The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/0969-9988.htm

Defining social value in the public Defining social

value
procurement process for works
Brandsford Kwame Gidigah
Department of Construction Technology and Management,
Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Kumasi, Ghana and 2245
Head of Procurement, Ho Technical University, Ho, Ghana, and
Received 5 November 2020
Kofi Agyekum and Bernard K. Baiden Revised 28 March 2021
29 April 2021
Department of Construction Technology and Management, Accepted 11 May 2021
Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Kumasi, Ghana

Abstract
Purpose – Though the Public Procurement Act of Ghana makes room for specific socio-economic policies
(environmental, social, economic and other policies which are intended to promote social and economic impact),
there is no explicit definition and provision for social value as an evaluation criterion, culminating in the
absence of a definition in the Act. This paper elicits the conception and understanding of social value from
stakeholders in the Ghanaian construction industry.
Design/methodology/approach – The study adopted a qualitative method that relied on a semi-structured
interview of 30 participants purposively drawn from Western, Western North and Central regions of Ghana.
An inductive thematic analysis approach, which involved identifying repetitions, exploring similarities and
differences, noting linguistic connectors, and a framework were employed to analyse the data.
Findings – The study established no single definition or explanation for social value in the construction
industry in Ghana. However, it was revealed from the study that the concept of social value could be defined
from the functional perspective of the definer, particularly from the perspective of a Procurement Officer,
Works Engineer, and a Quantity Surveyor. A new insight from the study that differs from the body of literature
is that participants equated benefits derived from physically constructed projects as social value.
Social implications – The study has implication for public administration and practice regarding the
decision-making process in the construction industry in Ghana. It provides a vital awakening on social value as
a criterion in evaluating construction works procurement in Ghana. The ability of participants to equate the
benefits derived from executed construction projects as social value creates a new perspective on
understanding the meaning of social value in the procurement of works construction.
Originality/value – The study contributes to the state-of-the-art and ongoing discourse on the concept of
social value globally. The findings create an important catalyst for social value research in the Ghanaian
construction industry.
Keywords Social value, Public procurement process, Procurement of works, Construction industry, Ghana
Paper type Research paper

Introduction
Globally, there has been considerable attention on social value in the public procurement
process. Governments worldwide have initiated policies that are intended to enhance the
socio-economic regeneration within their economies. The public procurement process has
been recognized as an essential vehicle to drive the implementation of these policies
(Arrowsmith, 2010). Public procurement should deliver value to its citizens, and it is
appropriate to use it to achieve specific policy goals (Grandia and Meehan, 2017). Historically,
public procurement has increasingly been used as a policy tool in a wide range of fields that
include industrial policy, reduction of unemployment and improvement in the conditions of
Engineering, Construction and
employment, support for local industries, and the employment of disadvantaged groups Architectural Management
(McCrudden, 2004). Vol. 29 No. 6, 2022
pp. 2245-2267
Previous studies have shown the persistent call for the need to integrate social value in the © Emerald Publishing Limited
0969-9988
public procurement process and the delivery of construction works. For instance, in Sweden, DOI 10.1108/ECAM-10-2020-0848
ECAM Petersen and Kadefors (2016) conducted a study on social procurement and employment
29,6 requirement in construction; in Australia, Reid and Loosemore (2017) researched the
motivations and barriers to social procurement in the construction industry. Also, Danny-
Smith and Loosemore (2017) used strain theory to assess how the Australian Indigenous
Procurement Policy could negatively impact society at the individual and community levels.
In the United Kingdom, Bridgeman et al. (2016), Burke and King (2015), Cartigny and Lord
(2017, 2019a, b) as well as Opoku and Guthrie (2018) researched various aspects of social
2246 value in the construction industry. Furthermore, in Northern Ireland, Muttugh and Brooks
(2019) studied the critical success factors for social value in construction procurement.
Akenroye (2013) appraised the use of social criteria in the public procurement process in
Nigeria and showed that there is potential for public procurement to directly influence
businesses that rely on government contracts when social criteria are increasingly used in the
award of contracts by public bodies. These studies are a testament to the increasing attention
paid to the concept of social value in the public procurement process.
Although the Public Procurement Act of Ghana makes room for certain socio-economic
policies (environmental, social, economic and other policies which are intended to promote
social and economic impact), there is no explicit definition and provision for social value as an
evaluation criterion, culminating in the absence of a definition in the Act. This definitional
gap in the Public Procurement Act (2003) (Act 663) must be filled to ensure effective
integration of social value in the public procurement process for construction works in
Ghana. This study attempts to fill this gap by defining social value in the public procurement
process for works in the Ghanaian construction industry. The study explores the meaning of
social value in the public procurement process for works in the Ghanaian construction
industry from the perspective of social actors engaged in the public procurement process.
Given the above definitional gap, the central question that seeks to be answered is: How
can social value be defined in the public procurement process for works in the Ghanaian
construction industry?
To answer this overarching question, three sub-questions arose. These sub-questions
include the following: (1) What is the purpose of social value, and what are some of its
examples in the construction industry in Ghana? (2) What is the goal for selecting contractors
for construction projects in Ghana? (3)What are the reasons for the inability to use social
value as an evaluation criterion for the public procurement of works in Ghana?
The study is structured into seven (1–7) key sections. The first section introduces and
makes a case for the study. The second section reviews the literature relating to the concept of
social value. Section three provides a detailed description of the method adopted for the study.
The fourth section presents the results. Section five discusses the key findings. Section six
discusses the implication of the study for policy regarding the public procurement processes
in Ghana, and the last section provides a conclusion and outlines direction(s) for future
studies.

Literature review
Public procurement process and practice
Considerable attention has been given to social value in the public procurement process and
practice globally. Several policies and legislation have been enacted to integrate social value
in the public procurement process and practice of several nations worldwide (Loosemore and
Barraket, 2017). These policies have served as a solid legal foundation for integrating social
value in the public procurement process of many nations (Mcfarlane, 2014). Examples include,
among others, affirmative action in the United States and Malaysia (McCrudden, 2004; Yusof
and Bhattasali, 2008); the Canadian Procurement strategy for Aboriginal rights (Cravero,
2017); the Public Service (Social Value) Social Value Act (2012), (Burke and King, 2015),
and the Commonwealth Indigenous Procurement policy in Australia (Allen, 2019). In other Defining social
countries, such as South Africa, the constitution has been used as a basis for the introduction value
of procurement systems and policies to address institutional discrimination and inequality
that occurred during the apartheid (Bolton, 2004, 2008).
The public procurement process in Ghana is guided by the Public Procurement Act (2003)
(Act 663) as amended, implementing regulations and administrative instructions issued by
the Public Procurement Authority (PPA). The Act provides for the general rules, processes
and procedures for public procurement in Ghana. In 2019, the Act was amended to 2247
incorporate new features and world best practices for public procurement. Section two (2) of
the Act advanced the objectives of public procurement processes, which seek to harmonize
the procurement processes in the public service to obtain a reasonable, economic and efficient
use of state resources. It was also intended to ensure public procurement was conducted in a
fair, transparent and non-discriminatory manner, focusing on the environment and society.
From the Act’s objective, it is evident that the public procurement process in Ghana aims to
achieve social benefits, among other numerous objectives.
Notwithstanding these benefits, an evaluation of the Act shows no explicit definition of
social value in the public procurement process. Although the Act alludes to consideration for
specific social criteria in evaluating tenders, these provisions are silent on social value as an
evaluation criterion in the public procurement processes. For instance, Section 59 (2) (g)
requires evaluation factors to include environmental and other characteristics of the subject
matter of the procurement. Again, Section 59 (8) (c) (v) requires that the determination of the
lowest evaluated tenderer by the procurement entity shall include the encouragement of
employment and the reservation of certain products for domestic suppliers. Further, Section
66 of the Act requires procuring entities to grant a margin of preference for the benefit of
domestic contractors and domestically produced goods, as well as for domestic suppliers of
services. Unfortunately, these provisions have not been applied in evaluating prospective
contractors in the public procurement process.
The aim of procuring construction should not be focused on profits and improvement in
productivity for its stakeholders, but the engagement and improvement in the communities
they build (Loosemore and Higgon, 2015). Cartigny and Lord (2017) have cautioned that
assessing the value of construction contracts should not be focused on the narrow, direct
economic or financial benefits but its more significant impact on society. Many countries have
used their procurement processes and policies to promote secondary goals that have social
implications beyond delivering goods and services. Preuss (2009) iterated that the United
Kingdom government encouraged the use of the public procurement process and activities to
provide social value for the benefit of local communities. In the views of Cartigny and Lord
(2017), social value is not a new concept, but the ideology has been debated in the literature
under different pseudonyms.

