Assessment of Social Return on Investment for the Project of “Kae Noi” Green Products from Ethnic Groups
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14456/jare-mju.2024.20Keywords:
social returns on investment, ethnic groupsAbstract
The objective of this study was to evaluate the social return on investment (SROI) for the "Kae Noi" green products project involving ethnic groups. The sample size of 60 was determined using a non-probability sampling method, initially employing the quota sampling technique. Subsequently, convenience sampling and purposive sampling techniques were utilized to select participants who voluntarily provided information and participated in the project. The researchers analyzed the outcomes using outcome mapping, considering inputs, activities, outputs, and the results. The data underwent analysis, encompassing the calculation of deadweight, attribution (other contributing factors affecting achievement), and the drop–off rate. Additionally, the financial proxy of the actual results was determined to calculate the social return on investment (SROI) ratio. The study's results were categorized into two aspects. Firstly, the economic aspect included income from agricultural occupations, income from processing agricultural products, and the reduction of social costs. It also encompassed family expenses invested in agriculture and the reduction of household debt through year–round production planning for agricultural products. Secondly, the educational social aspect involved professionalism and knowledge in processed products, agricultural product processing, and social culture. Regarding the social return on investment (SROI) of the project, the results indicated that stakeholders valued the investment at 2,388,913.04 Baht, while the monetized outcome value according to stakeholders was 2,565,869.57 Baht. The total investment outcome value amounted to 2,436,050.29 Baht, resulting in a net outcome value (SROI) of 176,956.53 Baht. Hence, for every 1 Baht invested in the project, a social benefit valued at 1.07 Baht can be generated. Consequently, it can be concluded that the project generates significant value beneficial to society and is worth the investment in the operating budget.
References
Cambero, C. and T. Sowlati. 2014. Assessment and optimization of forest biomass supply chains from economic, social and environmental perspectives-a review of literature. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 36(1): 62-73.
Committee on Agriculture and Cooperatives. 2021. Impacts on the Thai Economy from Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) and Recommendations for Driving the Development of the Agricultural Sector under the National Strategic Plan According to the Situation. Bangkok: Secretariat of the Senate. 15 p.
Eccles, R.G., and M. Krzus, 2010. One Report: Integrated Reporting for a Sustainable Strategy. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc. 256 p.
Joyce, S.A., and M. MacFarlane. 2001. Social Impact Assessment in the Mining Industry: Current Situation and Future Directions. London: Mining, Minerals and Sustainable Development. 28 p.
Kae Noi Royal Project Cooperative. 2020. Annual Report Year 2020. Chiang Mai: Kae Noi Royal Project Cooperative. 43 p. [in Thai]
National Innovation Agency, Thailand. 2020. SROI CALCULATOR. [Online]. Available https://sroi-calculator.nia.or.th (October 25, 2022).
Pongwiritthon K., K. Kamchai and W. Panturee 2022. Social return on investment assessment from operations of community-based innovation and career development fund: information dystems for managing community financial institutions. Res Militaris 12(2): 1174-1184.
Schlten, P., J. Nicholls, S. Olsen and B. Galimidi. 2006. Social Return on Investment: A Guide to SROI Analysis. Amstele Veen: Lenthe publishers. 118 p.
Vallaeys, F. 2014. University Social Responsibility: A Mature and Responsible Definition. pp. 88-96. In GUNI Report 2014 nº5 Higher Education in The World. Springfield: Global University.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Journal of Agricultural Research and Extension

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
This article is published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), which allows others to share the article with proper attribution to the authors and prohibits commercial use or modification. For any other reuse or republication, permission from the journal and the authors is required.