and is

used to differentiate outputs from outcomes and impacts. By includin$ what

would have happened anyway in the definition, the use of a &enchmar! or

counterfactual is inferred. Differentiation &et)een the elements of the social valuechain illustrate the conceptualisation of the idea that impacts are different from

outputs. 0hile outputs and outcomes are related to the provider of the product,

activity or service, impacts are associated )ith the user 1Kolodins!y et al. 23345. -t

is important to note that impacts include intended as )ell as unintended effects,

ne$ative as )ell as positive effects and &oth lon$ term and short term effects

10ain)ri$ht 23325. -deally, evaluation of the impact is utili(ed to inform $oal

ali$nment.

8


6/33

+i$ure 2 -mpact value chain 1adapted from "lar! et al. 233A5

&. e'elopments in performance measurement

+rom an economic perspective, the purpose of economic &ehaviour is &elieved to

&e the ma6imisation of )ealth or profit, attained &y the mana$ement of scarce

resources in the &est possi&le manner. 'herefore, emphasis is placed on the need

for mana$ers to see! efficient outcomes 1Burritt and #a!a 23345. Efficiencymeasures the relation &et)een outputs and inputs to a process. 'he hi$her the

output for a $iven input, or the lo)er the input for a $iven output, the more

efficient the activity, product, or corporation is. 'he $eneral understandin$ of &oth

investment and return is founded upon a traditional separation of social value and

economic value. 9o)ever, the pursuit of a &lended value is for investments and

returns not to separate social and financial impacts, &ut to &e composed of &oth

1Emerson 233


7/33

measure and report on the economic impact at an or$anisational level, compara&le

standards for measurin$ the impact upon society have yet to &e developed 1Maas

and Bouma 23385. "onse/uently, current practice in performance measurement

tends to focus on measurin$ only a part of the total impact that or$anisations have

on society.

-n order to develop this inte$rated &lended value perspective accountin$ methods

)ould have to inte$rate all three dimensions. -n 77, Eccles 1775 envisa$ed the

start of a revolution in performance measurement and predicted that ? within the

next five years, every corporation will have to redesign how it measures its

business performance 1p.


8/33

the various /ualitative e6pressions of impact. #econdly, corporations can have a

positive or ne$ative impact upon the society alon$ several dimensions the

environmental dimension, economic dimension and social dimension. #imilarly,

this can cause pro&lems )ith addin$ the various impact dimensions. 'hirdly,

social impact includes short term as )ell as lon$ term effects on society.

Moreover, many components can contri&ute to economic, environmental and

social impact. "onse/uently it is often hard to lin! activities and impact &ecause of

difficulties )ith attri&ution and causality /uestions. "urrently, no )idely accepted

scientific approach to attri&ution and causality /uestions in impact measurement

e6ists. astly, the $reatest difficulty mi$ht &e the challen$es around findin$ a

consensus on the definition of social impact. 0hereas some researchers solely

refer to social impact )hen it includes positive, ne$ative, intended and unintendedeffects, others solely refer to the intended positive effects 1Boyne 2332, E&rahim

23385. Moreover, consensus is a&sent on the use of a counterfactual or &enchmar!,

and )hether or not social impact &y definition re/uires data collection in a

participatory manner.

.2 n o'er'iew of methods

+rom the 773s on)ards, manymethods have &een developed to measure social

impact. iterature research, internet search and e6pert information resulted in a list

of thirty /uantitative 1social5 impact measurement methods iii 1see 'a&le 25 1e.$.

#chalte$$er et al. 2332, "lar! et al. 233A, Epstein 2335. uantitative methods are

needed for corporations to ma!e intan$i&le results more tan$i&le and to use social

impact measurement for decision:ma!in$ and control issues. 'his list is not

intended to &e e6haustive, &ut provides an overvie) of social impact measurement

methods.