Definitional challenges of the concept of social value

This section presents definitions and explanations of social value from different authors and
perspectives. These definitions and explanations are assessed to find similarities and
differences to ultimately guide and inform the concept in the public procurement process for
construction work in Ghana. The literature on social value has revealed many definitions and
explanations, creating a maze of what constitutes social value in the construction industry.
Some of these definitions are evaluated below.
Social value as a soft non-financial benefit. Wood and Leighton (2010) and Farag and
McDermott (2015) present social value as a soft non-financial impacts/outcome of operations/
programmes of work and investments, including individual and community well-being. To a
large extent, the definition can be subjected to critical analysis. The authors agree that social
ECAM value refers to “soft non-financial impacts/benefits”, but there was no precise explanation of
29,6 what constitute soft non-financial impacts or benefits. Again, the researchers noted that
social value connotes programmes or investments that include individual and community
well-being. It must be emphasised that well-being is a subjective concept that varies from one
individual to another and from community to community. Therefore, the critical question that
should be answered is, how can this subjective concept represent all individuals in a
community? Oanh (2019) added a new dimension to the ‘non-financial explanation by stating
2248 that it is the positive value created through human activities, which targets disadvantaged,
and marginalized people and aims to deliver positive social change to the broader community.
This definition appears like the explanation presented by Wood and Leighton (2010) and
Farag and McDermott (2015). However, it differs by showing that social value is created
through human activities but only fell short of describing the type of human activity that
creates social value. The vagueness of the kind of human activity leaves room for speculation.
The definition further differs by showing that social value is targeted at disadvantaged and
marginalized people. This position appears discriminatory, creating the impression that
social value only targets marginalized and socially disadvantaged people in society.
Notwithstanding how discriminatory the definition may appear; it offers some advantage
by showing that social value aims to deliver positive impacts and social change to a broader
community. For the writer, social value can only be effective when it brings transformation
into the lives of individuals and communities and the creation of positive social change.
Although the definition did not relate to the construction industry, it was explicit on the aim,
target, and the need for social value to bring transformation and positive social change to
individuals and communities.
Social value as a soft intangible outcome. Closely related to defining social value as a soft
non-financial benefit, the concept has been described as soft intangible outcome and more
comprehensive outputs, including the effect an activity has on the wider community and the
environment, not only on the individual (Halloran, 2017). This definition requires further
clarifications. It is essential to ask, what is the nature of the “soft intangible outcome”? The
inability to explicitly define these soft intangible outcomes gives room for speculation. Again,
although the writer sought to relate the effect of an activity on the environment, sustainability
was not mentioned in the definition, even though it could be inferred that the writer had in
mind sustainability.
Social value as sustainability. From the perspective of sustainability, social value connotes
recognizing the necessity of social, environmental and economic impact on a community and
the people who live in that community (Opoku and Guthrie, 2018). Generally, the authors see
social value as the additional environmental and economic benefits to a community.
Specifically, they stated that, although it is difficult to define and measure social value, it can
be described as the additional value created during the delivery of primary services that have
a wider impact on society, especially the community of operation. Although this definition
appears to be like that provided by Halloran (2017) regarding the environment, it offers a few
challenges. It did not explain the kind of impacts, be it negative or positive environmental and
economic impacts on communities and their people. Similarly, on the perspective of
sustainability, Harlock (2014) indicates the social value is the additional environmental, social
and economic benefits a community of operation enjoys beyond the delivery of primary
services. From the perspective of sustainability, this definition was not explicit on the nature
of benefits that can be classified as social value.
Social value as a positive social change that prevents negative social changes. Westell (2012)
appears to have offered a solution on the nature of the impact that can be classified as social
value by explaining the concept as the outcome of certain activities of organizations that
occur to create positive and or prevent negative social changes in the life of people and
continue to have an impact after completion of the initial activities. Although this definition
was explicit on the nature of the impact, it differs from the social, environmental and Defining social
economic perspective as advanced by Opoku and Guthrie (2018) and Harlock (2014). The value
Cabinet Office (2015), in its assessment of the Social Value Act (2012), described the nature of
impacts derived from social value. They contend that social value is the positive social,
environmental, and economic impact of an activity on stakeholders over and above that
would have happened anyway, considering the negative impact of the activity. This
definition is similar to the position advanced by Opoku and Guthrie (2018). In addition, the
definition presented by the Cabinet Office (2015) appears corroborates that of Westell (2012) 2249
by showing the nature of impacts that could be classified as social value – positive impacts.
Social value as an additional benefit. Further, social value has been described as an
additional benefit that a community derives from a procurement process over and above the
direct purchasing of goods, services and outcomes (Cook and Monk, 2012). Similarly, Russel
(2013) explained the concept as the benefit of certain activities performed by an organization
considered important to the organisation’s stakeholders. While these definitions are similar
on social value as a benefit, the type and nature of the benefit were not explained. Again, the
explanation appears to equate social value to corporate social responsibility. Contributing to
the literature of social value as a benefit, Daniel and Pasquire (2019) described it as the
benefit a community and its inhabitants obtain in terms of social, economic and
environmental well-being from companies or organizations conducting business around
the community. This definition, though sees social value as a benefit, it is in keeping with
other studies that defined the concept from the perspective of sustainability, such as Opoku
and Guthrie (2018) and the Cabinet Office (2015) who related social value to environmental,
social and economic factors. However, just as other studies in the perspective of
sustainability, the constructs of social, economic and environmental well-being were not
explicitly stated.
Social value as the outcome of publicly funded projects. Social value has been explained as
the additional outcome of publicly funded investment or programmes toward local
communities that vary from employing local suppliers, using the local work force, and
creating sustained opportunities for apprenticeship (Awuzie et al., 2018). This explanation is
instructive. Although it fell short of stating the nature of the additional outcomes, it was
explicit on the sources of social value as publicly funded investments towards local
communities. Again, the explanation was explicit on the form of social value to local
communities such as employment of local suppliers, use of local work force and the provision
of sustained opportunities for apprenticeship. However, the definition could not explain what
can be considered sustained in terms of duration.
Social value is perception focused. In addition to other stated definitions, Cartigny and Lord
(2017, p. 3), in evaluating the definition of social value in the construction industry in the UK,
pointed out that social value can be interpreted as “envisaging how the award of a
construction contract can improve a community’s social efficacy and an individual’s network
and trust”. This definition presents social value as a state of perception or mind activity of
how construction contracts can be used as a vehicle to enhance community well-being. The
definition also presents a picture of how social value depends on an individual’s network and
trust and how an individual in a community without a network cannot benefit from social
value. However, the definition was specific on the use of construction contracts as a vehicle
for individuals and communities to create social value.
Social value is action-driven, outcome-driven, sustainability-driven and pluralism-driven. A
critical perspective of social value has also been offered by Jain et al. (2019). Based on a
qualitative study that adopted a semi-structured interview, Jain et al. (2019) categorized social
value into action-driven, outcome-driven, sustainability-driven and pluralism-driven. In
explaining action-driven, the researchers noted that social value relates to people in society, in
contrast to the economy and environment, a view in keeping with other studies such as
ECAM Cartigny and Lord (2017), and Wood and Leighton (2010). In giving details of outcome-driven
29,6 social value, Jain et al. (2019) subdivided it into radicalist and pragmatist outcomes. For them,
radicalist social value refers to the building of trust and relationships with societal members.
This depends on an individual’s action to contribute to the enhancement of society in the
future. This explanation aligns with the definition of Cartigny and Lord (2017), who noted
that social value is based on an individual’s network and trust. They contend that pragmatist
outcome-driven social value can be conceived as an idea or intangible metric for measuring
2250 social impacts, without consideration of boundaries for organizational activities that can be
monetized and computed.
Jain et al. (2019) again noted that the sustainability-driven social value reflects the social,
environmental and economic values that contribute to sustainability. This reflection is in
keeping with social value as a “triple bottom line” (Norman and McDonald, 2004) as advanced
by studies such as Cabinet Office (2015), Harlock (2014) and Opoku and Guthrie (2018). In
view of pluralism-driven social value, the explanation showed the fluid and dynamic nature
of the concept. It is influenced by internal and external factors that guide and influence the
individual’s decision in the creation of positive or negative social value in society, which
appear similar to the position of Choi et al. (2014), who stated that social value is difficult to
define due to its intricate and subjective nature.
Based on the above categorizations, social value has been explained as a value that
demonstrates change(s) in the live(s) of an individual or groups of individuals when tangible
and intangible resources are employed at the grassroots level by social actors, ultimately
creating social change within society (Jain et al., 2019). This definition appears similar to
Oanh (2019), who view social value in the context of bringing social change to individuals
and communities. Few advantages can be noted from this definition; (1) the definition
showed the nature of resources that creates social value, tangible and intangible; (2) it stated
that resources should be applied at the grass-root level (communities); (3) the definition
appears to state the purpose of social value - ultimately to create social change in society; (4)
the change must be demonstrated in the lives of individual and groups of individuals in the
community.
Explanations and definitions of the concept offered above might have inspired the
argument that there is no universally accepted definition for social value. Social value is a
complex concept to define because of its intricate and subjective nature (Choi et al., 2014).
Therefore, it can be said that there are multiple interpretations for social value from the
perspective of who is interpreting (Wood and Leighton, 2010; Russel, 2013).
In the murkiness of social value definitions, as shown above, the central question is, how
can the concept be defined, especially in the Ghanaian context? There is the need for a clearer
definition of social value to assist procuring entities to integrate it in the procurement process
for construction works, especially in Ghana. Table 1 shows the summary of definitions and
explanations of social value.

