Assessing Public Works Procurement in the Czech Republic´s over-limit Regime: Survey Results and Recommendations for Contracting Authorities

• Autorzy: Matějková Jitka

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.59440/ceer/189313

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

This article elucidates the findings of a research study on public works procurement within the over-limit regime in the Czech Republic. A comprehensive survey, conducted in May 2023, provides a panoramic view of the current procurement landscape, encompassing aspects such as procurement methods, financing sources, cost considerations, and time allocation. The study uncovers significant trends and patterns in the procurement process, offering an in-depth understanding of prevalent practices and challenges in the field. It further explores the complexities of procurement method selection, tender document preparation, bidder communication, and appeal handling. The survey results highlight that the Best Value Approach (BVA) can enhance the quality, efficiency, and transparency of the procurement process and assist organizations in selecting contractors that provide the best overall value for their projects. However, some respondents expressed concerns about the potential complexity and time-consuming nature of implementing BVA. Despite these concerns, the benefits of BVA appear to outweigh the challenges for organizations willing to invest the necessary time and effort. Drawing on these findings, the article presents practical recommendations for public purchasers, aiming to boost the efficiency and effectiveness of the procurement process and contribute to the overall enhancement of public works procurement in the Czech Republic. The insights and recommendations offered in this study are anticipated to serve as a valuable resource for policymakers, practitioners, and researchers in the field of public procurement, particularly in relation to the application of the Best Value Approach.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

public procurement; evaluation; public bid; public works procurement; contracting authority; Best Value Approach

PL

zamówienia publiczne; ocena ofert; oferta publiczna; zamówienia publiczne na roboty budowlane

• Wydawca: Oficyna Wydawnicza Uniwersytetu Zielonogórskiego
• Czasopismo: Civil and Environmental Engineering Reports
• Rocznik: 2024
• Tom: Vol. 34, no. 2
• Strony: 84--99
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 40 poz., tab.