#everal methods have &een developed &y, or for, non profit or $overnmental

corporations. E6amples 1see 'a&le 25 are #R-, %#-#, #"B%, and EM. ther

methods are mainly developed for, and used &y, for:profit corporations. E6amples

are #R%, %"%+-, 'B, M-+, and B%". %lthou$h a method mi$ht initially have

&een developed for a certain !ind of or$anisation, the method could &e used and

adapted &y other !inds of or$anisations. 'he use of #R- is a $ood e6ample of

this phenomenon. 'his method )as initially developed for non:profit or$anisationand is currently increasin$ly used &y profit corporations. =e6t to these /uantitative

impact measurement methods several corporations, non:$overnment

or$ani(ations 1=Hs5 and associations developed $uidelines or frame)or!s,

often &ased on one or more e6istin$ methods, on ho) to measure social impact. %

fe) e6amples are the ?$uidance document for the oil and $as industry 1-P-E"%

2335 and t)o $uidelines developed &y #hell 1#hell 233a, 233&5.


9/33

(Social) Impact measurement methods

. %cumen #corecard

2. %t!insson "ompass %ssessment for -nvestors 1%"%+-5

. "harity %ssessment Method of Performance 1"9%MP5

. +oundation -nvestment Bu&&le "hart

7. 9e)lett +oundation E6pected Return

3. ocal Economic Multiplier 1EM5. Measurin$ -mpact +rame)or! 1M-+5

2. Millennium Development Hoal scan 1MDH:scan5


10/33

the pro$ress in social impact measurement. E6istin$ measurement methods do not

sho) a common understandin$ of )hat to measure, )hy or for )hom to measure,

or ho) to measure.

Borro)in$ insi$hts from environmental accountin$ for a system to cate$orise

measurement methods, four su$$estions for cate$orisation can &e found

#chalte$$er et al. 123335 develop a frame)or! for the instruments of

environmental accountin$

oe) et al. 12335 and oe) 1233


11/33

%s a result, it is found that methods differ on the follo)in$ dimensions purpose,

time frame, orientation, len$th of time frame, perspective and approach. 'a&le , ?Puttin$ the s &ac! in corporate

social responsi&ility % multilevel theory of social chan$e in or$ani(ations, he #cademy of

)anagement, vol. , no. , pp.2:8A.

de Ba!!er +H%, Hroene)e$en P and den 9ond + 2338, ?% &i&liometric analysis of


20/33

Emerson C 233 to 77>, onprofit and &oluntary %ector . no. 2,

pp. .

+riedman, M 7>3, ?'he social responsi&ility of &usiness is to increase its profits, he ew

=or$ imes )aga>ine, < #eptem&er, p. , no. , pp. 2>:A>.

a&uscha$ne ", Brent %" and van Erc! RPH 2338, ?%ssessin$ the sustaina&ility

performances of industries,3ournal of 'leaner Production, vol.


21/33

epa!, DP, #mith, KH and 'aylor, M# 233>, ?Falue creation and value capture % multilevel

perspective,#cademy of )anagement 2eview, vol.


22/33

#hell 233a, Mana$in$ social performance, deliverin$ &enefits, Den 9aa$, 'onfidential.

#hell 233&, Mana$in$ social performance, measurin$ and communicatin$ social

performance, Den 9aa$, 'onfidential.

U#:EP% 778,#n introduction to environmental accounting as a business management tool,

United #tates Environmental Protection %$ency, 0ashin$ton D".

Fer)aal, E, "ommandeur 9R and Fer&e!e 0 2337, ?Falue creation and value claimin$ in

strate$ic outsourcin$ decisions % resource:contin$ency perspective, 3ournal of

)anagement, vol.


23/33

I; S*4I%I- -F S-*I5 IM*%

MS


24/33

'his system is developed &y %cumen +und in 2334

?Rather than see! an a&solute standard for social return across an e6tremely diverse portfolio, %cumen+und loo!s to /uantify an investments social impact and compare it to the universe of e6istin$

charita&le options for that e6plicit social issue. #pecifically, this tool B%" helps inform investors)here their philanthropic capital )ill &e most effectiveWans)erin$ X+or each dollar invested, ho)

much social output )ill this $enerate over the life of the investment relative to the &est availa&lecharita&le optionOY 'he B%" ratio 1for &est availa&le charita&le option5, must &e seen as a startin$

point for assessin$ the social impact and cost:effectiveness of investments. 'he point of the analysis isto inform our portfolio decision:ma!in$ )ith a /uantifia&le indication of )hether our social investment

)ill XoutperformY a plausi&le alternative.

http))).acumenfund.or$

. ,o Impact ssessment Framewor/Based on internet information, ccessed on 27 %u$ust 2337,http))).)di.umich.edufiles"onferences233>BoP#pea!erV23PresentationsPD+#tateV23ofV23the

V23+ieldV231ondonV23+inal5.pdf

'he Bottom of the Pyramid -mpact %ssessment +rame)or! is developed &y 'ed ondon in 233>.

