‘Double-taxing’ Indigenous business: exploring the effects of political discourse on the transfer of public procurement policy

Cutcher, Leanne; Ormiston, Jarrod; Gardner, C. T.

doi:10.1080/14719037.2019.1679235

Cited by 17 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 95 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…There is some concern that Indigenous cultural businesses, and therefore Indigenous workers and communities, may miss out on the opportunities that Indigenous procurement policies present (Evans 2019). And, although policymakers claim that Indigenous businesses are significantly more likely to employ Indigenous workers as justification for Indigenous social procurement policies (Hunter 2014), there is little empirical evidence to support this (Cutcher et al 2019). So the benefits of social procurement over traditional social policy interventions remains contested and it is difficult to find empirical evidence of the tangible social impacts created by social benefit suppliers, such as Indigenous businesses, beyond the benefits created by normal businesses (Barraket et al 2016).…”

Section: Social Procurement In Relation To Indigenous Peoplementioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is also commonly people in a position of power who undertake this measurement and determine what social value is or is not and how it should be measured, and this can omit things that the beneficiaries of social procurement see as being valuable (Hebb and Hechigian 2017). This further disempowers and marginalises groups targeted by social procurement such as Indigenous Australians and can result in Indigenous voices and priorities being side-lined or co-opted into government rhetoric around the claimed success of Indigenous procurement policies (Cutcher et al 2019).…”

Section: Social Procurement Policy Evaluationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Assessing the impact of social procurement policies for Indigenous people

Denny-Smith

Williams

Loosemore

2020

Construction Management and Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Governments of highly developed western nations with colonised Indigenous populations such as Australia, Canada and South Africa are increasingly turning to social procurement policies in an attempt to solve social inequities between Indigenous people and other citizens. They seek to use policies and funds attached to infrastructure development and construction to encourage private sector companies to provide training, employment and business opportunities for Indigenous people in the communities in which construction occurs. This paper outlines the rise of these policies and their origins, and critiques their connection to Indigenous people's human rights, impact measurement, evaluation and accountability mechanisms. In doing so this paper also explores benefits and potential of social procurement policies, as well as risks. Drawing on insights from an Aboriginal-developed evaluation framework, Ngaa-bi-nya, and Indigenous Standpoint Theory, this paper highlights Indigenous peoples' definitions of value and outlines their relevance to social procurement. Introducing the notion of cultural counterfactuals into social impact measurement research, it also offers a new conceptual framework to enable policymakers and practitioners to more accurately account for social procurement value and impact, including Indigenous people's notions of social value.

show abstract

Section: Social Procurement In Relation To Indigenous Peoplementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Social Procurement Policy Evaluationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the impact of social procurement policies for Indigenous people

Denny-Smith

Williams

Loosemore

2020

Construction Management and Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Public procurement is the process of acquiring goods, services and works by public entities (OECD, 2017). There is increasing recognition of public procurement as a tool for socio-economic development (Cutcher et al, 2020). Consequently, this has led to more scholarly attention to supplier development research in the public procurement (Arráiz et al, 2013;David McKevitt & Davis, 2015;Hawkins et al, 2018;Patil, 2017), commonly referred to as institutionalised supplier development (hereafter "ISDIs") (Arráiz et al, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Similarly, Flynn (2018) add that the United Kingdom (UK) spends about £240 billion, and the European Union spends about €1900 billion in public procurement. Furthermore, OECD countries spend about 12% and Africa, about 20% of their GDP on public procurement (Cutcher et al, 2020;OECD, 2017). The expenditure reflects the policy attention that SMEs, in general, receive from policymakers and a significant market in public procurement.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Institutional factors influencing institutionalised supplier development initiatives in the construction industry in Zambia

Sikombe

Phiri

2021

Cogent Business & Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Share -copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format. Adapt -remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially. The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.Under the following terms: Attribution -You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use. No additional restrictionsYou may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.

show abstract

“…Despite some criticisms relating to the distortion of markets and the outsourcing of welfare to the community for economic rather than social reasons (Esteves and Barclay, 2011; Doherty et al , 2014; Cutcher et al , 2019), social procurement policies continue to proliferate in many countries, with the engineering and construction industry being a major focus because of its large size and its significant multiplier-effect into the wider economy (Loosemore, 2016; Tanekenov et al , 2018). However, as Raiden et al (2018) note, social procurement research has almost exclusively occurred outside construction, and there are few sector-specific insights into the challenges it poses in such industries.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Optimising social procurement policy outcomes through cross-sector collaboration in the Australian construction industry

Loosemore

Denny-Smith

Barraket

et al. 2020

ECAM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeSocial procurement policies are an emerging policy instrument being used by governments around the world to leverage infrastructure and construction spending to address intractable social problems in the communities they represent. The relational nature of social procurement policies requires construction firms to develop new collaborative partnerships with organisations from the government, not-for-profit and community sectors. The aim of this paper is to address the paucity of research into the risks and opportunities of entering into these new cross-sector partnerships from the perspectives of the stakeholders involved and how this affects collaborative potential and social value outcomes for intended beneficiaries.Design/methodology/approachThis case study research is based on a unique collaborative intermediary called Connectivity Centre created by an international contractor to coordinate its social procurement strategies. The findings draw on a thematic analysis of qualitative data from focus groups with 35 stakeholders from the construction, government, not-for-profit, social enterprise, education and employment sectors.FindingsFindings indicate that potentially enormous opportunities which social procurement offers are being undermined by stakeholder nervousness about policy design, stability and implementation, poor risk management, information asymmetries, perverse incentives, candidate supply constraints, scepticism, traditional recruitment practices and industry capacity constraints. While these risks can be mitigated through collaborative initiatives like Connectivity Centres, this depends on new “relational” skills, knowledge and competencies which do not currently exist in construction. In conclusion, when social procurement policy requirements are excessive and imposed top-down, with little understanding of the construction industry's compliance capacity, intended social outcomes of these policies are unlikely to be achieved.Originality/valueThis research draws on theories of cross-sector collaboration developed in the realm of public sector management to address the lack of research into how the new cross-sector partnerships encouraged by emerging social procurement policies work in the construction industry. Contributing to the emerging literature on cross-sector collaboration, the findings expose the many challenges of working in cross-sector partnerships in highly transitionary project-based environments like construction.

show abstract

‘Double-taxing’ Indigenous business: exploring the effects of political discourse on the transfer of public procurement policy

Cited by 17 publications

References 95 publications

Assessing the impact of social procurement policies for Indigenous people

Assessing the impact of social procurement policies for Indigenous people

Institutional factors influencing institutionalised supplier development initiatives in the construction industry in Zambia

Optimising social procurement policy outcomes through cross-sector collaboration in the Australian construction industry

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About