Factors for selecting contractors and inability to use social value as evaluation
criteria
Previous studies have shown that the focus for selecting contractors is not to attain social
value in the public procurement process but to minimize transactional cost. For example,
Burke and King (2015) noted the overriding factor in selecting contractors in the public
procurement process to be the desire to achieve value for money. According to Burke and
King (2015), although social criteria may be indicated in the tender document, there is a
challenge in turning them into reality. Cravero (2017) suggested that the basis to attain
economic efficiency in traditional public procurement is to focus on value for money, which
has primarily been seen as a compliance measure of soundly managed public funds. Stated
 Definition/explanation of
Defining social
Author(s) social value Identified gap(s) Key themes value
Social Social value is additional Nature and type of benefit not Benefits, community,
Value Act benefit to a community from stated in the definition and procurement process
(2012) commissioning or how the commissioning or
procurement process over procurement process creates
and above the direct social value not stated 2251
purchasing of goods, services
and outcomes
Cabinet Social value is the positive Connotes the idea of Positive social,
Office social, environmental and sustainability, but this was environmental and economic
(2015) economic impact of an not mentioned impact, negative impact of an
activity on stakeholders that activity
is over and above that which
would have happened
anyway, considering the
negative impact of the
activity
Cook and Social value refers to Nature and type of benefits Benefits, community,
Monk additional benefit that a was not stated procurement process
(2012) community derives from a
procurement process that is
over and above the direct
purchasing of goods, services
and outcomes
Russel Social value is the benefit of Nature and type of benefit Benefits, performed by an
(2013) certain activities that are was not stated. The basis of organization, considered
performed by an what is considered important important to stakeholders
organization, that are was not stated. What is
considered important to the important may be subjective
stakeholders of the
organization
Cartigny Social value is envisaging Connotes an idea of thinking, Community’s social efficacy
and Lord how a community’s social but not practical concept for Individual network, trust,
(2017) efficacy and an individual’s implementation award of construction
network and trust can be contract
improved by the award of
construction contract’
Halloran Soft intangible outcomes, and The nature of the effect of the Intangible outcomes, wider
(2017) to wider outputs, which activity was not defined outputs, community,
include the effect an activity environment, individual
has on the wider community
and the environment, and not
only on the individual
Awuzie Social value is the additional See social value as an end Publicly funded investment,
et al. (2018) outcome of publicly funded activity, but not a process Local communities, local
investment programmes that results in the outcome suppliers, local work force,
toward local communities sustained opportunities
that vary from employing
local suppliers, the use of
local work force, and the
creation of sustained Table 1.
opportunities for Summary of some
apprenticeship definitions/
explanations of social
(continued ) value and key themes
ECAM Definition/explanation of
29,6 Author(s) social value Identified gap(s) Key themes

Opoku and Social value connotes the Relates to sustainability, but Social, environmental and
Guthrie recognition of the necessity of this was not mentioned in the economic impact
(2018) social, environmental, and definition (sustainability), impact on
economic impact on a community and people
2252 community and the people
that live in these communities
Daniel and Social value is the benefit a Relates to sustainability, but Benefits, community and its
Pasquire community and its this was not mentioned in the inhabitants, social, economic
(2019) inhabitants obtain in terms of definition and environmental
social, economic and well-being
environmental well-being
from companies or
organizations conducting
business around the
Table 1. community

differently, in traditional public procurement, the final and strongest factor for awarding a
contract is the price (Celik et al., 2017).
In a study, Lindell and Olander (2019) commented that the challenge in adopting social
consideration in public procurement was the lack of a common understanding of what
constitutes social consideration from the perspective of project managers. They stated that
social considerations in tender documents are not clear and measurable. There is a lack of
organizational competence on social consideration and a lack of appropriate measures to
disseminate information on social consideration to communities. Similarly, a significant
challenge for implementing social value is defining and applying the concept within the
confines of a legal framework (Cabinet Office, 2015). Furthermore, it has been noted that,
while construction firms may be interested in social issues, there is a greater emphasis on
enterprise culture in the construction industry, which is the driving force for behaviour and
attention to the bottom line (Ness, 2010). Kattel and Lember (2010) forcefully advanced that
public procurement’s central focus is not social reforms, and government agencies should not
be seen to be directly implementing social innovations.
On the contrary, public procurement can be used to attain specific policy goals that create
value for society. The starting point is selecting economically advantageous award criteria
rather than price (Grandia and Meehan, 2017). Supporting this position, Calleja (2016) showed
that public procurement could foster industrial progress, boost innovation, and attain social
aims and impact policy in addition to the provision of amenities.

Methodology
This study explores the meaning of social value in the public procurement process for works
in the Ghanaian construction industry. Ontologically, the study holds that there is no single
objective, a universally accepted definition for social value, and therefore, an interpretative
position was adopted. The study seeks to apply knowledge in the body of literature on social
value in the construction industry. It uses content and constant comparative analysis as
analytical tools to compare key themes and concepts obtained from literature and data
through the semi-structured interview from 30 participants. The participants were drawn
from Metropolitan, Municipal and District Assemblies in Western, Western North and
Central Regions of Ghana to reach a consensus on what constitutes social value in the public Defining social
procurement process for construction works in Ghana. value
Therefore, the study adopts a qualitative research approach for the gathering and
analysis of data in the public procurement process for construction works. A qualitative
design was deemed appropriate for the study because it enabled the researchers to explore
and describe the social value in the public procurement process for construction works from
the perspectives of specific social actors (Procurement Officers, Works Engineers and
Quantity Surveyors) in the public procurement process (Christensen et al., 2014). The use of 2253
qualitative design also enabled the contextual uniqueness (Bryman, 2012) of social actors in
the public procurement process to explore construction works. The research process adopted
for the study is shown in Figure 1.
The various stages of the research methodology are explained below:

Stage 1: content analysis, identification of themes and consensus on key themes

The process of reviewing the literature to understand current knowledge that creates new
insight for further research is an essential step in research to explore a phenomenon under
study (Daniel and Pasquire, 2019). For understanding the current knowledge in the body of
literature on social value as a channel to appropriately define the concept in the public
procurement process for works in the construction industry in Ghana, a systematic
comparative review of related literature was conducted. The use of systematic literature

Systemac Review of
Literature

Idenficaon of
Stage 1 Content Analysis Themes in Social Value

Consensus on Key
Themes/concepts on
Social Value

Validate key
themes/concepts
Stage 2 through semi-
structured interview

Analysis of data from

semi-structured interview
Stage 3 via an inducve themac
analysis.