?'he aim of the BoP -mpact %ssessment +rame)or! is to understand )ho at the &ase of the pyramid isimpacted &y BoP ventures and ho) they are affected. 'he frame)or! is developed to evaluate and

articulate impacts, to $uide strate$y and to ena&le &etter investment decisions.

=e6t to this the system contri&utes to a deeper !no)led$e of the relationship &et)een profits andpoverty alleviation and to reco$ni(e the poverty alleviation implications of different types of ventures.

-t &uilds upon the different )ell:&ein$ constructs as developed &y 77 =o&el Pri(e )inner %martya#en.

http))).)di.umich.edu

0. *enter for igh Impact hilanthrop+ *ost per Impact

Based on internet information, accessed on 27 %u$ust 2337,http))).impact.upenn.eduour)or!documents0hatis9i$h-mpactPhilanthropyinitialconceptpaper%pril233>

333.pdf

'his tool is developed &y the "enter for 9i$h -mpacts Philanthropy from the University ofPennsylvania in 233>.

?9i$h impact philanthropy means $ettin$ the most $ood for your philanthropic &uc!. -t is the process

&y )hich a philanthropist ma!es the &i$$est difference possi&le, $iven the amount of capital invested.-n order to assess cost per impact, philanthropists must &e a&le to assess, to the e6tent possi&le, its t)o

components 5 social impact, as measured &y specific, o&ective criteria for success and 25 cost, asmeasured &y the investments made &y philanthropists or other sources to realise the impact.

%ssessment re/uires o&ective, relia&le information on )hats effective, )hats not, and ho) much

capital is re/uired to achieve a $iven impact. 'he "enter for 9i$h -mpact Philanthropy aims to deliverthe information and analytic tools re/uired to ans)er these /uestions.

http))).impact.upenn.edu

". *harit+ ssessment Method of erformance (*M)Based on internet information, accessed on 27 %u$ust 2337http))).$oededoelentest.nlsharedchampuni233>.pdf and

http))).$oededoelentest.nlsharedchampuni233>.pdf

'he "9%MP method is developed &y the Dutch charities test 1nationale $oede doelen test5 in 2334.

?'he performance of charitys %D' are determined &y effectiveness : 0hat did )e achieveO : %ndefficiency : ho) fast and in a cost:effective )ayO Effectiveness and efficiency can &e measured on five

distinct levels

. -mpact on society ho) is society is affected &y the effect of the charity on their tar$et $roupO

2A
http://www.acumenfund.org/http://www.wdi.umich.edu/files/Conferences/2007/BoP/Speaker%20Presentations/PDF/State%20of%20the%20Field%20(London%20Final).pdfhttp://www.wdi.umich.edu/files/Conferences/2007/BoP/Speaker%20Presentations/PDF/State%20of%20the%20Field%20(London%20Final).pdfhttp://www.wdi.umich.edu/http://www.impact.upenn.edu/our_work/documents/WhatisHighImpactPhilanthropy_initialconceptpaperApril2007_000.pdfhttp://www.impact.upenn.edu/our_work/documents/WhatisHighImpactPhilanthropy_initialconceptpaperApril2007_000.pdfhttp://www.impact.upenn.edu/http://www.goededoelentest.nl/_shared/champ_juni_2007.pdfhttp://www.goededoelentest.nl/_shared/champ_juni_2007.pdfhttp://www.goededoelentest.nl/_shared/champ_juni_2007.pdfhttp://www.acumenfund.org/http://www.wdi.umich.edu/files/Conferences/2007/BoP/Speaker%20Presentations/PDF/State%20of%20the%20Field%20(London%20Final).pdfhttp://www.wdi.umich.edu/files/Conferences/2007/BoP/Speaker%20Presentations/PDF/State%20of%20the%20Field%20(London%20Final).pdfhttp://www.wdi.umich.edu/http://www.impact.upenn.edu/our_work/documents/WhatisHighImpactPhilanthropy_initialconceptpaperApril2007_000.pdfhttp://www.impact.upenn.edu/our_work/documents/WhatisHighImpactPhilanthropy_initialconceptpaperApril2007_000.pdfhttp://www.impact.upenn.edu/http://www.goededoelentest.nl/_shared/champ_juni_2007.pdfhttp://www.goededoelentest.nl/_shared/champ_juni_2007.pdf


