有效的公共采购与竞争的作用

IF 0.5 Q4 ECONOMICS
V. Melnikov
{"title":"有效的公共采购与竞争的作用","authors":"V. Melnikov","doi":"10.17835/2076-6297.2022.14.3.119-131","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The authors explain why accurate conclusions on public procurement efficiency are impossible in light of the current formal rules of the public contractual system. In regulatory acts, efficiency is replaced with saving and effectiveness - concepts that have different meaning and do not focus on the scale of transaction costs associated with contract conclusion and execution. Since assessing public procurement efficiency has no economic meaning outside the interests of particular actors, achieving the indicators specified in the Budget Code of the Russian Federation is not indicative of the desirable vector of development and result interpretation. In this case, control over efficient satisfaction of public needs is replaced with attaining the metrics (pseudo-objectives) and procedural compliance, which increases the regulator' influence. Multiple control parameters lead to adverse selection of the stuff of customer's contractual services and affect the quality of procured goods. Quasi- market competition based on directive buyer- seller interaction gives the appearance of fair transactions but does not stimulate efficiency or saving of public financial resources against transaction costs. Fair procedures designed to protect competitors from each other do not allow to build up trust-based interactions within the contractual system and engage supplier's reputation as well as establish long-term economic relations. To further develop the contractual system in Russia, would be useful to have a legal definition of public procurement efficiency and give the criteria for achieving it or rejecting procedural regulation.","PeriodicalId":43842,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Institutional Studies","volume":"66 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficient Public Procurement and The Role of Competition\",\"authors\":\"V. Melnikov\",\"doi\":\"10.17835/2076-6297.2022.14.3.119-131\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The authors explain why accurate conclusions on public procurement efficiency are impossible in light of the current formal rules of the public contractual system. In regulatory acts, efficiency is replaced with saving and effectiveness - concepts that have different meaning and do not focus on the scale of transaction costs associated with contract conclusion and execution. Since assessing public procurement efficiency has no economic meaning outside the interests of particular actors, achieving the indicators specified in the Budget Code of the Russian Federation is not indicative of the desirable vector of development and result interpretation. In this case, control over efficient satisfaction of public needs is replaced with attaining the metrics (pseudo-objectives) and procedural compliance, which increases the regulator' influence. Multiple control parameters lead to adverse selection of the stuff of customer's contractual services and affect the quality of procured goods. Quasi- market competition based on directive buyer- seller interaction gives the appearance of fair transactions but does not stimulate efficiency or saving of public financial resources against transaction costs. Fair procedures designed to protect competitors from each other do not allow to build up trust-based interactions within the contractual system and engage supplier's reputation as well as establish long-term economic relations. To further develop the contractual system in Russia, would be useful to have a legal definition of public procurement efficiency and give the criteria for achieving it or rejecting procedural regulation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43842,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Institutional Studies\",\"volume\":\"66 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Institutional Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17835/2076-6297.2022.14.3.119-131\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Institutional Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17835/2076-6297.2022.14.3.119-131","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

作者解释了为什么在现行公共合同制度的正式规则下,不可能得出关于公共采购效率的准确结论。在监管行为中,效率被节约和有效性所取代,这两个概念的含义不同,并不关注与合同订立和执行有关的交易成本的规模。由于评估公共采购效率在特定行为者的利益之外没有任何经济意义,实现《俄罗斯联邦预算法》中规定的指标并不能表明理想的发展方向和结果解释。在这种情况下,对有效满足公众需求的控制被实现指标(伪目标)和程序合规所取代,这增加了监管者的影响力。多种控制参数导致客户合同服务对象的逆向选择,影响采购产品的质量。建立在买卖双方直接互动基础上的准市场竞争提供了公平交易的表象,但并不能提高效率或节约公共财政资源以对抗交易成本。旨在相互保护竞争对手的公平程序不允许在合同体系内建立基于信任的互动,也不允许参与供应商的声誉以及建立长期的经济关系。为了进一步发展俄罗斯的合同制度,最好对公共采购效率作出法律定义,并提出实现或拒绝程序管制的标准。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Efficient Public Procurement and The Role of Competition
The authors explain why accurate conclusions on public procurement efficiency are impossible in light of the current formal rules of the public contractual system. In regulatory acts, efficiency is replaced with saving and effectiveness - concepts that have different meaning and do not focus on the scale of transaction costs associated with contract conclusion and execution. Since assessing public procurement efficiency has no economic meaning outside the interests of particular actors, achieving the indicators specified in the Budget Code of the Russian Federation is not indicative of the desirable vector of development and result interpretation. In this case, control over efficient satisfaction of public needs is replaced with attaining the metrics (pseudo-objectives) and procedural compliance, which increases the regulator' influence. Multiple control parameters lead to adverse selection of the stuff of customer's contractual services and affect the quality of procured goods. Quasi- market competition based on directive buyer- seller interaction gives the appearance of fair transactions but does not stimulate efficiency or saving of public financial resources against transaction costs. Fair procedures designed to protect competitors from each other do not allow to build up trust-based interactions within the contractual system and engage supplier's reputation as well as establish long-term economic relations. To further develop the contractual system in Russia, would be useful to have a legal definition of public procurement efficiency and give the criteria for achieving it or rejecting procedural regulation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
33.30%
发文量
24
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信