Top Banner
Evaluation of public procurement Directives High Level Group of Independent Stakeholders on Administrative Burdens Thursday 14 July 2011
19

Evaluation of public procurement Directives High Level Group of Independent Stakeholders on Administrative Burdens Thursday 14 July 2011.

Mar 27, 2015

Download

Documents

Jordan Lamb
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: Evaluation of public procurement Directives High Level Group of Independent Stakeholders on Administrative Burdens Thursday 14 July 2011.

Evaluation of public procurement Directives

High Level Group of Independent Stakeholders on Administrative Burdens

Thursday 14 July 2011

Page 2: Evaluation of public procurement Directives High Level Group of Independent Stakeholders on Administrative Burdens Thursday 14 July 2011.

Total public expenditure

Eurostat and Commission estimates As % EU GDP (2008)

Published in OJEU 3,14

Below threshold 2,10

Health 4,12Social

Protection 1,18

Education 0,81

Fuel for energy 2,46

Defence 0,59

Other 2,30

VAT on OJEU published

0,61

Page 3: Evaluation of public procurement Directives High Level Group of Independent Stakeholders on Administrative Burdens Thursday 14 July 2011.

Use of procedures

Pwc, London Economics, Ecorys from OJEU data 2006-2010

73%

9%

8%

7%0%

52%

23%

14%

5%4%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Number Value

Competitive dialogue

Accelerated procedures

Negotiated withoutpublication

Negotiated

Restricted

Open

Page 4: Evaluation of public procurement Directives High Level Group of Independent Stakeholders on Administrative Burdens Thursday 14 July 2011.

SME access and success

By Number of contracts

18

18

18

18

22

21

24

20

19

39

42

39

4022 20

20

2006

2007

2008

Total

Micro Small Medium Large

By value of contracts

6

5

6

6

9

11

13

16

15

69

69

62

6611 17

19

2006

2007

2008

Total

Micro Small Medium Large

GHK

Page 5: Evaluation of public procurement Directives High Level Group of Independent Stakeholders on Administrative Burdens Thursday 14 July 2011.

Cross border procurement

Ramboll as % of total (above threshold) procurement

13,9

11,4

3,6

1,4

13,712,4

11,211,7

3,23,7

1,81,60

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

2007 2008 2009

% total indirect cross-borderthrough affiliates(value)

indirect cross-borderthrough affiliates(number ofcontracts)

direct cross-border(value)

direct cross-border(number ofcontracts)

Page 6: Evaluation of public procurement Directives High Level Group of Independent Stakeholders on Administrative Burdens Thursday 14 July 2011.

Cross border participation

Ramboll

How often did your company participate in public procurement tenders (domestically and abroad) in the last three years?

76,1

10,9

6

7

0

6,4

5,3

4,9

11,1

72,3

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

more than 20 times

10 to 20

5 to 10

1 to 5

Never

% of respondents

Participation abroad N=1011

Participation overall (domestically and abroad) N=1026

Page 7: Evaluation of public procurement Directives High Level Group of Independent Stakeholders on Administrative Burdens Thursday 14 July 2011.

Reasons for not bidding cross border

Reasons for not bidding cross-border

32,5

34,2

34,6

36,6

47,6

48,6

50,3

61,3

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Exchange rate risk

Administrative requirements

More resources to tender

Higher costs

Legal barriers

Too much local competition

Language barriers

No experience doing business abroad

Ramboll

Page 8: Evaluation of public procurement Directives High Level Group of Independent Stakeholders on Administrative Burdens Thursday 14 July 2011.

Total cost of procedures

Average cost per procedure €28 000

€22 500 - cost of average 5 – 6 bids € 5 500 contracting authority costs

Total Costs €5.3 billion Less than 1.3% of total contract value

Page 9: Evaluation of public procurement Directives High Level Group of Independent Stakeholders on Administrative Burdens Thursday 14 July 2011.

Average person days for procedure

Pwc, London Economics, Ecorys from OJEU data 2006-2010

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Luxe

mbo

urg

Malt

a

Czech

Rep

.

Belgium

Franc

e

Icela

nd

Irelan

d

Finlan

d

Germ

any

Poland

Austri

a

Estonia

Norway

Slovenia

Nether

lands

Sweden

EEA-30

Hungar

y

Spain

Denmar

kUK

Latvi

a

Lithu

ania

Romania

Portu

gal

Slovak R

ep.

Greec

eIta

ly

Cypru

s

Bulgar

ia

Authorities Firms

Page 10: Evaluation of public procurement Directives High Level Group of Independent Stakeholders on Administrative Burdens Thursday 14 July 2011.

Person-days required

Best performer

Worst performer

Difference

Authorities 11 68 57

Firm 10 43 33

Authorities and winning firm combined

22 93 71

PwC, London Economics, Ecorys

Page 11: Evaluation of public procurement Directives High Level Group of Independent Stakeholders on Administrative Burdens Thursday 14 July 2011.

Savings

Econometric model Save 1% on the final contract value if contract

notice advertised further 3 % if open procedure

or 1.1 % if restricted procedure Total 2.1 - 4 per cent compared with the initial

estimate.

PwC, London Economics, Ecorys

Page 12: Evaluation of public procurement Directives High Level Group of Independent Stakeholders on Administrative Burdens Thursday 14 July 2011.

N Cumulative

€Cumulative

80%

50%

20%

0

400

800

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000Value of purchase ('000)

Frequency of contract values

PwC, London Economics, Ecorys

Page 13: Evaluation of public procurement Directives High Level Group of Independent Stakeholders on Administrative Burdens Thursday 14 July 2011.

Evaluation: main findings

Effectiveness Relevance Efficiency Consistency with other policies EU added value

Page 14: Evaluation of public procurement Directives High Level Group of Independent Stakeholders on Administrative Burdens Thursday 14 July 2011.

Effectiveness

Transparency Competition Savings Cross border Differences in implementation

Page 15: Evaluation of public procurement Directives High Level Group of Independent Stakeholders on Administrative Burdens Thursday 14 July 2011.

Relevance

Value for money CPB’s and Frameworks Equal treatment Non discrimination

Page 16: Evaluation of public procurement Directives High Level Group of Independent Stakeholders on Administrative Burdens Thursday 14 July 2011.

Efficiency

Positive cost benefit analysis Compliance costs Difference across MS Unintended consequences

Page 17: Evaluation of public procurement Directives High Level Group of Independent Stakeholders on Administrative Burdens Thursday 14 July 2011.

Consistency with other Policies

Green public procurement Socially responsible Innovation Lack of monitoring Different requirements, standards, labels…

Page 18: Evaluation of public procurement Directives High Level Group of Independent Stakeholders on Administrative Burdens Thursday 14 July 2011.

EU Added Value

Single Market Coordination Still large differences in implementation

Page 19: Evaluation of public procurement Directives High Level Group of Independent Stakeholders on Administrative Burdens Thursday 14 July 2011.

Evaluation: overall conclusion

Savings outweigh costs Scope for improving balance of costs and

benefits particularly for small contracts Potential for more cross border procurement