Public organizations are increasingly adding environmental and social aspects in their strategic agendas. This paper focuses on the actors and factors that influence the speed of implementation of sustainability initiatives. Four healthcare organizations in The Netherlands were studied. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with top management, budget owners and procurement professionals. Although top management assigned strategic importance to sustainability initiatives, budget owners had the final say in implementation. Procurement professionals had very little influence on the implementation process of sustainability.

Public agencies feel the need to advance sustainability and use procurement as an instrument to do so. Many studies focused on internal forces, explaining the limited success of sustainable public procurement. This study focused on how external forces are able to hold municipalities accountable for sustainable procurement. Three mid-sized Dutch municipalities were investigated through an extensive document study and 34 semi-structured interviews. The results show minor legal pressure to enforce sustainable procurement. National legislation, guidelines and principles are considered non-binding, due to a lack of penalties in the case of non-compliance. Real pressure stems from lobbying by branch organizations and political pressure initiated by citizens. In contrast with the New Public Management principles, municipalities appear to place more emphasis on legal and financial accountability, in contrast to performance accountability. Accountants mainly focus on legitimacy and the finance department only monitors spending within budget. The hybrid organization of the procurement function seems to impede sustainability development. Only the larger projects are subject to sustainability requirements, set by centralized purchasing departments. Smaller projects, responsible for 2/3 of the total spend are managed by decentralized groups, remaining under the radar of sustainability policies.

Purpose Social return on investment (SROI) is a systematic way of incorporating social values of different stakeholders into public sector decision-making on sustainability. This study aims to identify salient factors that influence SROI implementation. Design/methodology/approach The interactions of four Dutch municipalities and their social enterprises were examined, by analyzing relevant documents and interviewing key actors. Findings External forces appear to have little influence on SROI implementation. Management systems, legal restrictions in relation to privacy and the administrative burden appear to hinder SROI implementation. Findings suggest that trust among the parties involved and their representatives is a major driver for SROI development. SROI is not measured well enough, which complicates analyzing and reporting its development. Research limitations/implications Achieving collaboration through trust is a characteristic of stewardship theory, and therefore useful for studying social sustainability. Combining agency and stewardship theory provides useful insights concerning the application of control mechanisms versus empowerment. Practical implications Barriers can be overcome by informing and engaging suppliers in SROI initiatives. Furthermore, findings of this study suggest that it is easier for municipalities to incorporate SROI when social firm activities are insourced. An independent procurement function stimulates SROI development. Engaged professionals can make the difference in SROI policy implementation, more so than written policies. Social implications SROI enables social sustainability. SROI can be used by public agencies to provide meaningful activities for the long-term unemployed and underprivileged adolescents. Originality/value The study is the first empirical work that relates public procurement to SROI implementation and its effect on suppliers. The findings provide valuable insights into government influence on social enterprises.