IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/mup/actaun/actaun_2015063062057.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Impact of the Choice of Evaluation Criteria and the Type of Tender on the Awarding Public Contracts (in the Case of Construction Contracts at the Local Level in the Czech Republic)

Author

Listed:
  • František Ochrana

    (Center for Social and Economic Strategy, Faculty of Social Sciences Charles University in Prague, Ovocný trh 3-5, 116 36 Praha 1, Czech Republic)

  • Kristýna Hrnčířová

    (Center for Social and Economic Strategy, Faculty of Social Sciences Charles University in Prague, Ovocný trh 3-5, 116 36 Praha 1, Czech Republic)

  • Michal Plaček

    (Center for Social and Economic Strategy, Faculty of Social Sciences Charles University in Prague, Ovocný trh 3-5, 116 36 Praha 1, Czech Republic)

  • Milan Půček

    (Center for Social and Economic Strategy, Faculty of Social Sciences Charles University in Prague, Ovocný trh 3-5, 116 36 Praha 1, Czech Republic)

Abstract

Public procurement may be examined from different perspectives. Using the Czech Republic as an example, this study is devoted to examining the impact of decisions made by the contracting authority regarding a public tender on the tender process itself and on the outcomes of the tender. The contracting authority addresses a number of decision-making issues regarding public procurements. For example, it needs to decide between two types of criteria (choosing between a single-criterion evaluation or rather opting for several evaluation criteria). At the same time, the authority is free to choose among different types of award procedures while adhering to certain restrictions imposed by the Act on Public Contracts. Using a sample of 1,027 construction work contracts awarded in the Czech Republic, the study examines, in more detail, the impacts of individual choices made by the contracting authority (namely the type of evaluation criteria chosen and the type of procedure for awarding contracts) on the estimated and final price of public contracts. Recommendations on how to streamline the process of public procurement can be drawn from conclusions from the empirical analysis.

Suggested Citation

  • František Ochrana & Kristýna Hrnčířová & Michal Plaček & Milan Půček, 2015. "The Impact of the Choice of Evaluation Criteria and the Type of Tender on the Awarding Public Contracts (in the Case of Construction Contracts at the Local Level in the Czech Republic)," Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, Mendel University Press, vol. 63(6), pages 2057-2065.
    • Handle: RePEc:mup:actaun:actaun_2015063062057
    DOI: 10.11118/actaun201563062057
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://acta.mendelu.cz/doi/10.11118/actaun201563062057.html
    Download Restriction: free of charge
    File URL: http://acta.mendelu.cz/doi/10.11118/actaun201563062057.pdf
    Download Restriction: free of charge
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.11118/actaun201563062057?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Miller, William L., 2006. "Corruption and corruptibility," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 371-380, February.
    2. Patrick Bolton & Mathias Dewatripont, 2005. "Contract Theory," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262025760, December.
    3. Jana Soukopová & Ivan Malý, 2013. "Competitive environment in waste management and its impact on municipal expenditures," Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, Mendel University Press, vol. 61(4), pages 1113-1119.
    4. Juraj Nemec & Beata Merickova & Frantisek Ochrana, 2008. "Introducing benchmarking in the Czech Republic and Slovakia," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(5), pages 673-684, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Arnošt Veselý & František Ochrana & Stanislav Klazar, 2015. "An Analysis of Expenses for the Outsourcing of Policy Advice on the Level of the Ministries of the Czech Republic," Prague Economic Papers, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2015(5), pages 581-601.
    2. Giat, Yahel & Subramanian, Ajay, 2013. "Dynamic contracting under imperfect public information and asymmetric beliefs," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 37(12), pages 2833-2861.
    3. Gordon L Clark & Ashby H B Monk, 2014. "The Geography of Investment Management Contracts: The UK, Europe, and the Global Financial Services Industry," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 46(3), pages 531-549, March.
    4. Nieken, Petra & Schmitz, Patrick W., 2012. "Repeated moral hazard and contracts with memory: A laboratory experiment," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 75(2), pages 1000-1008.
    5. Alvaro Forteza & Cecilia Noboa, 2014. "Discretion Rather than Simple Rules: the Case of Social Protection," Documentos de Trabajo (working papers) 0814, Department of Economics - dECON.
    6. Pierpaolo Battigalli, 2006. "Rationalization In Signaling Games: Theory And Applications," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 8(01), pages 67-93.
    7. Schubert, Torben, 2009. "Empirical observations on New Public Management to increase efficiency in public research--Boon or bane?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 1225-1234, October.
    8. Georgy Egorov & Konstantin Sonin, 2011. "Dictators And Their Viziers: Endogenizing The Loyalty–Competence Trade‐Off," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 9(5), pages 903-930, October.
    9. Rosta, Miklós, 2013. "New Public Management: opportunity for the Centre, thread for the Periphery," MPRA Paper 68474, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Johannes Hörner & Larry Samuelson, 2013. "Incentives for experimenting agents," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 44(4), pages 632-663, December.
    11. Joaquín Gómez Miñambres & Mark Schneider, 2019. "Carrots and Sticks: Optimal Contracting with Skewness Preference and Ambiguity Aversion," Working Papers 19-02, Chapman University, Economic Science Institute.
    12. Berger, Allen N. & Kick, Thomas & Schaeck, Klaus, 2014. "Executive board composition and bank risk taking," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 48-65.
    13. Ramalingam, Abhijit, 2009. ""Endogenous" Relative Concerns: The Impact of Workers' Characteristics on Status and Pro ts in the Firm," MPRA Paper 18759, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Hélène Cadre & David Mercier, 2012. "Is energy storage an economic opportunity for the eco-neighborhood?," Netnomics, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 191-216, October.
    15. Swarbrick, Jonathan, 2023. "Lending standards, productivity, and credit crunches," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 27(2), pages 456-481, March.
    16. Nicholas Bloom & Raffaella Sadun, 2012. "The Organization of Firms Across Countries," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 127(4), pages 1663-1705.
    17. Bilancini, Ennio & Boncinelli, Leonardo, 2016. "Dynamic adverse selection and the supply size," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 233-242.
    18. Dongsoo Shin & Roland Strausz, 2014. "Delegation and dynamic incentives," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 45(3), pages 495-520, September.
    19. Goel, Rajeev K. & Nelson, Michael A., 2007. "Are corrupt acts contagious?: Evidence from the United States," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 839-850.
    20. Jansson, Kjell & Pyddoke, Roger, 2010. "Quality incentives and quality outcomes in procured public transport - Case study Stockholm," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 11-18.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:mup:actaun:actaun_2015063062057. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Ivo Andrle (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://mendelu.cz/en/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.