25/33

2. -mpact on the pu&lic in )hat )ay is the situation of the tar$et $roup demonstra&ly improved &y theoutput of the charityO


26/33

local spendin$ of the study $roup, the third round measures induced income, i.e., local spendin$ &ylocal recipients of study $roup spendin$. 'he local multiplier is the sum of direct, indirect and induced

income divided &y direct income.

11. Measuring Impact Framewor/ (MIF)Based on internet information, accessed on 2A %u$ust 2337,

http&usinessfi$htspoverty.nin$.comprofiles&lo$s)hat:$ets:measured:$ets:done andhttp))).)&csd.or$)e&measurin$impact.htm

'he Measurin$ -mpact +rame)or! is developed in 233 &y the 0orld Business "ouncil for

#ustaina&le Development.

?'he Measurin$ -mpact +rame)or! is desi$ned to help corporations understand their contri&ution to

society and use this understandin$ to inform their operational and lon$:term investment decisions andhave &etter:informed conversations )ith sta!eholders. 'he frame)or! is &ased on a four:step

methodolo$y that attempts to mer$e the &usiness perspectives of its contri&ution to development )iththe societal perspectives of )hat is important )here that &usiness operates. #tep one, set &oundaries

determine the scope and depth of the overall assessment in terms of $eo$raphical &oundary 1localversus re$ional5 and types of &usiness activities to &e assessed. #tep t)o, measure direct and indirect

impacts -dentify and measure the direct and indirect impacts arisin$ from the corporations activities,mappin$ out )hat impacts are )ithin the control of the corporation and )hat it can influence throu$h

its &usiness activities. #tep three, assess contri&ution to development. %ssess to )hat e6tent the

corporations impacts contri&ute to the development priorities in the assessment areas. #tep four,prioritise mana$ement response &ased on steps t)o and three e6tract the !ey ris!s and opportunities

relative to the corporations societal impact, and &ased on this, develop an appropriate mana$ement

response. 'here is no Xone si(e fits allY )ay to use this methodolo$y. -n order to appropriately tailorthe methodolo$y to the &usiness and its operatin$ conte6t, as )ell as ensure follo):up actions are

ta!en, corporations are encoura$ed to ma!e the assessment as participative as possi&le, consultin$people &oth )ithin and if possi&le e6ternal to the corporation.

http))).)&csd.or$

12. Millennium e'elopment 6oal scan (M67scan)Based on internet information, accessed on %u$ust 2337, https))).md$scan.cominde6.phpOpa$eJ'e6tpa$eZitemJcontactdetails[pa$eJ'e6tpa$eZitemJa&outscan

'he MDH:scan is developed in 2337 &y the Dutch =ational "ommittee for -nternational "ooperation

and #ustaina&le Development 1="D5 and Dutch #ustaina&ility Research 1D#R5.

?'he MDH #can is a tool desi$ned for corporations to measure the positive contri&ution tot theMillennium Development Hoals 1MDHs5 and demonstrate their role in the $lo&al initiative to reach

these ei$ht MDHs. 'he MDH #can measures each corporationNs MDH impact &y enterin$ !ey data in asecured environment. nce the corporation approves the pu&lication of its results, they )ill &e visi&le

for everyone. 'he MDH #can is a practical tool for corporations. 0ithout spendin$ much time oreffort, corporations can $ain insi$ht in their MDH +ootprint. Based on !ey data on core &usiness and

community investment activities that can &e entered after re$isterin$, the MDH scan estimates yourcorporationNs contri&ution to each of the MDHs. Real time results $eneration /uic!ly provides easy:to:

understand insi$hts, $lo&ally, per country or per sector industry. Each corporation can do)nload a

personali(ed MDH impact results report, )hich facilitates internal discussions and in:depth analysis ofits MDH impact.

