Public Procurement Resilience Following Global Supply-Chain Disruption

Abstract

Background: Differences in how institutions address public procurement raise important questions about accountability, administrative consistency, and effective implementation.

Objective: The research compared approaches to public procurement and explored which governance features were most closely associated with outcomes involving supply chains.

Methods: Data consisted of 4,951 administrative, contractual, case-level, or transaction records across 12 public bodies. Measures covered process timing, procedural characteristics, institutional features, and outcomes; fixed-effects, multivariable, or time-to-event techniques were used where appropriate.

Results: Institutions did not perform uniformly on public procurement. Those with clearer procedures and better coordination recorded roughly 8% stronger performance on the primary outcome; capacity differences explained an estimated 40% of variation across units. Weak oversight and incomplete information-sharing characterized lower-performing settings.

Conclusion: These findings place institutional capacity at the centre of effective governance relating to public procurement. Accordingly, contracting integrity depends on operational transparency and administrative capacity as much as on the wording of procurement rules.

Study design: procurement-record panel study.

Publication history: Originally published in print on 15 June 2022, Volume 2, Article 6. Online abstract record added on 16 September 2026. Full-text PDF will be added when the digital galley is ready.