Collaborative Learning Processes in Social Impact Bonds: A Case Study from the Netherlands

Smeets, Dominique Jozef Alfons

doi:10.1080/19420676.2017.1299034

Cited by 44 publications

(52 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Additionally, the focus on pre-defined outcomes transfers the risk of project failure to the private sector [87]. Finally, SIBs encourage innovation [88] because, beyond the introduction of market forces and investor inspection into social policy, they are receptive to collaboration directed at the co-creation of collective social impact [89].…”

Section: Social Impact Bonds (Sibs): Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Business Models for Sustainable Finance: The Case Study of Social Impact Bonds

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Business models for sustainability (BMfS) are relevant topics on research agendas, given their orientation toward sustainability issues. However, traditional versions of these models are often ill-equipped at solving complex social problems. Cross-sector partnerships for sustainability (CSPfS) have been recognized as a new paradigm that mitigates the failure of traditional models. Impact investing, and social impact bonds (SIBs) in particular, represent an interesting field of research in innovative business models for sustainable finance, even though the literature does not consider SIBs within this broader field. We propose an exploratory study based on qualitative methods aimed at conceptualizing SIBs within the framework of BMfS and understanding how SIB collaboration varies across social sectors and geographical areas. Our study identifies three different models of SIBs characterized by the different degrees of collaboration between actors: (i) SIB as a fully collaborative partnership; (ii) SIB as a low-collaborative partnership; and (iii) SIB as a partially collaborative partnership. Our findings are useful to policy makers and practitioners involved in the SIB design, suggesting that a fully collaborative SIB model may stand a better chance of achieving the expected social impacts.

show abstract

Section: Social Impact Bonds (Sibs): Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Business Models for Sustainable Finance: The Case Study of Social Impact Bonds

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The first large group of single‐country studies investigated a single sector (or very few sectors) in which an SIB has been implemented. As such, they applied an in‐depth single case study method (Andreu, ; Broccardo & Mazzuca, ; Carter, ; Cooper et al, ; Edmiston & Nicholls, ; Farr, ; FitzGerald et al, ; Harvie & Ogman, ; Lowe et al, ; Neyland, ; Pandey et al, ; Smeets, ; Tse & Warner, ). Availability, reliability, and the amount of data are key issues in empirical research on SIBs.…”

Section: Analysis Of the Content Of The Contributionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…All empirical studies rely on secondary data, such as publicly available SIB contracts, evaluation reports, financial and accounting information on the service provider, invitations to tender (Carter, ), website information, and press releases on SIBs. A few studies were enriched by the use of primary data, such as semistructured interviews with SIB stakeholders (Cooper et al, ; Edmiston & Nicholls, ; Lowe et al, ; Neyland, ; Smeets, ; Tse & Warner, ), informal conversations, and correspondence (Edmiston & Nicholls, ; Lowe et al, ). Two studies enriched the research by collecting insightful qualitative data through focus groups (Smeets, ), seminars, and policy roundtables (Edmiston & Nicholls, ) among relevant stakeholders.…”

Section: Analysis Of the Content Of The Contributionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A few studies were enriched by the use of primary data, such as semistructured interviews with SIB stakeholders (Cooper et al, ; Edmiston & Nicholls, ; Lowe et al, ; Neyland, ; Smeets, ; Tse & Warner, ), informal conversations, and correspondence (Edmiston & Nicholls, ; Lowe et al, ). Two studies enriched the research by collecting insightful qualitative data through focus groups (Smeets, ), seminars, and policy roundtables (Edmiston & Nicholls, ) among relevant stakeholders. Among single‐country and/or single‐sector case studies, only Broccardo and Mazzuca (), Edmiston and Nicholls (), and Tse and Warner () analysed more than one SIB.…”

Section: Analysis Of the Content Of The Contributionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Social impact bonds: The evolution of research and a review of the academic literature