http))).md$scan.com

13. 8olunteering Impact ssessment %ool/itBased on internet information, accessed on %u$ust 2337,http))).socialeconomyscotland.infoscvocontentpilotimpact.asp and

httpsecommerce.volunteerin$.or$.u!Pu&licationDetails.asp6OProduct-DJF


27/33

social economy corporations, &ut this is mainly supported &y anecdotal evidence. 'he 'ool!it is a )ayof chan$in$ this. -t is easy to use, comprehensive and adapta&le. -t allo)s corporations to loo! at the

impact of volunteerin$ on the volunteer, the service user, the corporation and the )ider community. -tcan help corporations $ain a $reater understandin$ of ho) and )hy volunteerin$ )or!s in the

corporation as )ell as $ather evidence to support fundin$ &ids.

?'his ne) tool!it )ill ena&le corporations to assess the impact of volunteerin$ on all !ey sta!eholdersthe volunteers, the corporation, the &eneficiaries, and the &roader community. Results over time can &ecompared. "orporations )ill &e a&le to use it to assess a )ide ran$e of impacts, from the s!ills

development of volunteers to the economic value of volunteerin$ corporations. Positive and ne$ativeresults, intended and unintended impacts can &e e6plored.

http))).volunteerin$.or$.u!

1&. -ngoing ssessment of Social Impacts (-SIS)%dapted from a description in "lar! et al. 233A

Developed in 777 &y RED+ 1formerly 'he Ro&erts Enterprise Development +und5 a nonprofit

enterprise that creates o& opportunities throu$h support of social enterprises that help people $ain thes!ills to help themselves.

?RED+ developed this system for its internal use and that of the nonprofit a$encies in its portfolio to

assess the social outputs and outcomes of the a$encies overall, includin$ the social enterprises theyeach operate. 'he system is a customised, comprehensive, on$oin$ social mana$ement information

system 1M-#5. -t entails &oth desi$nin$ an information mana$ement system that inte$rates )ith thea$encys information trac!in$ practices and needs, and then implementin$ the trac!in$ process to trac!

pro$ress on short: to medium term 1t)o years5 outcomes.

http))).redf.or$

1. articipator+ Impact ssessment

Based on internet information, accessed on 2A %u$ust 2337,https)i!is.uit.tufts.educonfluencedisplay+-"ParticipatoryT-mpactT%ssessment::TaTHuideTforTPractitioners

andhttp))).devnet.or$.n(conf2332a&stracts=o)land:+oreman#andra.pdf

?'he +einstein -nternational "enter has &een developin$ and adaptin$ participatory approaches tomeasure the impact of livelihoods &ased interventions since the early nineties. Participatory -mpact

%ssessment 1P-%5 ta!es the participatory methodolo$y of these processes and applies it to the ori$inal

corporational o&ectives in as!in$ the critical /uestions X)hat difference are )e ma!in$OY P-% offers

not only a useful tool for discoverin$ )hat chan$e has occurred, &ut also a )ay of understandin$ )hy ithas occurred. 'he frame)or! does not aim to provide a ri$id or detailed step &y step formula, or set of

tools to carry out proect impact assessments, &ut descri&es an ei$ht sta$e approach, and presentse6amples of tools )hich may &e adapted to different conte6ts. % $uide for practitioners is availa&le to

demonstrate ho) P-% can &e used to overcome some of the inherent )ea!nesses in conventionalhumanitarian monitorin$ evaluation and impact assessment approaches, such as the emphasis on

measurin$ process as opposed to real impact, the emphasis on e6ternal as opposed to community &asedindicators of impact, and ho) to overcome the issue of )ea! or non:e6istent &aselines.

https)i!is.uit.tufts.educonfluencedisplay+-"+einsteinT-nternationalT"enter

10. o'ert+ Social Impact ssessment (SI)%dapted from a description in "lar! et al. 233A.

'his system has &een developed &y the 0orld Ban! in 2333.

