This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Reading the Evropaïki Dynamiki (ESP-ISEP) Judgment, one cannot but wonder if EU public procurement rules do not still impose an excessive degree of transparency in the debriefing of disappointed bidders. Therefore, rules on disclosure of information should take into account their potentially restrictive or distortive effects on competition.
Concerns were raised over suspicious tendering practices such as short bidding periods, overly rigid specifications, and potential collusion. Open data provides the foundation for these other elements to thrive, enabling citizens, journalists, and authorities to act as watchdogs and hold those in power accountable.
Procurement is thus seen as a mechanism of ‘regulation by contract’ whereby the public buyer can impose requirements seeking to achieve broad goals of digital regulation, such as transparency, trustworthiness, or explainability, or to operationalise more general ‘AI ethics’ frameworks.
The 2020 data strategy stressed that Public procurement data are essential to improve transparency and accountability of public spending, fighting corruption and improving spending quality. However, data from only 20% of all call for tenders as submitted by public buyers is available and searchable for analysis in one place [ie TED].
For instance, FAR includes a provision at 52.203-2, Certificate of Independent Price Determination, which ensures independent bids and prevents collusive pricing in government contracting. In addition, the government accountability office plays a crucial role in monitoring and evaluating the performance of these agencies.
The latter has made it possible to process large amounts of data on economic transactions, which can now be used to provide more transparency about the prices of goods and services, and even a more precise measurement of economic activity. Boosting market transparency.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 5,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content