Stage 4 Define Social Value in the

construcon procurement Figure 1.
process in Ghana.
Research process
ECAM review in this study was to ensure that materials from different sources were systematically
29,6 analysed and synthesized to provide the conception of social value in the Ghanaian public
procurement process for construction works that adds new insights to understanding
social value.
Two sampling techniques were used in the selection and review of literature for analysis.
These were purposive and snowballing sampling techniques. In purposive sampling, a
researcher uses his or her judgment to select cases that best enable answering the research
2254 questions and meeting the objectives set for the study (Saunders et al., 2019). Since “the term
social value is relatively new” (Cartigny and Lord, 2017. p. 2), purposive sampling was
appropriate for the study to quantitatively explore peer-reviewed articles that enabled the
researchers to address the research questions adequately. The use of snowballing techniques
was appropriate for this study because it enabled the researchers to evaluate the
bibliography of peer-reviewed articles to identify articles (data) that relate to the
phenomenon under study.
The study population predominantly consisted of literature that defined or explained
social value. An appropriate search protocol used a combination of key terms such as *social
value*, *social value and construction work*, *public procurement process and social value*,
*public procurement and community benefits* among others. Online databases such as
Google Scholar, Scopus, Emerald Insight, Elsevier and Semantics Scholar were used to search
for literature from January to July 2020. During the search, some of the online databases could
not return anything on social value, perhaps corroborating the assertion by Cartigny and
Lord (2017) that the concept of social value is relatively new. However, other databases
returned valuable peer-reviewed articles for the study, as shown in Table 2.
A total of 133 peer-reviewed articles were returned from an online search. However, 108
was used for the study after screening abstracts to assess relevance to the phenomenon under
study. Literature obtained was evaluated through content analysis to identify emerging key
themes and concepts in the body of literature regarding social value. The purpose of content
analysis in this study was to allow the objective and systematic quantification of data
(literature) to identify key themes and concepts on the definition and explanation of social
value in the body of literature. Key themes and concepts were developed to give a sense of
direction and purpose for the study. A consensus on key themes and concepts on the
definition was identified through content analysis to set the stage for validation through a
semi-structured interview during stage 2 of the study process.

Stage 2: Theme validation and semi-structured interview

Semi-structured interviews were conducted to gather data for the study. The purpose of semi-
structured interviews in the study was to explore and validate key themes and concepts that
emerged from literature on the definition and explanation of social value. Semi-structured
interviews provided the opportunity to elicit participants’ reasons, opinions and attitudes on
the definition and explanation of social value in the public procurement process for
construction works in Ghana. This qualitative research strategy offered the opportunity to

No Name of database Number of papers

1 Elsevier 38
2 Emerald Insight 42
Table 2. 3 Semantic Scholar 28
Summary of papers 4 Other Sources 25
based on online search Total 133
probe responses from participants to add depth to the data collected and ensure its (i.e. the Defining social
data) reliability and authenticity. Interviews were conducted face-to-face and by phone with value
purposively selected participants in the public procurement process to obtain an
individualized perspective of the phenomenon under study. Participants who were
interviewed on the phone were called a day earlier to schedule a convenient time for the
interview. Interview data were collected in narrative form and transcribed verbatim by a
framework approach for thematic analysis before further interviews were conducted.
2255
Participants for interview
Participants for the interview were drawn from metropolitan, municipal and district
assemblies in the Western, Western North and Central regions of Ghana. There is a total of
216 Metropolitan, Municipal and District Assemblies (MMDAs) in Ghana. This number
comprises 6 Metropolitans, 56 Municipals, and 154 District Assemblies. Currently, there are
41 MMDAs in the Western, Western North and Central Regions, made up of 2 Metropolitans,
17 Municipals and 22 District Assemblies, respectively. Out of this number, 30 participants
(Assemblies) were purposively selected for this study, consisting of 2 Metropolitans, 14
Municipals and 14 District Assemblies. The choice of these assemblies in the Western,
Western North and Central regions of Ghana was based on the fact that the researchers had
established a meaningful rapport with many social actors in the public procurement process
of these assemblies who served as effective and efficient gatekeepers to gain access for data
collection. The need for gatekeepers in research has been underscored by Saunders et al.
(2019), who showed that gatekeepers have the potential to play an essential role through the
creation of awareness of the study, the enhancement of credibility by their intervention, as
well as the introduction of researchers to relevant stakeholders in the organization. These
gatekeepers facilitated ease of access to participants in the selected assemblies.
To strengthen the homogeneity of participants selected, a selection criteria as indicated in
Table 3 was used. To qualify for selection, a case participant must satisfy the established
criteria. To promote the credibility of the data gathered, interview themes were prepared and
sent to the participants about one month before the interview. The purpose was to ensure
adequate preparation by participants. In addition, findings were discussed with ten (10)
participants to ensure the results confirmed the opinions presented by participants. Again, it
was to ensure that participants’ perspectives were perfectly understood (Bryman, 2012). This
process offered the opportunity to modify data to accurately reflect explanations and
definitions presented by participants (Christensen et al., 2014). Also, low-inference descriptors
were used – the use of quotes in the presentation of results to demonstrate the thinking
behind explanations offered by participants. These processes were undertaken to promote
the validity and reliability of the data collected.
The power of public procurement is enormous, and public sector organizations can use
their procurement spend as a tool to promote the implementation of social policies that can
transform the lives of community members (Akenroyoe, 2013). These policies include the

No Criteria

1 A public entity that conducts procurement activities using the Public Procurement Act (2003) (Act 663) as
amended
2 Participants must have worked in their current positions for a minimum of 5 years
3 Must have procured construction works in the past 2 years Table 3.
4 Must have a functional procurement unit and works department Criteria for the
5 Willing to participate in the study selection of cases
ECAM development of skills, creation of jobs, development of communities and ensuring the welfare
29,6 of suppliers’ employees. Public procurement constitutes about 50–70% of government
expenditure (PPA, 2011). A greater portion of this expenditure is made up of programmes
that are executed by Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs), and MMDAs (Kusi et al.,
2014). In addition, most of the expenditure incurred by the MDAs and District Assemblies
(DAs) in Ghana are capital construction procurement activities that are aimed at providing
the infrastructural requirement of the nation (Anvuur et al., 2006; Ofori, 2012).
2256 Further, the procurement decisions by public entities have inherent social, public health,
environmental and economic impact, both locally and globally (Hycinth et al., 2017).
Procurement spends represent an avenue by which social benefits can be attained
(Sutherland et al., 2015), a view further reiterated by Wontner (2018), who observed that
public procurement expenditure represents an important stimulant for local socio-economic
regeneration. The choice of MMDAs for the study was informed by the desire to assess the
social impact of the public procurement process for construction works on the well-being of
individuals and communities of these assemblies.

Stage 3: Inductive Thematic Analysis

The search for themes in the narrated data collected was based on the approach suggested by
Ryan and Bernard (2003), as cited in Bryman (2012), which involve the identification of
repetitions, exploration of similarities and differences, as well as noting linguistics
connectors, in addition to the use of framework approach. According to Bryman (2012), in
qualitative analysis, the framework approach and the recommendations suggested by Ryan
and Bernard (2003) are good starting points in the organization of data. The framework
approach enabled the researchers to analyse as data collection progressed, using a matrix.
The matrix was used to identify similarities, differences and linguistics connectors in data
gathered from participants. The process of the inductive thematic analysis as outlined by
Saunders et al. (2019) include: (1) Familiarization with data - immersing in data through
transcription by listening to recorded conversation several times: (2) Coding the collected data
with unique codes to ensure each piece of the interview is accessible for analysis; (3) Searching
for themes and establishing relationships. The strategy for identifying themes was based on
a framework for thematic analysis suggested by Bryman (2012), which enables identifying
central and subthemes; and (4) Refining themes and testing – themes identified are refined
and relationships established. As data gathering progressed, some themes were refined to
conform to the research questions.
Using the above-suggested process as a yardstick, the study used the following steps for
the analysis of data: (1) Initial data were collected from participants purposively selected
through an exploratory interview of 30 respondents; (2) The data was analysed by devising
codes and themes to establish relationships and similarities, leading to the explanation of
social value in the procurement process for construction works in Ghana. Table 4 presents the
codes for participants in the study; (3) Explanations identified were further tested in the
second round of purposive selection of ten participants for an exploratory interview; (4) To
ensure the credibility of explanations given by participants, the third stage of data collection
through exploratory phone interview was conducted with ten respondents. At this stage of

No Code Description

1 PO Procurement Officer
Table 4. 2 WKENG Head of Works Department
Codes and explanation 3 WKENG/QS Head of Works Department who is a quantity Surveyor
testing of explanations, no deviant case was encountered. Respondents reasonably explained Defining social
the concept of social value, which corroborates previous studies; and (5) A final stage was the value
validation of data with ten participants to confirm data gathered reflected the actual opinions
of participants.
Although the inductive analytical strategy of qualitative study has been criticized for
its limited representativeness and non-generalizability, it fits perfectly for this study
because the focus of the study was to obtain explanations of social value that is grounded
in the understanding of social actors engaged in the public procurement process for 2257
construction works in Ghana, which can exhibit a high level of reliability and internal
validity of data.

