State and local procurement preferences: A survey

Abstract

The use of public procurement as a vehicle for implementing various socioeconomic preference policies has a long history. This article reviews the current state of affairs of procurement preference programs with regard to U.S. state and local governments and analyzes their impact on both the recipients and on public procurement process. Opportunities for further research are noted, and the authors conclude that the ability to navigate the difficult waters of socioeconomic preferences should be a core competency of state and local public procurement officials.

Antecedents of supplier selection decisions in the public sector in Nigeria

“…Government buying policies serve as guiding frameworks to align decision-making processes with intended objectives. These objectives could range from mitigation of corrupt practices (Nijboer et al, 2017;Lindskog, Brege, & Brehmer, 2010), to encouraging sustainable procurement practices and innovations (Nijboer, Senden, & Telgen, 2017;Akenroye, 2013;Rao & Holt, 2005), to protecting local entrepreneurial production capacity (Bremmer & Walker, 2011;Qiao et al, 2009).…”

Local preferencing for local suppliers: examining the use of locality in public procurement

“…As a result of the need for capacity building, support mechanisms in the form of policies might warrant consideration (Loader, 2005 andSsennoga, 2006;Prier et al, 2008;Qiao et al, 2009;Preuss and Walker, 2011). These policies are designed to help small and medium enterprises (SMEs) and small and historically underutilized businesses (SHUBs).…”

“…Ssennoga (2006) describes the use of these laws as either being tie-breakers, overall percentage goals or closeness policies in which local suppliers win if they are within a given percentage of the best non-local supplier. Qiao et al (2009) point out that interstate commerce is often overlooked when these challenges are made to these laws. Regardless of the perceptions of legality, these preferences are used.…”

“…Preference programmes typically aim to benefit local industrial development, meet social goals and increase the competitiveness of local suppliers (Ssennoga, 2006;Qiao et al, 2009). Questions about the legality of these programmes, especially geographic preference laws, have arisen (Short, 1992).…”

“…Procurement as an effective tool for economic development (Walker and Phillips, 2009;Nijaki and Worrel, 2012) is not without concern. To the point of procurement officials being useful in the process (Wilson, 1995), questions of their competence in procurement policies (Qiao et al, 2009) and supplier selection (Nijaki, 2013) must be understood.…”