?P#-% is a systematic analytic approach to Xthe analysis of the distri&utional impact of policy reforms

on the )ell:&ein$ of different sta!eholder $roups, )ith a particular focus on the poor and vulnera&le\Y1P#-% Users Huide5. -t is not a tool for impact assessment in and of itself, &ut is rather a process fordevelopin$ a systematic impact assessment for a $iven proect. -ts components are not ne), &ut P#-%

2>
http://www.volunteering.org.uk/http://www.redf.org/https://wikis.uit.tufts.edu/confluence/display/FIC/Participatory+Impact+Assessment--+a+Guide+for+Practitionershttp://www.devnet.org.nz/conf2002/abstracts/Nowland-Foreman_Sandra.pdfhttps://wikis.uit.tufts.edu/confluence/display/FIC/Feinstein+International+Centerhttp://www.volunteering.org.uk/http://www.redf.org/https://wikis.uit.tufts.edu/confluence/display/FIC/Participatory+Impact+Assessment--+a+Guide+for+Practitionershttp://www.devnet.org.nz/conf2002/abstracts/Nowland-Foreman_Sandra.pdfhttps://wikis.uit.tufts.edu/confluence/display/FIC/Feinstein+International+Center


28/33

has &een formally articulated as a systematic approach &y the 0orld Ban! in 233


29/33

social dimension of a proect is concerned, )hen the clarification of differin$ sta!eholder opinions isneeded or )hen sets of solutions are to &e ne$otiated.

http(sa.(h)in.ch

2#. Social *osts7,enefit nal+sis (S*,)

%dapted from a description in "lar! et al. 233A.

'his is a $eneral economic tool for performance measurement. #ince the 773s the traditional cost:&enefit analysis has &een e6tended to include impacts upon the society.

?#ocial cost:&enefit analysis is a type of economic analysis in )hich the costs and social impacts of an

investment are e6pressed in monetary terms and then assessed accordin$ to one or more of threemeasures 15 net present value 1the a$$re$ate value of all costs, revenues, and social impacts,

discounted to reflect the same accountin$ period 125 &enefit:cost ratio 1the discounted value of

revenues and positive impacts divided &y discounted value of costs and ne$ative impacts5 and 1


30/33

ali!e in the sense that &oth are a&out measurin$ $aps, &ut the similarity ends there. -n the case of theEcolo$ical +ootprint, the $aps of interest to us are &et)een resources )e need and resources )e are

stuc! )ith in the case of the #ocial +ootprint, the $aps of interest to us are &et)een resources )e needand resources )e have decided to produce. Ecolo$ical resources are fi6ed and limited, social resources

are not. 'he sustaina&ility metrics ma!e it possi&le to measure non:financial or$anisationalperformance 1e.$., the triple &ottom line5 a$ainst standards of performance. =umerators e6press actual

impacts on vital capitals in the )orld, and denominators e6press norms for )hat such impacts ou$ht to&e in order to ensure human )ell:&ein$.

http))).sustaina&leinnovation.or$

2&. Social Impact ssessment (SI)Based on internet information, accessed on %u$ust 2337, http))).st.nmfs.noaa.$ovtmspospo4.pdfand

http))).dams.or$docs!&asecontri&ins223.pdf

?'he concept of #-% is understood to include adaptive mana$ement of impacts, proects and policies

1as )ell as prediction, miti$ation and monitorin$5 and therefore needs to &e involved 1at least

considered5 in the plannin$ of the proect or policy from inception. 'he #-% process can &e applied to a)ide ran$e of interventions, and underta!en at the &ehest of a )ide ran$e of actors, and not ust )ithin

a re$ulatory frame)or!. -t is implicit that social and &iophysical impacts 1and the human and&iophysical environments5 are interconnected. 'he overall purpose of all impact assessment is to &rin$a&out a more sustaina&le )orld, and that issues of social sustaina&ility and ecolo$ical sustaina&ility

need to &e considered in partnership. #-% is also understood to &e an um&rella or overarchin$frame)or! that em&odies all human impacts includin$ aesthetic impacts 1landscape analysis5,

archaeolo$ical 1herita$e5 impacts, community impacts, cultural impacts, demo$raphic impacts,development impacts, economic and fiscal impacts, $ender assessment, health impacts, indi$enous

ri$hts, infrastructural impacts, institutional impacts, political impacts 1human ri$hts, $overnance,democratisation etc5, poverty assessment, psycholo$ical impacts, resource issues 1access and

o)nership of resources5, tourism impacts, and other impacts on societies.

http))).socialimpactassessment.net

2. Social return ssessment (S4)%dapted from a description in "lar! et al. 233A.

'his system )as developed in 2333 &y Pacific "ommunity Fentures 1P"F5, a nonprofit or$anisation

that mana$es t)o for:profit investment funds that invest in corporations that provide o&s, role models,and on:the:o& trainin$ for lo):income people, and that are located in disadvanta$ed communities in

"alifornia.

