Main Article Content
Research background: The purpose of the public procurement system in the market economy should be to ensure that the public sector entities conduct purchases which are optimal from the economic point of view, as well as to prevent favoring or discrimination of entities participating in public tenders. The Public Procurement Act mentions fair competition as one of the fundamental principles. Both contractors and contracting entities are subject to this principle. In practice, however, it is very often violated in connection with a number of phenomena resulting from imperfections of the aforementioned system.
Purpose of the article: The purpose of this article is to identify the most important solutions to support the development of competition in the economy through the public procurement system, as well as to examine the obstacles and risks carried by the system itself. Another purpose is to present further action proposals based on research — actions affecting the development of competition and at the same time improving the efficiency of tenders.
Methods: The article is based on the analysis of literature and on a questionnaire. The survey was conducted electronically (CAWI). The questionnaire was sent to 300 entities required to apply the provisions of the Public Procurement Law throughout the country. Another method involved a direct route (PAPI) and 155 entities participating in public tenders as contractors. Purposeful sampling was implemented to ensure reliable and expert replies. The study was carried out in the first half of 2016.
Findings and Value added: The results indicate the most important solutions supporting the development of competition. They include the following: facilitating access to information about orders, improving the efficiency of state authorities in detecting collusive tendering, reducing the possibility of using the potential of third parties, and increasing the availability of data on tender results. The solutions presented in this article are evolutionary rather than revolutionary, and point primarily to the ability to streamline existing procedures and regulations and not to replace them with new ones. They should also help to improve the functioning of public procurement system in Poland, which is of great importance for the development of competition in domestic economy.
Bologna, J. (2015). Corruption, product market competition, and institutional quality: empirical evidence from the U.S. states. Economic Inquiry, 55(1). doi: 10.1111/ecin.12378.
Dimitri, N. (2012). Best value for money in procurement. Maastricht School of Management, Working Paper, 2012/02.
Gaudin, G., & Mantzari, D. (2016). Margin squeeze: an above-cost predatory pricing approach. Journal of Competition Law & Economics, 12(1). doi: 10.1093/joclec/nhv042.
Heimler, A. (2012). Cartels in public procurement. Journal of Competition Law&Economics, 8(4). doi: 10.1093/joclec/nhs028.
Hayek, F. A. (2002). Competition as a discovery procedure. Quartely Journal of Austrian Economics, 5(3).
Martin, S, Hartley, K, & Cox, A. (1999). Public procurement directives in the European Union: a study of local authority purchasing. Public Administration, 77(2). doi: 10.1111/1467-9299.00159.
Trionfetti, F. (2000). Discriminatory public procurement and international trade. World Economy, 23(1). doi: 10.1111/1467-9701.00262.