Social Return on Investment (SROI) of mental health related interventions—A scoping review

Kadel, Rajendra; Stielke, A; Ashton, Kathryn; Masters, Rebecca; Dyakova, M

doi:10.3389/fpubh.2022.965148

Cited by 8 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 19 publications

(20 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In fact, SROI was designed and developed in the UK [49], and this finding is consistent with other studies on SROI in other areas [16,50]. The distribution over the years 2013-2021 is also consistent with reviews in the literature on applications of this methodology [16,46,50,51]. Nowadays, the multifunctionality of agriculture is assuming an increasingly important role, especially in view of the new Agenda 2030 goals [6,40], and the interest in the role these practices play in creating social value is growing [2,39,52].…”

Section: Discussion Of Resultssupporting

confidence: 88%

“…The fact that the first applications were made in the UK is no accident. In fact, SROI was designed and developed in the UK [49], and this finding is consistent with other studies on SROI in other areas [16,50]. The distribution over the years 2013-2021 is also consistent with reviews in the literature on applications of this methodology [16,46,50,51].…”

Section: Discussion Of Resultssupporting

confidence: 85%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Evaluation of Social Farming through Social Return on Investment: A Review

Basset

2023

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, there has been a need for a shared methodology for evaluating social farming (SF) practices to verify not only their effectiveness but also their social and economic sustainability. The evaluation of SF has been highlighted using the methodology of the social return on investment (SROI) due to the potential of such approach regarding the quantification of social impact. The main purpose of this study is to provide an overview, through a systematic review, of the application of SROI to SF experiences to check the results comparability, both in terms of outcomes standardization and comparisons between SROI ratios. The results first show some similarities on the construction of outcomes that allow for the initial comparability of the results. Secondly, all the indicators calculated in the articles report a social return value of social farming projects that varies approximately from EUR 2 to EUR 3 per euro invested. Critical issues remain regarding the application of this methodology to SF practices, regarding the number of the applications of SROI to SF, the process of stakeholder engagement and the construction of outcome. There is a need for more studies that apply SROI to SF experiences in order to standardize the process of analysis.

show abstract

Section: Discussion Of Resultssupporting

confidence: 88%

Section: Discussion Of Resultssupporting

confidence: 85%

The Evaluation of Social Farming through Social Return on Investment: A Review

Basset

2023

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This review applied a 12-point quality assessment framework ( 59 ) also used by previously published reviews of SROI evidence ( 29 , 66 ). However, it must be acknowledged that another, academically published, SROI quality assessment framework is available ( 36 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While the methodology used for this review ( 31 ) is suitable for its aim and followed previously published reviews as part of a series ( 29 , 66 ), some limitations can be noted. Although this study is not a systematic literature review, the methodology followed was able to give an idea of the scope of the available evidence and a snapshot of eligible studies.…”

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The social return on investment of physical activity and nutrition interventions—a scoping review

Stielke,

Ashton,

Cotter-Roberts

et al. 2024

Front. Sports Act. Living

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionScarcity of resources and mounting pressures on health systems make it critical to evaluate new and existing public health interventions related to physical activity and nutrition. The Social Return on Investment (SROI) framework has gained prominence for capturing traditional variables such as economic costs and returns, as well as wider beneficial social and environmental outcomes. A scoping review was conducted to present the existing evidence on the SROI of physical activity and nutrition interventions, demonstrating the wider benefits of these interventions.MethodologyExisting peer-reviewed evidence and grey literature was collated to identify physical activity and nutrition interventions that were evaluated using the SROI framework between January 1996 up until February 2022. Only literature published in the English language, interventions that were conducted in high-income countries were considered for inclusion. Study information and economic data was entered into a pre-prepared data extraction sheet and eligible studies were quality assessed using a 12-point quality assessment framework for SROI studies.ResultsThis review identified a total of 21 SROI studies, with only four deriving from peer-reviewed literature sources. In total, 18 studies evaluated physical activity interventions, one study was purely focused on nutrition, whereas the two remaining studies presented a mix of physical activity and nutrition. The majority of studies derived from the United Kingdom (n = 16) with very few of the studies published prior to 2010 (n = 1). In total, four studies were classified as low quality based on the 12-point quality assessment framework used for this review. Outcomes of the relevant studies show that the benefits of these interventions have added value to families, communities and the wider environments of the target groups.ConclusionThis scoping review is adding to research conducted to understand the wider value of public health interventions such as physical activity and nutrition interventions using the SROI framework. This is important so that the development and implementation of public health interventions have the greatest value to people and society, which also benefits decision-makers to effectively and sustainably allocate scarce resources.

show abstract

“…Instead of basing its claims on 'good value for money', they argue GMH must advocate for 'good value for humanity'(p. 109). Indeed, today's GMH research investigates the role of the social determinants, social inclusion and stigma (Baumgartner & Burns, 2014;Boardman et al, 2022;Thornicroft et al, 2022), social interventions (Burgess et al, 2020) and has begun to consider the 'social return on investment' of mental healthcare (Kadel et al, 2022).…”

Section: A Social Paradigm For Gmhmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contingent universality: The epistemic politics of global mental health

Bemme

2023

Transcult Psychiatry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The field of global mental health (GMH) has undergone profound changes over the past decade. Outgrowing its earlier agenda it has performed a reflexive turn, broadened towards a social paradigm and developed new modes of knowledge production, all of which reshaped ‘mental health’ as a global object of knowledge and care, and the epistemic politics of the field. Drawing on long-term ethnographic fieldwork among GMH experts and recent agenda-setting publications, I discuss how GMH advocates and critical observers alike have created conceptual and practical middle-grounds between different forms of mental health knowledge – across culture, epistemic power, lived experience, policy platforms and academic disciplines – framing their dynamic encounters as dialogue, adaptation, participation, co-production or integration. Ultimately, I argue, GMH today is focusing less on establishing mental health as a universal problem than on managing its inherent multiplicity through alignment and integration across different bodies of knowledge. Global knowledge, so conceived, is fluid and malleable and produced in open-ended knowledge practices, governed by what I call ‘contingent universality’. It is not new that the concepts and practices of the psy-disciplines are malleable and multiple, internally and externally contested, rapidly changing over time and not easily transferrable across space. What is new is that within the increasingly heterogenous epistemic space of GMH, these features have become assets rather than liabilities. GMH knowledge achieves both global reach and local relevance precisely because ‘mental health’ can be many things; it can be expressed in a wide range of idioms and concepts, and its problems and solutions align easily with others, at many scales. These fluid and integrative knowledge practices call for renewed empirical, critical and collaborative engagement.

show abstract

Social Return on Investment (SROI) of mental health related interventions—A scoping review

Cited by 8 publications

References 19 publications

The Evaluation of Social Farming through Social Return on Investment: A Review

The Evaluation of Social Farming through Social Return on Investment: A Review

The social return on investment of physical activity and nutrition interventions—a scoping review

Contingent universality: The epistemic politics of global mental health

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About