The Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) hs published scoping research on potential methodologies to monetise the value of social cohesion: ‘the strength and quality of relationships, trust, and connectedness’ in society.
Government UK writes:
This research is part of the Culture and Heritage Capital (CHC) Programme, led by the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) and the UKRI Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC), in partnership with DCMS’ arm’s-length bodies: Arts Council England (ACE), the British Film Institute (BFI), Historic England, and the National Lottery Heritage Fund. The CHC programme aims to better account for the market and non-market benefits generated by creative, cultural and heritage assets through conceptualising culture and heritage assets as a form of capital that generates services which create a flow benefit for individuals and wider society. The CHC Programme is developing new methods, practical tools, and an evidence bank to ensure that the full economic, social, cultural and environmental benefits of culture, the creative industries and heritage are included in appraisals (social cost-benefit analysis (SCBA)) and evaluations.
A core challenge of this research (and measuring and monetising social cohesion more broadly) is navigating the risk of double counting within SCBA. Because existing use and non-use valuation studies may already implicitly capture elements of social cohesion, a clear analytical boundary must be established. Specifically, this research aims to address a three-part challenge:
- Deconstruction: The study aims to determine exactly if, and to what extent, existing use and non-use values already encompass social cohesion.
- Gap Analysis: If overlap exists, the study aims to identify how to isolate and value any ‘missing’ dimensions of social cohesion not currently captured within existing use and non-use values, without double counting.
- Integration: If no overlap exists, the study aims to identify the most robust methodologies to introduce and quantify social cohesion as a distinct variable within the SCBA framework.
This scoping work will support the development of quantitative evidence to substantiate social cohesion in the culture and heritage sector, informing future public investment decisions. As the specific measurement and valuation of social cohesion is an emergent research area, the current research provides an important early step in understanding the feasibility of valuation of social cohesion and the extent to which it can be incorporated into a SCBA framework.
Key findings from the literature
The quality of the evidence base we reviewed as part of the Rapid Evidence Assessment was mixed, with most studies relying on cross-sectional analysis of large-scale survey data or qualitative evidence gathered through interviews. The headline findings from the evidence review included:
- There is no universally agreed definition of social cohesion. While all the definitions we found captured social connectedness between individuals, the specific elements of each definition were often influenced by the context or specific goals of the organisation providing the definition.
- Culture and heritage generate social cohesion through a range of mechanisms. The literature converged around four broad mechanisms: (i) shared identity and belonging, (ii) facilitation of social networks, (iii) solidification of shared norms and values, and (iv) provision of space for socialisation and social mixing.
- Social cohesion is associated with positive outcomes at different levels of society. The literature indicates that social cohesion can manifest at different societal levels, including at the micro-level (i.e., strengthening connections with friends or other direct connections), the meso-level (i.e., strengthening relationships at the neighbourhood or local community level), and at the macro-level (i.e., improving sense of attachment and belonging at the national level).
- There have been very few attempts to monetise the value of social cohesion as an isolated outcome. The review identified limited attempts to monetise a loss or gain of social cohesion-related outcomes, both in general and for culture and heritage specifically, with only one paper explicitly monetising social capital. There is, however, a large body of literature estimating the total welfare of culture and heritage assets and services, which could partially capture social cohesion, even if it is not directly attributed as a driver of value.
Based on the insights developed through the Rapid Evidence Assessment, development of a theoretical model, and pilot study, a suggested definition of social cohesion – which is applicable to culture and heritage – is described below: ‘Social cohesion describes the strength and quality of relationships, trust, and connectedness between individuals, communities, institutions, and wider society. It encompasses the extent to which people feel they belong, participate, and cooperate across social groups and institutions. Social cohesion operates at multiple levels: at the micro level through relationships between individuals; at the meso level through engagement with local communities, organisations, and places; and at the macro level through individuals’ relationships with wider society, its institutions, culture, and systems of governance.’
To read the theoretical framework for social cohesion of culture & heritage; approaches to valuing social cohesion and the recommendations for future research go to the following link:
