Abstract:
Background: Globally, populations are ever-changing, and providing new challenges
which demand new ways of thinking. In response to ‘new’ (and often complex) social
risks, there has been an increase in Governmental focus on improving social outcomes,
augmenting the need to demonstrate value, and providing assurance that investments
are evidence informed. Social investment can be seen as an attempt to combine
principles from the preceding macroeconomic paradigms of Keynesianism and
Neoliberalism through the ‘third way’ political philosophy. However, it is not exempt
from the need to demonstrate value, therefore highlighting the need to first define
social investment, as well as the methods for evaluating it.
Objective: To explore the concept of social investment, through both an international
and New Zealand lens.
Methods: This study utilised a mixed-methods multiphase design and consisted of
three key phases. Phase One employed a mixed-methods explanatory approach, first
using statistical analyses to contextualise the Organisation of Economic Cooperation
and Development (OECD) environment of social investment. This was followed by
document analyses of grey literature pertaining to social investment within the OECD
context. Phase Two followed a qualitative descriptive approach, using semi-structured
interviews with key stakeholders of social investment within New Zealand. Interviews
were conducted on participants within the Funder, Policy and Governance levels (n=
5) as well as the Operations level (n=7) and analysed using general inductive thematic
analysis. Phase Three combined big data with the Government’s Living Standards
Framework (LSF) and used the Integrated Data Infrastructure (IDI) to ascertain the
extent of evaluation that was possible within New Zealand.
Results: Within the OECD context, the implementation of policies was largely
influenced by contextual factors, which are influenced by historical and political
decisions. Inductive thematic analysis of the interviews highlighted five key themes
relating to social investment within New Zealand, relating to societal problems, human
behaviours, and the potential for social investment in New Zealand. The integration
of big data with a New Zealand framework for well-being highlighted great potential
for this approach. However, limitations mean that further research is needed to make
use of these tools in a meaningful way.
Conclusion: Social investment can be seen as a way of addressing complex social
problems within societies. Within New Zealand, social investment is an attempt to
integrate the humanitarian and economic perspectives and improve well-being within
society. For New Zealand, social investments are defined to be initiatives which have
been configured to address complex social issues. They consist of alliances between
targeted populations, their communities and organisations across multiple sectors,
sharing the common goal of improving well-being in the long run for the targeted
population. The interventions utilised within social investment are innovative and
agnostic, commissioning the most appropriate Provider for service delivery.