Stage 4: Defining social value based on data

This stage of the study represented the definition or explanation of social value in the public
procurement process for works in the construction industry in Ghana. After the iterative
process described above, central themes were selected and further tested to explain social
value after no deviant participant case was detected.

Results
The results are presented under the main and sub research questions posed in the study as
follows:
MRQ. How can social value be defined in the public procurement process for works in the
Ghanaian construction industry?
An important phenomenon that appears to emerge from the study is that the concept of social
value is defined from different perspectives, sometimes from the functional role of the definer.
Results from interviews conducted during the study corroborated findings from the literature
that the concept of social value has been defined from different perspectives, from the
person’s vantage point defining it. For example, a few of the definitions from the perspective
of different interviewees are indicated below:
[. . .] Procuring to cater for the needs of the community and procuring to improve the quality of life
(WKENG1, WKENG/QS 5, PO 6, WKENG. 25 and PO 28).
[. . .] The benefits a community obtains from a project/added benefits of construction to a community
(PO 2, PO 3, PO 18, PO 29).
[. . .] Projects are delivered for society and its members to obtain a positive impact (WKENG. 8,
WKENG. 2, WKENG/QS 21 and 22, WKENG. 17).

SRQ1. What is the purpose of social value, and what are some of its examples in the
Ghanaian construction industry?
The purpose of social value in construction projects has been varied in the body of literature.
While many studies indicated the purpose of social value is to create employment and skill
development that improves individuals and community members of where construction
works are undertaken, results from this study appear to be different. This sub-question
sought interviewees’ views concerning the purpose of social value and some examples of
social value in the Ghanaian construction industry. Some of the results as indicated by the
interviewees are presented below:
ECAM [. . .] The purpose is to address the needs of society to enhance the quality of life of community
members. Examples include school blocks, roads, markets, places of convenience. To have facilities
29,6 closer to the community (WKENG/QS. 3).
[. . .] The purpose is to use physical projects to impact the lives of citizens. For example, the school,
Community-based Health Planning Services (CHPS) compound will impact the people (WKENG. 1).
[. . .] Provision of projects to reduce the burden of community members. For example, school blocks
2258 that prevent children from travelling long distance. It motivates community members. It increases
the enrolment for school (PO. 6).
[. . .] To ensure the participation of community members in the construction of projects. For example,
additional businesses such as food vending and others generate income to reduce community
poverty. (PO. 2)
[. . .] To ensure that taxpayers benefit from their taxes. For example, hospitals provide relief for
people in terms of a cure for diseases and prevent travelling to seek health care elsewhere. (PO. 1)
However, a few participants agreed with the dominant view in the literature that the purpose
of social value in construction is to create employment for socially disadvantaged members of
society. This is what some of the interviewees had to say;
[. . .] To engage people or employ people in the locality who can earn an income to transform their
lives. It enables people to stay away from negativity and social vices such as arm robbery. The
purpose is to transform the lives of people by an income to depend on (PO. 4).
[. . .] Purpose is to mitigate social vices, e.g. If there are projects, people will gain employment and be
taken off the street; others will not indulge in social vices (WKENG. 2).
[. . .] The purpose of social value is to add value to the lives of people in the community—for example,
the provision of employment that transforms the quality of life of people (PO. 3).

SRQ2. What is the goal for selecting contractors for construction projects?
Contactor selection is an important decision-making process to attain the objectives of
construction projects. Varied reasons are assigned for selecting contractors to execute
construction works. This sub research question 2 required the interviewees to indicate the
goal of choosing contractors for construction projects in Ghana. From the results, most
interviewees noted that the goal for selecting contractors is to reduce cost and obtain value for
money. Interviewees were emphatic in their responses by stating that the cost of projects is a
major factor in the attainment of value for money. Some of their responses are as follows:
[. . .] to attain value for money, obtain the lowest evaluated responsive bidder (WKENG/QS. 1, 7,
21, 29)
[. . .] to select the contractor who can deliver the contract at a lower cost than others (PO 1, 8, WKENG
3, 5, 16).

SRQ3. What are the reasons for the inability to use social value as an evaluation criterion
in the public procurement for works?
In the Ghanaian construction industry, social value has not been used as an evaluation
criterion for selecting contractors. Different reasons have been assigned for this state of affair
in construction works procurement in Ghana. Whereas much attention has been paid to
statutory requirement, capability and past performance of contractors, little attention has
been given to social value as an evaluation criterion in the selection decision making process. Defining social
This question required the interviewees to state some reasons for the inability to use social value
value as an evaluation criterion in Ghana. Some of the interviewees responded as follows:
[. . .] due to systemic and political challenges. Projects in communities are not most of the time
determined by the community. Most projects are imposed by politicians, which may not be needed.
Again, the structure of the public service does not permit local consultation, except in cases where
projects are going to have adverse effects on the community. In such cases, impact assessments are
done (WKENG/QS. 1)
2259
[. . .] although this is difficult to say, it can be attributed to the strict provisions of the Public
Procurement Act (2003) (Act 663) as amended (WKENG 2, 19 and 25).
[. . .] although this is needed, it cannot be indicated in the process, but financial criterion can be used,
which eventually results in social value (PO 9 and 11).

