Are flawed social value measures holding back green progress?

Understanding the Current Social Value Frameworks

Social value frameworks, such as the widely used Themes, Outcomes and Measures (TOMs) system, were developed to encourage organizations—particularly those involved in public sector projects—to consider their broader impact. TOMs was created in response to the Public Services (Social Value) Act 2012, aiming to embed social, economic, and environmental benefits into procurement processes.

Despite its comprehensive intent, the framework largely emphasizes easy-to-measure social outcomes like local employment and supply chain expenditure. For example, recent data from Procure Partnerships shows that over 98% of the £6.8 billion social value generated through their frameworks derives from these two categories. Environmental contributions, including carbon reduction, account for less than 1%.

This disproportionate focus can be attributed to the relative ease of tracking employment figures and local spending compared to quantifying environmental impact. As a result, many firms prioritize activities that improve their social value scores without necessarily advancing sustainability goals.

The Disproportionate Emphasis on Local Employment and Supply Chain Spend

Local employment and supply chain spend have become default metrics for social value, often regarded as standard industry practice rather than exceptional contributions. Many construction firms routinely hire local subcontractors and staff, which inflates their social value scores without necessarily creating additional community benefits.

Robbie Blackhurst, founder of Black Capital Group, argues that these metrics reward 'business as usual' activities and fail to challenge firms to innovate or prioritize environmental or deeper social outcomes. This creates a complacency that undermines the transformative potential of social value initiatives.

Moreover, this narrow focus risks neglecting vulnerable community needs such as education, health, and wellbeing, which require more nuanced and long-term engagement. By overvaluing local spend and employment, social value measures may inadvertently marginalize more impactful but less tangible contributions.

Why Environmental Impact is Marginalized in Social Value Metrics

Environmental outcomes, especially carbon reduction, are critically underrepresented in current social value frameworks. Data indicates that environmental contributions make up a mere 0.3% of total social value in construction projects, reflecting a systemic undervaluation of sustainability efforts.

One key issue is that social value managers and environmental specialists often operate separately within organizations, leading to fragmented reporting and accountability. Environmental goals are typically managed outside of social value metrics, which diminishes their visibility and integration into procurement decisions.

Oliver Kempton, a partner at Envoy Partnership, highlights the need for public bodies to expand social value considerations beyond spending patterns to include environmental and wellbeing impacts. Incorporating community stakeholder voices and embedding robust environmental indicators can drive more holistic and meaningful outcomes.

The Call for a Distinct Environmental Focus

Experts suggest that separating environmental goals from social value metrics could enhance focus and effectiveness. Robbie Blackhurst advocates for stripping environmental targets out of social value frameworks, allowing dedicated attention and expertise to be applied to both areas independently.

This separation acknowledges the distinct skill sets required to manage social and environmental objectives and prevents dilution of efforts. By creating standalone environmental metrics, organizations can better track carbon reduction, biodiversity gains, and resource efficiency without conflating these with social employment measures.

Kingsley Clarke from SCF concurs, emphasizing the importance of addressing embodied carbon and striving for carbon-zero buildings. However, he notes that these environmental considerations often fall outside the remit of social value managers, reinforcing the need for distinct but complementary frameworks.

The Need for a Standardized and Governing Body-Led Revamp

To tackle inconsistencies and gaps in social value measurement, many industry leaders call for a comprehensive overhaul led by an official governing body. This entity would collaborate with government agencies and sector representatives to develop standardized, transparent, and outcome-focused social value metrics.

A unified standard would enable clearer benchmarking and accountability, encouraging firms to prioritize activities that deliver genuine social and environmental improvements rather than ticking boxes. It would also facilitate better data collection and reporting, improving decision-making for public procurement and private investment.

Such a revamp should include stakeholder engagement to ensure that community priorities and environmental sustainability are central. By integrating diverse perspectives, the new framework can better reflect the complex realities of social value creation and green progress.

Challenges in Measuring True Social and Environmental Value

Capturing authentic social and environmental value is inherently complex due to the qualitative and long-term nature of many outcomes. Unlike straightforward metrics such as job numbers or spend amounts, impacts on wellbeing, community cohesion, and environmental health require sophisticated evaluation methods.

This complexity often leads organizations to default to simpler, quantifiable metrics, perpetuating a cycle where easy wins dominate social value reporting. Additionally, the lack of uniform definitions and measurement tools complicates comparisons and undermines confidence in reported outcomes.

Addressing these challenges demands investment in research, tools, and training to equip social value and sustainability professionals with the capabilities to assess and communicate these nuanced impacts effectively.

Aligning Social Value with Sustainable Development Goals

Aligning social value frameworks with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) could provide a comprehensive roadmap for integrating social, economic, and environmental objectives. The SDGs emphasize interconnectedness, encouraging holistic approaches that balance local employment, community wellbeing, and environmental stewardship.

Embedding SDG-aligned indicators into procurement and reporting can help organizations move beyond narrow metrics toward transformative impact. This alignment would also facilitate international benchmarking and collaboration, enhancing the credibility and relevance of social value initiatives.

Ultimately, integrating social value with broader sustainability agendas promotes a future-proof approach that supports green progress while fostering resilient, inclusive communities.

Innovative Approaches and the Way Forward

Several organizations are pioneering innovative approaches to social value measurement that better capture environmental impact and community wellbeing. These include participatory methods that involve local stakeholders in defining value and impact, as well as adopting lifecycle assessments for environmental footprints.

Technology also offers promising tools, such as data analytics and digital platforms, to track and visualize social and environmental outcomes in real time. These advancements can enhance transparency and enable adaptive management of social value initiatives.

Moving forward, a collaborative, multi-disciplinary effort is essential to reform social value frameworks. By embracing innovation, standardization, and stakeholder engagement, the construction sector and beyond can unlock the full potential of social value to drive meaningful green progress.

Conclusion

Flawed social value measures that prioritize easily quantifiable activities like local employment over critical environmental goals are impeding green progress, particularly in industries such as construction. To address this, a fundamental reimagining of social value frameworks is essential—one that distinctly incorporates robust environmental metrics and aligns with broader sustainability agendas. By standardizing measurement, engaging stakeholders, and leveraging innovation, social value can evolve into a powerful catalyst for sustainable development. This transformation is vital to ensure that social value initiatives do not merely reflect business as usual but actively contribute to a greener, more equitable future.