Abstract
Joint public procurement is an opportunity that first appeared with the new European Public Procurement Directives. The significance of joint public procurement should not be exaggerated, but it is important to explore its advantages, its possible applications and its occasional disadvantages. Joint public procurement can not be managed independently from the decisions or the internal organisational matters of the contracting authorities or entities. There are plenty of potential research questions that widen the scope of understanding of the joint procurement framework system. A better understanding of everyday practice could make it clear that joint implementation of projects does not directly yield cheaper and more efficient public procurement.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Eriksson et al. [2], 197.
Blair et al. [1], 269.
Blair et al. [1], 280.
Kim et al. [11], 46.
E.g., Howorth [9].
Ranjay G., Sytch M. [18], 32.
Wang et al. [21], 56.
Guidelines on the applicability of Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to horizontal cooperation agreements [7].
Normann et al. [15].
Havighurst C.C. [8].
LEAP Toolkit [13], 1.
LEAP Toolkit [13], 1–2.
Kamann et al. [10], 1.
Grudinschi et al. [6], 1.
We focus on Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on Public Procurement and Repealing Directive 2004/18/EU.
The 2014/25/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on procurement by entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors and repealing Directive 2004/17/EU’s content concerning joint procurement is equal with Directive 2014/24/EU.
Directive 2014/23/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on the award of concession contracts contains part of the same Preamble text as that in Directive 2014/24/EU.
Public Procurement in Europe—Cost and effectiveness [17].
Joint purchasers use frameworks much more than the average other user. It is particularly common in the Nordics, Slovakia and the Netherlands. Some countries like Portugal and the Czech Republic have a high degree of covariation—but have very little use of frameworks overall.
In practice, joint purchasers in Austria, Sweden, Denmark, Ireland and the Czech Republic use only framework agreements. Their share reaches 90 percent. This also shifts the overall average upwards—and the overall share in value is about 50 percent.
Joint purchasing is also frequent in the Nordic countries, the United Kingdom, Latvia and Greece. It is rarely done in Romania, Portugal and Bulgaria. There is much variation in terms of values involved. Particularly high values are found in the United Kingdom, Denmark and Austria, where joint purchasing accounts for a third of the value involved in all procurement under the directives.
The data entry forms in TED for purchases under the utilities directive do not register in this category and as such, we cannot determine the extent of the use of joint purchasing under the utilities directive.
Public Procurement in Europe—Cost and Effectiveness [17] p. 22.
Public Procurement in Europe—Cost and Effectiveness [17] p. 44.
Public Procurement in Europe—Cost and Effectiveness [17] p. 29.
These case studies concern joint procurement of recycled paper in Greece, in Portugal and in Spain, of environmentally friendly cleaning products in the United Kingdom, of TFT monitors in the United Kingdom, of biodiesel in Sweden, green electricity in The Netherlands.
References
Blair, R., Janousek, C.L.: Collaborative mechanisms in interlocal cooperation: a longitudinal examination. State Local Gov. Rev. 45(4), 268–282 (2013)
Eriksson, P.E., Westerberg, M.: Effects of cooperative procurement procedures on construction project performance: a conceptual framework. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 29, 197–208 (2011)
Erridge, A.: Public procurement. Public Policy Adm. 15(4), 14–24 (2000)
Essig, M.: Purchasing consortia as symbiotic relationships: developing the concept of “consortium sourcing”. Eur. J. Purch. Supply Manag. 6(1), 13–22 (2000)
GPP Toolkit: Green Public Procuremen Toolkit, http://ec.europa.eu/environment/gpp/pdf/toolkit/module1_factsheet_joint_procurement.pdf
Grudinschi, D., Sintonen, S., Hallikas, J.: Relationship risk perception and determinants of the collaboration fluency of buyer–supplier relationships in public service procurement. J. Purch. Supply Manag. 20(2), 82–91 (2014)
Guidelines on the applicability of Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to horizontal cooperation agreements [Official Journal C 11 of [14.1.2011]. http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/competition/firms/l26062_en.htm
Havighurst, C.: Antitrust issues in the joint purchasing of health care. Utah Law Rev., 409 (1995)
Howorth, J.: ESDP and NATO: wedlock of deadlock? Cooperation and conflict. J. Nord. Int. Stud. Assoc. 38(3), 235–254 (2003)
Kamann, D.J., van der Vaart, T., de Vries, J.: Joint purchasing: theory and practice. In: International IPSERA Conference (2004)
Kim, K.K., Umanath, N.S., Kim, J.Y., Ahrens, F., Kim, B.: Knowledge complementarity and knowledge exchange in supply channel relationships. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 32, 35–49 (2012)
Kiss, J., Vörösmarty, G.: Involving purchasing in innovation management. Working Paper (2014). http://edok.lib.uni-corvinus.hu/444/1/TM88_Kiss_Vorosmarty.pdf
LEAP Toolkit—Local Authority Environmental Management and Procurement Taken from Local Authority Procurement: A research report, commissioned by the United Kingdom Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, http://www.leap-gpp-toolkit.org/index.php?id=43
Mudambi, R., Schründer, C.P., Mongar, A.: How co-operative is co-operative purchasing in smaller firms? Evidence from United Kingdom engineering SMEs. Long Range Plan. 37(1), 85–102 (2004)
Norman, H., Rösch, J., Schultz, L.M.: Do buyer groups facilitate collusion? J. Econ. Behav. Organ. (2014)
O’Brien, J.: Joint utility purchasing: a case study lane electric cooperative. Manag. Q. 36(1), 21 (1995)
Public Procurement in Europe—Cost and Effectiveness. A study on procurement regulation. Prepared for the European Commission by PWC-Ecorys, http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/publicprocurement/docs/modernising_rules/cost-effectiveness_en.pdf, March 2011
Ranjay, G., Sytch, M.: Dependence asymmetry and joint dependence in interorganizational relationships: effects of embeddedness on a manufacturer’s performance in procurement relationships. Adm. Sci. Q. 52(1), 32–69 (2007)
Rolfstam, M.: Good rules of bad rules in public prourement of innovation: but is it really the (right) question? Halduskultuur—Adm. Cult. 13(2), 109–129 (2012)
Taebok, K., Hong, Y., Chang, S.J.: Joint economic procurement—production–delivery policy for multiple items in a single-manufacturer, multiple-retailer system. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 103(1), 199–208 (2006)
Wang, X., Zhong, W., Mei, S.: An analysis on the benefits of joint procurement in e-commerce environment. Chin. J. Manag. Sci. 4(13), 56–62 (2005)
Wang, X., Zhong, W., Mei, S.: Analysis of joint procurement coordination mechanism through quantity discounts [J]. J. Southeast Univ. Nat. Sci. 1, 033 (2006)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Tátrai, T. Joint public procurement. ERA Forum 16, 7–24 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12027-015-0374-3
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12027-015-0374-3