Broccardo

Mazzuca

Frigotto

2019

Corp Soc Responsibility Env

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study reviews all the academic contributions to research on social impact bonds (SIBs). It responds to the need for clarification across and within the various perspectives used in the literature. The goal was to assess the approaches used in extant studies and to offer directions for future studies. A bibliometric analysis was performed, and a framework was developed in which the contributions were positioned according to two criteria: (a) a distinction on the basis of research approaches and perspectives on SIBs and (b) an analysis of content according to a protocol that includes key questions corresponding with the most pressing issues in this area. K E Y W O R D S literature review, social impact bond, social impact finance 1 | INTRODUCTION The purpose of this study is to provide a systematic review of the academic literature on social impact bonds (SIBs). Since their introduction in the United Kingdom in 2010, SIBs have been receiving increasing attention from practitioners and scholars, as evidenced in the nuanced approaches and methods adopted for studying them as well as in the diverse research areas where SIBs have been addressed (Fraser, Tan, Lagarde, & Mays, 2018). To date, a review of SIBs focussed exclusively on academic papers is non-existent. Fraser et al.'s (2018) review included both academic (38 papers) and "grey" literature products (63 papers) from 2009 to 2015. They distinguished the "cautionary narrative" (mainly related to the academic literature) and two other narratives (mainly related to the grey literature) that assumed a pragmatic and ideological perspective of SIBs. At present, SIBs have broadened both in terms of adoption and research interest: This could allow academics to develop both theoretical and empirical analyses. Therefore, exclusive focus on academic contributions is timely because it is possible to reconstruct a scholarly assessment of SIB implementations, theoretical so-far developing arguments, and open issues. The review's strategy was twofold. First, a bibliometric analysis was conducted to explore (a) the evolution of SIBs in the literature; (b) the existence of central contributors and institutions devoted to work on SIBs; (c) disciplinary areas (research categories) that have shown interest in the discourse of SIBs; and (d) the visibility of contributions as measured through their positioning in ranked journals. Second, to develop a framework, academic contributions to SIBs were analysed and positioned according to two criteria: (a) a distinction based on research approaches to and perspectives on SIBs and (b) an analysis of content according to a protocol that includes key questions corresponding to SIBs' most pressing issues as individuated by the Government Outcomes Lab, a centre of academic research and practice for outcome-based contracting and SIBs at the University of Oxford. The current paper makes two contributions. First, it provides a critical analysis of academic contributions that point out directions and frameworks for extant research and future r...

show abstract

“…The technical tools are often too complicated. For example, social impact bonds, which form an innovative financial solution encouraging collaboration between social enterprises, regular companies and local government, have found their way into the Netherlands in recent years, but managing these bonds is very complicated and resource-consuming (Smeets 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Developing stereotypes to facilitate dialogue between social entrepreneurs and local government

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social enterprises and government share the ultimate goal of solving societal problems, which provides a lot of potential for collaboration between the two parties. While the local government level is the most relevant for social enterprises, little research has been done on the relationship between social entrepreneurs and local government officials. However, in the Netherlands, social enterprises experience these relations as far from optimal, evidenced by the fact that they named 'regulations and government policy' as the most important obstacle for increasing their impact in a 2015 sector survey. Therefore, a pilot project was started with social entrepreneurs in an Amsterdam neighbourhood, forming a learning network aiming to improve relations with local government. In the network, an innovative tool was developed in the form of a set of five illustrated stereotypes of social entrepreneurs with certain views towards local government. These stereotypes serve both as a reflection tool for social entrepreneurs and as a communication tool to open dialogue between social entrepreneurs and local government. We conclude that in an applied research project, it is crucial to place focus on the final phases in which results are reformulated into practical tools to match target groups, and resulting tools are distributed through targeted events and publications.

show abstract

Collaborative Learning Processes in Social Impact Bonds: A Case Study from the Netherlands

Cited by 44 publications

References 42 publications

Business Models for Sustainable Finance: The Case Study of Social Impact Bonds

Business Models for Sustainable Finance: The Case Study of Social Impact Bonds

Social impact bonds: The evolution of research and a review of the academic literature

Developing stereotypes to facilitate dialogue between social entrepreneurs and local government

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About