Discussion of results
A recurring theme that appears to emanate from the explanations provided by participants is
social value as a benefit to individuals and communities. These explanations corroborate
those advanced by studies such as Cook and Monk (2012), Russel (2013), Social Value Act of
UK (2012) and Daniel and Pasquire (2019). Data from the study confirm that social value is a
complex concept to define due to its intricate and subjective nature. Due to this subjectivity,
the idea is very illusive to attract a concise and precise definition in the public procurement
process for construction works. Further, the study showed a dichotomy in the functional
perspective of procurement staff and works engineers. For example, while PO 11 defines it as
the benefits a project gives to a community, WKENG 18 sees it as the extra or additional value a
project brings to a community. These explanations showed divergent views. While WKENG
18 views it as adding value to the primary intention of the project, PO 11, on the other hand,
sees it as just the benefit a project delivers to a community. However, a new insight that
emerges from the study is that participants perceive the direct benefits of an executed project
as social value to individuals and communities. This position was advanced by PO 2, PO 3,
PO 18, PO 29, which appear different from explanations and definitions offered in other
studies.
Results from this study also appear to show that social value is intended to be delivered to
societies and its members to attain a positive impact, as indicated by WKENG 8, WKENG/QS
21 and 22 as WKENG 17. Although these explanations fell short of mentioning tangible and
intangible resources, they are similar to the definition offered by Jain et al. (2019), who showed
that social value is intended to demonstrate change(s) in the live(s) of an individuals or groups
of individuals in a society. It is, however, worthy to note that no definition or explanation
related to the sustainability (economic, social and environmental) aspect of the procurement
process as showed by Opoku and Guthrie (2018) and Daniel and Paquire (2019) was
uncovered in this study.
A potential gap that had been identified revealed no concise definition or explanation of
social value in the public procurement process for construction works in Ghana. From the
views of the interviewees, it appears the concept has been defined from the functional
perspective of social actors in the public procurement process in Ghana, i.e. procurement
officers, construction works engineers and quantity surveyors. An inference from the views
of the interviewees reveals that social value in the public procurement process for
construction works can be defined as those secondary benefits, financial and non-financial
(employment, training and skills development, business setups, welfare enhancement, crime
reduction, environmental protection, among others) that are obtained by individuals or
ECAM communities as a result of the execution of construction contracts that are capable of
29,6 enhancing well-being, social and human capital, that ultimately results in a positive social
change to individuals and the wider community.
The above definition of social value as revealed from this study presents a broader and all-
encompassing view of the concept, thereby enhancing the discourse in literature. This
definition offers a few advantages over others, as stated in the comparative review, due to the
following: (1) It is specific because it relates to the construction industry; (2) Secondary
2260 benefits (employment, training and skills development, business setups, welfare
enhancement, crime reduction, environmental protection, financial and non-financial) are
directed towards individuals and communities; (3) The benefits are obtained as a result of the
execution of construction activities; (4) The benefits must be capable of enhancing well-being,
social and human capital; and (5) The benefits must ultimately result in positive social change
in the lives of individuals and the wider community.
Literature on the phenomenon under study showed that there is a varied purpose for social
value. This study presents the concept as direct benefits derived from physical projects
executed in a community, which are the primary objectives of construction projects in a
community. The primary objectives of construction projects such as schools, hospitals,
markets and access roads are social obligations of governments that are intended to enhance
the development of a community and the lives of its people. This cannot be equated to social
value, which has been explained as the additional benefit over and above the intended
primary objective of a project.
The purpose advanced by PO. 2 above is very instructive to this study. The purpose
appears to affirm studies such as the European Commission (2010), who showed that social
value in construction supports social inclusion by integrating minority groups into society.
This inclusiveness of community members is creating other businesses such as food and
water vending and other related.
Construction supply chain businesses to generate an income stream for community
members to improve their livelihood. Again, the purpose advanced by PO. 1 showed that
social value is intended to directly benefit citizens in delivering direct benefits that enhance
their well-being.
It is noteworthy that several participants agreed with the dominant view in the literature
that the purpose of social value in construction works is to create employment. This specific
result from the study corroborates the work of McCrudden (2004), who notes public
procurement has been used as a tool by governments to reduce unemployment and improve
employment conditions. The result is also in sync with the explanation presented by Awuzie
et al. (2018). They see the concept to encompass the employment of local suppliers and the use
of local workforces that create sustained apprenticeship. This is an essential step in
improving the social capital of individuals in a community. Providing job opportunities and
training to the local area due to construction projects provides network opportunities with
others that leaves individuals empowered. Further, results are similar to the work of Barraket
and Weissman (2009) who indicated that the integration of social clause or targeted
recruitment and training clauses in contracts represented an appropriate channel by which
contractors can be obligated to create employment opportunities for specific target groups
such as graduates and the long-term unemployed.
The societal cost of unemployment and the subsequent effects of criminality on a
community can be devastating. Therefore, employment requirement in construction projects
can be an essential avenue to mitigate these societal challenges (Troje and Kadefors, 2018).
The result from the study is very instructive in the affirmation of this position. A participant
noted, [. . .] the purpose of social value is to mitigate social vices, e.g. if there are projects, people
will gain employment and be taken off the street; others will not indulge in social vices
(WKENG. 2)
 Contractor selection is a significant decision that is made in the construction of projects. Defining social
Traditionally, the public sector has focused on using the lowest bid as the award criteria for value
selecting contractors for construction projects (Waara and Brochner, 2006). Results from the
study appear to corroborate the position that the major goal in selecting contractors is to
obtain value for money through the reduction of construction costs.
On the other hand, other studies have shown that the selection of lowest bid, and not the
most advantageous alternative, is a weakness in traditional procurement (Walker and
Hampson, 2008; Hall, 2010). According to Grandia and Meehan (2017), an obligation rest on 2261
public procurement to deliver value to citizens. The authors argue that using public
procurement to attain policy goals that create value for society must begin with a contract
award criterion based on factors other than price. They recommended using award criteria
based on the most economically advantageous tender, a weighted sum of various aspects of a
product or service that creates value for society. The study showed that actors in the
procurement process for construction works are not keen on moving away from award
criteria based on the lowest cost to other criteria such as social value. It appears the main goal
for the selection of contractors for construction works is to attain value for money. This view
aligns with Murray (2001), who stated that value for money was a primary driver of
procurement activities in the UK local government. However, there is little in the literature
that elucidates exactly what value-for-money means to the public sector client side of the
construction supply chain (Staples and Dalrymple, 2012). Social value reflects the effective
allocation of scarce resources and the evaluation of contracts beyond price to seek wider
societal benefits to a community. Decisions for creating social value should not be based only
on price but on added value or benefits produced by that service (Arvidson and Kara, 2013).
This position was further strengthened by Ruparathna and Hewage (2015), who averred that
selection criteria in public procurement are no longer focused on traditional goals of
delivering products based on the lowest cost, but on the delivery of secondary and social
objectives.

Implication for policy and practice

This study undoubtedly has implication for public administration policy and practice,
particularly concerning the public procurement process for construction works in Ghana and
the West African Sub-region. The overarching aim of policymakers is to deliver services to
members of the society through the process of developing and implementing public and
social policies, laws and regulations, ultimately leading to the creation of social (public) value
in the process (Jain, 2019). By this, the study has implications for enacting policies in the
public procurement processes to integrate social value in the public procurement process for
construction works that ensure the enhancement of citizens’ well-being in communities where
construction works are undertaken. Such policies will serve as an important foundation for
the socio-economic regeneration and development of local communities where construction
works are undertaken.
The study also serves as an important catalyst for policy change in the public
procurement process for construction works in Ghana. Over the years, public procurement
processes and practice have overemphasized commercial goals based on economy and
efficiency over social welfare and public value. This has led public procurement to operate in
a rule-bound risk avoidance environment, to the detriment of attaining social objectives
(Erridge, 2007). Although the Public Procurement Act of Ghana provided for socio-economic
objectives (environmental, social and economic), this study represents an important catalyst
to draw attention to the potential of leveraging on construction expenditure to integrate social
value in the public procurement process for construction works as an avenue to enhance
ECAM employment generation, community development and poverty reduction in local
29,6 communities.
Further, the study is an important tool for a positive social orientation towards the cost of
construction projects in Ghana. Public procurement represents a large portion of the
country’s GDP, representing about 14% of GDP and 24% of imports (Osei-Tutu et al., 2011).
The construction industry is very critical in every country. Due to its size, it has greater
potential to contribute directly to the growth of the national economy (Ofori, 2012; Osei, 2013).
2262 By leveraging the cost of construction projects for local socio-economic regeneration and
development, construction cost can be seen as an important avenue for social change,
economic development and poverty reduction, rather than an abyss that saps
taxpayer’s money.
Furthermore, the study serves as an important impetus for reviewing laws, regulations
and policies in the public procurement process and practice for construction works in Ghana
to integrate social value in public contracts. Laws, rules, policies and regulations serve as an
important basis for behaviour and practice in public procurement in the public sector. For
example, the promulgation of the Social Value (Public Service) Act (2012) in the UK did not
only motivate the integration of social value in the procurement process but also spurred the
public, private and third sector organizations to adopt the process of creating social value
(Teasdale et al., 2012). Therefore, this study offers potential for the review of the public
procurement law, policies, rules and regulation to transform the traditional focus on
transactional cost to social linkages (McCrudden, 2004) and horizontal policies
(Arrowsmith, 2010).
In addition, the study has the potential to transform the over-reliance of award criteria that
is focused on the lowest cost to other equally important criteria, such as social value. The
public sector has traditionally relied on the lowest bid as a basis for the award of construction
contracts (Waara and Brochner, 2006). On the contrary, Cartigny and Lord (2019a, b) showed
that the UK reviewed its award criteria to key terms associated with social value. Therefore,
this study offers an avenue for the planning and execution of the procurement process that
will not solely be based on the lowest bid as an award criterion but also on social objectives.

