8.1 Considering the Purpose of Social Investment
111
development for the next 15 years. So we’re sort of seeing this trend towards companies
reflecting back to their approach to social investment and telling how it could better serve
the business.
In the excerpt above, P15 strategically drew on discourses of sustainable development for social investment as a way of justifying social investment based on
companies’ business interests. P15’s focus on the “implications of the sustainable
development goals” indicates her/his apparent adoption of working with discourses
of social investment. However, P15 positions sustainable developmental goals as
serving the company.
Like P15, other participants discussed the purpose of social investment as being
to benefit both company and communities. However, some participants positioned
social investment in terms of communities’ capacity building. The next section
explores participants’ talk about capacity building programmes as a way of benefiting
both the country and the business. Again, participants drew on multiple discourses
of social investment in their accounts.
8.1.2 Investing in Communities’ Capacity Building
Most social investment experts also discussed capacity building programmes as a way
to achieve meaningful social investment. The following quotes illustrate participants’
social investment ideals. In this regard: “I think that for me it is education and capacity
building” (P3); “to implement a scholarship scheme to build the capacity of the local
human resources” (P6); and “[ideally social investment includes] programmes that
really deal with human capacity, like training, skills development” (P10). The above
quotes are examples of participants recommending that a strategic social investment
approach is capacity building.
Capacity building is a concept found in sustainable development literature (Eade,
1997; Simmons, Reynolds, & Swinburn, 2011; Simpson, Wood, & Daws, 2003).
However, in my study, experts positioned capacity building as serving the twin interests of both communities and business. This is arguably at odds with the sustainable
development literature, which does not position capacity building in relation to the
business’ agenda (Eade, 1997; Simmons et al., 2011; Simpson et al., 2003). In this
section, I investigate how, in my research, participants recommended investing in
capacity building programmes as a way to meet the interests of both the community
and the company.
Since the 1980s, capacity building has been considered by the World Bank Group
and the United Nations as key to sustainable development (Eade, 1997). According to
Simmons et al. (2011), there are myriad definitions of capacity building. In sustainable development literature, capacity building is the process by which communities
leverage their assets or strengths in order to improve well-being (Simmons et al.,
2011; Simpson, Wood, & Daws, 2003). To Simpson et al. (2003) ideally, capacity
building programmes promote expertise, skills and leadership; enhance a sense of
111
development for the next 15 years. So we’re sort of seeing this trend towards companies
reflecting back to their approach to social investment and telling how it could better serve
the business.
In the excerpt above, P15 strategically drew on discourses of sustainable development for social investment as a way of justifying social investment based on
companies’ business interests. P15’s focus on the “implications of the sustainable
development goals” indicates her/his apparent adoption of working with discourses
of social investment. However, P15 positions sustainable developmental goals as
serving the company.
Like P15, other participants discussed the purpose of social investment as being
to benefit both company and communities. However, some participants positioned
social investment in terms of communities’ capacity building. The next section
explores participants’ talk about capacity building programmes as a way of benefiting
both the country and the business. Again, participants drew on multiple discourses
of social investment in their accounts.
8.1.2 Investing in Communities’ Capacity Building
Most social investment experts also discussed capacity building programmes as a way
to achieve meaningful social investment. The following quotes illustrate participants’
social investment ideals. In this regard: “I think that for me it is education and capacity
building” (P3); “to implement a scholarship scheme to build the capacity of the local
human resources” (P6); and “[ideally social investment includes] programmes that
really deal with human capacity, like training, skills development” (P10). The above
quotes are examples of participants recommending that a strategic social investment
approach is capacity building.
Capacity building is a concept found in sustainable development literature (Eade,
1997; Simmons, Reynolds, & Swinburn, 2011; Simpson, Wood, & Daws, 2003).
However, in my study, experts positioned capacity building as serving the twin interests of both communities and business. This is arguably at odds with the sustainable
development literature, which does not position capacity building in relation to the
business’ agenda (Eade, 1997; Simmons et al., 2011; Simpson et al., 2003). In this
section, I investigate how, in my research, participants recommended investing in
capacity building programmes as a way to meet the interests of both the community
and the company.
Since the 1980s, capacity building has been considered by the World Bank Group
and the United Nations as key to sustainable development (Eade, 1997). According to
Simmons et al. (2011), there are myriad definitions of capacity building. In sustainable development literature, capacity building is the process by which communities
leverage their assets or strengths in order to improve well-being (Simmons et al.,
2011; Simpson, Wood, & Daws, 2003). To Simpson et al. (2003) ideally, capacity
building programmes promote expertise, skills and leadership; enhance a sense of