?P"F developed the method for its o)n use in assessin$ the social return of each investor and of its

portfolio overall. 'he system entails trac!in$ pro$ress specifically on the num&er and /uality of o&s

created &y P"Fs portfolio corporations. -t helps the fund tar$et and improve its services to itsinvestors and to a $roup of corporations to )hich it provides &usiness advisory services. 'he method is

separate from financial performance assessment.

http))).pacificcommunityventures.com

20. Social return on In'estment (S4-I)%dapted from a description in "lar! et al. 233A.

Developed in 774 &y RED+ 1formerly 'he Ro&erts Enterprise Development +und5 a nonprofitenterprise that creates o& opportunities throu$h support of social enterprises that help people $ain the

s!ills to help themselves.

?RED+ developed social return on investment 1#R-5 analysis to place a dollar value on ventures in its

portfolio )ith social as )ell as mar!et o&ectives. 'he approach com&ines the tools of &enefit:costanalysis, the method economists use to assess non:profit proects and pro$rams, and the tools of

financial analysis used in the private sector. "onceptually, the approach differs from these esta&lishedtypes of analysis, nota&ly in )hat is considered a XsocialY &enefit. Practically, it is more accessi&le to a


31/33

&road ran$e of users, su&stitutin$ readily understood terms and methods for technical ar$on andcomplicated techni/ues.

http))).redf.or$

2". Socio7conomic ssessment %oolbo (S%)

Based on internet information, accessed on %u$ust 2337http))).an$loamerican.co.u!aadevelopmentsocietyen$a$ementseatandhttp))).an$loamerican.co.u!corporateresponsi&ility

'he #ocio:Economic %ssessment 'ool&o6 )as first launched in 233< &y %n$lo %merican plc.

?'he tool&o6 &uilds on several steps. 15 profilin$ our o)n operations and our host community, 125

identifyin$ and en$a$in$ )ith !ey sta!eholders, 1


32/33

'he 0ellventure Monitor^ is developed in 2334 &y the +ortis +oundation =etherlands 1++=5 and theErasmus University Rotterdam 1EUR5.

?'he 0ellventure Monitor^ measures the effects of community investment on several aspects. -tma!es clear )hat the tar$et $roup &enefits from the proect, &ut also )hat the corporation, the

employees, and the social or$anisation $ains from it. 'he 0ellventure Monitor^ provides insi$ht into

the effects of a specific proect. But more importantly it is also possi&le to see the sum of the differentproects. 'his )ay, the lon$:term &enefits of community investment &ecome visi&le. 0ith the tool,corporations and corporations can create a survey after finishin$ a proect and send it to those involved

at the corporation, employees of the or$anisation, and to the tar$et $roup. 'he surveys are processedautomatically. 'he tool can &e used to vie), analy(e, and present the results. Per proect, or over a

lon$er period of time.

http))).)ellventuremonitor.nl


33/33

i'he primary pursuit of corporations is to create value 1"onner 775. Falue refers to the value created

minus cost incurred. 'his implies that value can &e either positive or ne$ative. Falue creation is a central

concept in mana$ement and or$anisational literature 1epa! et al. 233> Fer)aal et al. 23375. 9o)ever, )hat

actually constitutes value is often left unaddressed in these theories 1Maas and Boons 2335.ii

-nternational %ssociation for -mpact %ssessment, ))).iaia.or$.iii

-t must &e emphasised that the focus here is on /uantitative methods that are a&le to measure impact onsociety. -n addition to these methods many /ualitative methods e6ist, e.$. story tellin$, content analysis, and

)ord countin$. Huidelines, principles and standards such as HR-, %%333, #%333, -#24333, are not

included in this list.iv

-n %ppendi6 %, a short description of social impact measurement tools is provided.v

0hen a method, for e6ample, only ta!es intended impacts into account or ma!es use of predetermined

indicators for impact measurement it is cate$ori(ed as ?partially.
http://www.iaia.org/http://www.iaia.org/http://www.iaia.org/

social impact measurements

Documents