Conclusion
This study sought to explore the meaning of social value in the public procurement process
for construction works in Ghana. The study showed that in addition to the meanings and
explanations assigned to the concept in the body of literature, benefits derived from physical
projects’ construction were equated to social value. For example, participants pointed out that
the provision of classroom blocks and hospital facilities to alleviate the suffering of school
children and people in a community represented social value. The study was conducted with
participants who are important stakeholders in the public procurement process for
construction works. This enabled the researchers to explain the concept of social value in the
public procurement process, specifically for construction works. This explanation represents
a new insight on the concept that differs from the literature on the phenomenon. As far as the
researchers are concerned, no study has qualitatively examined the opinions of social actors
in the public procurement process for construction works on social value. The implication is
that the concept is very subjective and elusive to attract a concise definition or explanation.
Again, although previous studies agree there are multiple interpretations for social value,
there has not been any study that has shown the perspectives of independent categories of
social actors (procurement officers, works engineers and quantity surveyors) in a single
study (the public procurement process). This new insight adds to the current global discourse
on the explanations and definitions of social value, and therefore, this study adds to the body
of literature on the concept.
 The investigation established that the central goal for selecting contractors in the public Defining social
procurement process for construction works was to reduce transactional cost. The study value
revealed that social actors (procurement officers, works engineers and quantity surveyors) in
the public procurement process were not adequately motivated to shift from the traditional
lowest bid award criteria to other economically advantageous criteria, such as social value.
This implies that, although social value offers enormous potential for positive social change
in the lives of individuals and communities, it will continue to be a laudable concept hidden in
the pages of books and articles. 2263
In addition, the study found that the construction industry in Ghana is highly focused on
the achievement of direct primary benefits from projects, rather than additional secondary
benefits that enhances well-being and creates positive social changes. Reasons assigned by
participants are the strict provisions of the Public Procurement Act that did not provide
explicit steps for social value as an award criterion in selecting a contractor. Participants
observed that, unlike capacity and financial factors that can easily be evaluated, social value
factors are difficult to be stated and evaluated in the selection process. This indicates that the
Public Procurement Law is a constraining force to innovation, creating a rule-bound risk
avoidance environment for public procurement practice. This perspective cannot be said to
be limited to the Ghanaian construction industry. As shown in the literature above, public
procurement appears to operate in a rule-bound environment.
In sum, this study reviewed the definitions and explanations of social value in the body of
literature. It advanced a definition/explanation of the concept in the context of the
construction industry in Ghana. In the authors’ view, this definition offers an advantage over
prior explanations because it is context-specific (focused on the public procurement process
for construction works) and outcome specific (to bring about positive social change in the
lives of individuals and communities). However, the study was based on a qualitative design
that relied on 30 participants drawn from Western, Western North and Central Regions of
Ghana. The researchers aimed not to generalize results to a larger population but to seek an
understanding of social value from the perspective of social actors in the public procurement
process for construction works. The study serves as an important foundation upon which
further studies on social value in the public procurement process can be built upon, using a
quantitative design with a larger population to ascertain a broader understanding of the
public procurement process for construction works in Ghana.