Twórcy

autor

Matějková Jitka

• Faculty of Civil Engineering, Brno University of Technology, Czech Republic

Bibliografia

• 1. Dvořák, D, Novotný, P, Šebesta, M and Machurek, T 2017. Public Procurement Act: Commentary. Prague: C.H. Beck.
• 2. Bosio, E, Djankov, S, Glaeser, E and Shleifer, A 2022. Public procurement in law and practice. American Economic Review 4, 1091-1117.
• 3. Flynn, A.and Davis, P 2014. Theory in public procurement research. Journal of public procurement 2, 139-180.
• 4. Nemec, P, Kubak, M and Dzupka, P 2021. The Transition of the Visegrad Countries Toward Sustainable Public Procurement. Eastern European Economics 59, 487-512.
• 5. Jurčík, R 2013. Green Procurement of Public Contracts – Introduction and Present Situation. In: Proceedings of the 17th International Conference Current Trends in Public Sector Research. Brno: Masaryk University, 38-48. ISBN 978-80-210- 6159-0.
• 6. Kashiwagi, D 2017. How to Know Everything Without Knowing Anything. Kashiwagi Solution Model Inc. Mesa, Arizona: KSM.
• 7. Chen, T H 2008. An economic approach to public procurement. Journal of Public Procurement 8, 407-430.
• 8. Kashiwagi, D 2016. Best Value Approach. Performance Based Studies Research Group. Tempe, Arizona: KSM.
• 9. Kerzner, H 2017. Project Management Metrics, KPIs, and Dashboards: A Guide to Measuring and Monitoring Project Performance. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley.
• 10. Larsson, J, Eriksson, PE, Lingegård, S and Järvenpää, AT 2022. Innovation outcomes and processes in infrastructure projects – a comparative study of Design-Build and Design-Build-Maintenance contracts. Construction Management and Economics 40, 142-156.
• 11. David, D and Radicic, D 2022. Network additionality and policy mix of regional and national public support for innovation. Economics of Innovation and New Technology 31, 148-172.
• 12. Rivera, A and Kashiwagi, D 2020. Minimize Project Risk and Costs: A New Approach to Project Management. Journal for the Advancement of Performance Information and Value 9, 49-62.
• 13. Rivera, A at al. 2016. Identifying the Global Performance of the Construction Industry. Journal for the Advancement of Performance Information and Value 8, 7.
• 14. De Boer, L, Labro, E and Morlacchi, P 2001. A review of methods supporting supplier selection. European Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management 7, 75-89.
• 15. Raymond, J 2008. Benchmarking in public procurement. Benchmarking: An International Journal 15(6), 782-793.
• 16. Chacko, SJ, Rai, RS and Ahuja, V 2023. Identification of Critical Project Success (CPS) Factors for Construction Projects in India: An Overview 10, 23. In: Shukla, SK, Raman, SN, Bhattacharjee, B, Singh, P et al. Recent Developments in Geotechnics and Structural Engineering. TRACE 2022. Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering 338. Singapore: Springer.
• 17. Kashiwagi, J and Kashiwagi, D 2022. IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci. 1101 082013
• 18. Rijt, VDJ and Santema, S 2012. The Best Value Approach in the Netherlands: A Reflection on Past, Present and Future, Journal for the Advancement of Performance Information and Value 2, 147-60.
• 19. Kashiwagi, D and Verweij, J 2016. Introducing the Best Value Quality Checklist in Procurement, Journal for the Advancement of Performance Information and Value 2, 20.
• 20. Naoum, SG and Egbu, C 2016. Modern selection criteria for procurement methods in construction: A state-of-the-art literature review and a survey, International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 9(2), 309-336. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMPB-09-2015-0094
• 21. Soudek, J and Skuhrovec, J 2013. Public Procurement of Homogenous Goods: the Czech Republic Case Study, Econpaper. Charles University, 1-23.
• 22. Hanák, T and Drozdová, A and Marović, I 2021. Bidding Strategy in Construction Public Procurement: A Contractor’s Perspective. Buildings, 11(2), 47.
• 23. Hanák, T 2016. Electronic Reverse Auctions in Public Construction Procurement-Empirical Evidence from the Czech Republic. Arch. Civ. Eng., 62, 47–60.
• 24. Ballesteros-Pérez, P and Skitmore, M and Pellicer, E and González-Cruz, MC 2015. Scoring Rules and Abnormally Low Bids Criteria in Construction Tenders: A Taxonomic Review. Constr. Manag. Econ. 33, 259–278.
• 25. Marovi´c, I and Boškovi´c, D and Gudac, I 2012. Process Approach in Modelling Croatian Construction Contract Management Practice | Procesni Pristup Pri Modeliranju Upravljanja Hrvatske Graðevinske Ugovorne Prakse. Int. J. Eng. Model. 25, 19–26.
• 26. Lundberg, S and Bergman, M 2013. Tender Evaluation and Award Methodologies in Public Procurement. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 19, 2, 73-83.
• 27. Pacini, R 2012. Pro-collusion Features of Commonly Used Scoring Rules in Public Procurement, 5th International Public Procurement Conference.
• 28. Chen, TH 2008. An Economic Approach to Public Procurement, Journal of Public Procurement, 8, 3, 407-430. ISSN 1535-0118.
• 29. Love, PED, Skitmore, M and Earl, G. 1998. Selecting a suitable procurement method for a building project. Construction Management and Economics, 16(2), 221–233.
• 30. Lenderink, B, Boes, J, Halman, J I, Voordijk, H and Dorée, AG 2022. The development of a typology and guideline for selecting innovation-encouraging procurement strategies in civil engineering. Innovation. The European Journal of Social Science Research, 1–35.
• 31. Zhao, N and Ying, F and Tookey, J. 2021. Selection Criteria for Procurement System: A Systematic Literature Review. In: Ye, G., Yuan, H., Zuo, J. (eds) Proceedings of the 24th International Symposium on Advancement of Construction Management and Real Estate. CRIOCM 2019. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-8892-1_150.
• 32. Jurčík, R 2015. Evaluation of Public Tender According to the New Procurement Directives. In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference Theoretical and Practical Aspects of Public Finance, Prague University of Economics, 100-106. ISBN 978-80-245-2094-0.
• 33. Jurčík, R 2005. New Trends in the Evaluation of Public Contracts. The Lowest Tender Price or Economic Advantageousness of the Tender? In Spalkova, D and Furova, L eds. Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Modern and Current Trends in the Public Sector Research. Brno: Masaryk University. 125-133. ISBN 978-80-210-7532-0.
• 34. Ochrana, F 2004. Public Procurement. Prague. Ekopress. 173. ISBN 8086119798.
• 35. Pihlajamaa, M and Merisalo, M 2021. Organizing innovation contests for public procurement of innovation – a case study of smart city hackathons in Tampere, Finland. European Planning Studies 29, 1906-1924.
• 36. Mazzucato, M and Ryan-Collins, J 2022. Putting value creation back into “public value”: from market-fixing to market-shaping. Journal of Economic Policy Reform 25, 345-360.
• 37. Cutcher, L, Ormiston, J and Gardner, C 2020.‘Double-taxing’ Indigenous business: exploring the effects of political discourse on the transfer of public procurement policy. Public Management Review 22, 1398-1422.
• 38. Oishee, K, James, AD, and Rigby, J 2020. Public procurement and innovation: a systematic literature review, Science and Public Policy 47, 490–502.
• 39. Gelderman, CJ, Janjaap,S and Vluggen, R 2017. Development of sustainability in public sector procurement. Public Money & Management 37, 435-442.
• 40. Rolfstam, M 2015. Public procurement of innovation for a better world: a consolidation or a new beginning? Innovation, The European Journal of Social Science Research 28, 211-219.