References
Akenroye, T.O. (2013), “An appraisal of the use of social criteria in public procurement in Nigeria”,
Journal of Public Procurement, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 364-397.
Allen, B. (2019), “Does strategic public procurement for SMEs work? Public procurement: humdrum
bureaucratic beast or vital instrument for social change. Session 3 – public procurement as a
policy tool”, 4th International Conference on Public Policy (IPCPP4). June 26–28, 2019. Montreal.
Anvuur, A., Kumaraswamy, M.M. and Male, S. (2006), “Taking forward public procurement reforms in
Ghana, CIB W107 construction in developing economies international symposium”, in Serpell,
A. (Ed.), New Issues and Challenges, International Council for Building in English (CIB),
Santiago, pp. 9-18.
Arrowsmith, S. (2010), “Horizontal policies in public procurement: a taxonomy”, Journal of Public
Procurement, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 149-186.
Arvidson, M. and Kara, H. (2013), “Putting evaluations to use: from measuring to endorsing social
value”, Working Paper 110, Third Sector Research Centre, Birmingham.
Awuzie, B., Farag, F. and McDermott, P. (2018), “Achieving social value through construction
frameworks: the effect of client attributes”, Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers –
Management, Procurement and Law, Vol. 171 No. 1, pp. 25-31.
ECAM Baraket, J. and Weissman, J. (2009), “Social procurement and its implications for social enterprise: a
literature review”, Working Paper No. CPNS 48, The Australian Centre for Philanthropy and
29,6 Non-profit Studies, Queensland University Technology, Brisbane, December 2009.
Bolton, P. (2004), “The use of government procurement as an instrument policy”, South African Law
Journal, Vol. 121 No. 3, pp. 619-635.
Bolton, P. (2008), “Protecting the environment through public procurement: the case of South Africa”,
Natural Resources Forum, Vol. 32, pp. 1-10.
2264
Bridgeman, J., Maple, P., Murdock, A., Hardy, S. and Townley, C. (2016), “Demonstrating the social
value of a schools engagement programme: introducing young people to the construction
professions”, in Chan, P.W. and Neilson, C.J. (Eds), Proceedings of the 32nd Annual ARCOM
Conference, Association of Researchers in Construction Management, Manchester, 5–7
September 2016, Vol. 2, pp. 1007-1016.
Bryman, A. (2012), Social Research Methods, 4th ed., Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Burke, C. and King, A. (2015), “Generating social value through public sector construction
procurement: a study of local authorities and SMEs”, in Raiden, A.B. and Aboagye-Nimo, E.
(Eds), Procs 31st Annual ARCOM Conference, Association of Researchers in Construction
Management, Lincoln, 7–9 September 2015, pp. 387-396.
Cabinet Office (2015), Social Value Act Review, Cabinet Office, London.
Calleja, A. (2016), Unleashing Social Justice through EU Procurement, Routledge, New York, NY.
Cartigny, T. and Lord, W. (2017), “Defining social value in the UK construction industry”, Proceedings
of the Institute of Civil Engineers - Management, Procurement and Law, Vol. 172 No. 3,
pp. 107-114.
Cartigny, T. and Lord, W. (2019a), “Evaluating social value in the UK construction industry”,
Proceedings of the Institute of Civil Engineers - Management, Procurement and Law, Vol. 172
No. 1, pp. 8-16.
Cartigny, T. and Lord, W. (2019b), “Defining social value in the UK construction industry”,
Proceedings of the Institute of Civil Engineers - Management, Procurement and Law, Vol. 172
No. 3, pp. 107-114.
Celik, T., Kamah, L. and Aragic, Y. (2017), “Social cost of construction projects”, Environmental Impact
Assessment Review, Vol. 64, pp. 77-86.
Choi, Y., Walters, A.T., Lam, B., Green, S., Na, J.H., Grenzhaeuser, A.S. and Kang, Y. (2014),
“Measuring social values of design in the commercial sector”, available at: http://www.
designmanagementexcellence.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/SVODFinal-Report-v6_FULL.
pdf (accessed 15 December 2020).
Christensen, L.B., Johnson, R.B. and Turner, L.A. (2014), Research Methods, Design, and Analysis, 12th
ed., Pearson Education, Boston.
Cook, M. and Monk, G. (2012), The Social Value Guide: Implementing the Public Service (Social Value)
Act, Social Enterprise UK, London.
Cravero, C. (2017), “Socially responsible public procurement and set-asides: a comparative analysis of
the US, Canada and EU”, Arctic Review on Law and Politics, Vol. 8, pp. 174-192.
Daniel, E. and Pasquire, C. (2019), “Creating social value within the delivery of construction projects:
the role of lean approach”, Engineering Construction and Architectural Management, Vol. 26
No. 6, pp. 1105-1128.
Danny-Smith, G. and Loosemore, L. (2017), “Integrating indigenous enterprise into the Australian
construction industry”, Engineering Construction and Architectural Management, Vol. 24 No. 5,
pp. 788-808.
Erridge, A. (2007), “Public Procurement, public value and Northern Ireland unemployment pilot
project”, Public Administration, Vol. 85 No. 4, pp. 1023-1043.
European Union (2010), Buying Social - A Guide to Taking Account of Social Considerations in Public Defining social
Procurement, Director – General for Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities Unit
D.2 and Directorate-General for the Internal Market and Services Unit C.3, European value
Commission, Luxembourg.
Farage, F. and McDemott, P. (2015), “Using soft systems methodology to approach social value
outcomes in public procurement”, Proceedings of Going North for Sustainability: Leveraging
Knowledge and Innovation for Sustainable Construction and Development, pp. 23-25.
Grandia, J. and Meehan, J. (2017), “Public procurement as a policy tool: using procurement to reach 2265
desired outcome in society”, International Journal of Public Sector Management, Vol. 30 No. 4,
pp. 302-309.
Hall, J.N. (2010), “Briefing: a practical initiative for the construction industry”, Engineering
Sustainability, Vol. 163, pp. 181-183.
Halloran, D. (2017), “The social value in social clauses: methods of measuring and evaluation in social
procurement”, in Thai, K.V. (Ed.), Global Public Procurement Theories and Practices, Springer
International Publishing, Bali, pp. 39-58.
Harlock, J. (2014), “From outcome-based commissioning to social value? Implications for performance
managing the third sector”, International Journal of Management Reviews, Vol. 16 No. 4,
pp. 417-436.
Hyacinth, D.D., Babura, A.M. and Animashaun, A.O. (2017), “Sustainable public procurement practice:
panacea to good governance in Nigeria”, International Journal of Scientific Research in Social
Sciences and Management Studies, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 114-131.
Jain, P.K., Hazenberg, R., Seddon, F. and Denny, S. (2019), “Social value as a mechanism for linking
public administrators with society: identifying the meaning, forms and process of social value
creation”, International Journal of Public Administration, Vol. 43 No. 10, pp. 876-889.
Kattel, R. and Lember, V. (2010), “Public procurement as an industrial policy tool: an option for
developing countries?”, Journal of Public Procurement, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 368-390.
Kusi, L.Y., Aggrey, G.A.B. and Nyarku, K.M. (2014), “Assessment of public procurement policy
implementation in the educational sector (a case study of Takoradi polytechnic)”,
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, Vol. 4 No. 10,
pp. 260-278.
Lindell, A. and Olander, S. (2019), “Social considerations in the procurement of road and railroad
projects in Sweden”, Emerald Reach Proceedings Series, Vol. 2, pp. 17-23.
Loosemore, M. and Barraket, J. (2017), “The Co-creation of social value between social enterprises and
private firms in the construction industry”, in Chan, P.W. and Neilson, C.J. (Eds), Proceeding of
the 33rd Annual ARCOM Conference, Association of Researchers in Construction Management,
Cambridge, 4–6 September 2017, pp. 673-682.
Loosemore, M. and Higgon, D. (2015), Social Enterprise in the Construction Industry: Building Better
Communities, Routledge, London.
MacFarlane, R. (2014), Tackling Poverty through Public Procurement, Joseph Rowntree
Foundation, York.
McCrudden, C. (2004), “Using public procurement to achieve social outcomes”, Natural Resources
Forum, Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 257-267.
Murray, J.G. (2001), “Improving purchasing’s contribution - the purchasing strategy of buying
council”, International Journal of Public Sector Management, Vol. 14 No. 5, pp. 391-410.
Murtagh, S.R. and Brooks, T. (2019), “Critical success factors for social value in construction
procurement in Northern Ireland”, Proceedings of Civil Engineers – Management, Procurement
and Law, Vol. 172 No. 5, pp. 183-196.
Ness, K. (2010), “The discourse of ‘respect for people’ in UK construction”, Construction Management
Economics, Vol. 28 No. 5, pp. 481-493.
ECAM Norman, W. and MacDonald, C. (2004), “Getting to the bottom of ‘triple bottom line’”, Business Ethics
Quarterly, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 243-262.
29,6
Oanh, C.T. (2019), Social Value Creation through Community Engagement in Public Service Delivery: A
Qualitative Comparison between the UK and Vietnamese Contexts, [Doctoral Thesis],
Northampton University, Northampton.
Ofori, G. (2012), Developing the Construction Industry in Ghana: The Case for a Central Agency,
Singapore University Press, Singapore.
2266
Opoku, A. and Guthrie, P. (2018), “The Social Value Act 2012: current state of practice in the social
housing sector”, Journal of Facilities Management, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 253-268.
Osei, V. (2013), “The construction industry and its linkages to the Ghanaian economy- policies to
improve the sector’s performance”, International Journal of Development and Economic
Sustainability, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 56-72.
Osei-Tutu, E., Mensdah, S. and Amenya, C. (2011), The Level of Compliance with the Public
Procurement Act (Act 663) in Ghana, Management and Innovation for a Sustainable Built
Environment, Amsterdam.
Petersen, D. and Kadefors, A. (2016), “Social procurement and employment requirements in
construction”, in Chan, P.W. and Neilson, C.J. (Eds), Proceedings of the 32nd Annual ARCOM
Conference, Association of Researchers in Construction Management, Manchester, 5-7
September 2016, Vol. 2, pp. 1045-1054.
Pruess, L. (2009), “Addressing sustainable development through public procurement: the case of local
government”, Journal of Supply Chain Management, Vol. 14, pp. 213-223.
Public Procurement Act (2003), (Act 663), as Amended, Assembly Press, Accra, Ghana.
Public Procurement Annual Report (2011), Public Procurement Authority Annual Report, Assembly
Press, Ghana.
Reid, S. and Loosemore, M. (2017), “Motivations and barriers to social procurement in the Australian
construction industry”, in Chan, P.W. and Neilson, C.J. (Eds), Proceeding of the 33rd Annual
ARCOM Conference, Association of Researchers in Construction Management, Cambridge, 4-6
September 2017, pp. 643-651.
Ruparathna, R. and Hewage, K. (2015), “Review of contemporary construction procurement practices”,
Journal of Management Engineering, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 305-314.
Russel, S. (2013), “Journey of Impact: a practitioner perspective on measuring social impact”, Coventry:
HouseMark/Midland Heart, Birmingham.
Ryan, G.W. and Bernard, H.R. (2003), “Techniques to identify themes”, Field Methods, Vol. 15,
pp. 85-109.
Saunders, M., Lewis, P. and Thornhill, A. (2019), Research Methods for Business Students, 7th ed.,
Pearson Education, Harlow.
Social Enterprise UK (2012), “The social value guide, implementing the public services (social value)
act”, available at: http://www.socialenterprise.org.uk/uploads/files/2012/12/social_value_guide.
pdf (accessed 15 February 2020).
Social Value Act (2012), Public Services (Social Value) Act 2012, Cabinet Office, HM Government,
London.
Staples, W.J. and Dalrymple, J.F. (2012), “Value for money in public sector construction procurement”,
Proceedings of the 26th Annual Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management
Conference (ANZAM 2012), Perth, Western Australia.
Sutherland, V., McTier, A., Glass, A. and McGregor, A. (2015), Analysis of the Impact and Value of
Community Benefit Clauses in Procurement, Training and Employment Research Unit (TERU)
University of Glasgow, Glasgow.
Teasdale, S., Alcock, P. and Smith, G. (2012), “Legislating for the big society? The case of the public
services (social value) bill”, Public Money and Management, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 201-208.
Troje, D. and Kadefors, A. (2018), “Employment requirement in Swedish construction procurement – Defining social
institutional perspective”, Journal of Facilities Management, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 284-298.
value
Waara, F. and Brochner (2006), “Price and nonprice criteria for contractor selection”, Journal of
Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 132 No. 8, pp. 797-804.
Walker, D. and Hampson, K. (2008), Procurement Strategies: A Relationship-Based Approach, 1st ed.,
John Wiley and Sons, Chichester.
Westall, A. (2012), Briefing 2: Measuring Social Value, Social Outcomes and Impact, NAVCA’s Local 2267
Commissioning and Procurement Unit.
Wontner, K.L. (2018), Achieving Social Value in Public Procurement through Community Benefits: Can
One Size Fit All?, Published Dissertation, Cardiff Business School, University of Cardiff, Cardiff.
Wood, C. and Leighton, D. (2010), Measuring Social Value: The Gap between Policy and Practice,
Demos, London.
Yusof, Z.A. and Bhattasali, D. (2008), “Economic growth and development in malaysia: policy making
and leadership, commission on growth and development”, Working Paper No. 27, The
International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank On behalf of the
Commission on Growth and Development.

Corresponding author
Brandsford Kwame Gidigah can be contacted at: brans7@yahoo.com

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com