Bid protests — vendors’ challenges to contracting officials’ errors, either before or after award — have been an established part of federal procurement for at least a century. Protests (sometimes called “challenges” or “remedies proceedings” abroad) are a recognized bulwark against corruption in the United States, and have become a standard part of procurement systems around the world, often at the urging of the United States. But new proposals being considered for U.S. government procurement in practice could dramatically limit bid protests, in the name of streamlining the procurement process. This drastic change to U.S. procurement practices could violate international agreements under which the United States has agreed to maintain an effective bid protest system, and could raise new risks of corruption in procurement.
Russia’s Special Procurement Investment Contracts (SPIC).
From the Public Procurement Institute (Moscow, www.roszakupki.com):
SPIC is an agreement between investor and the Russian Federation and/or region of the Russian Federation under which investor commits to invest certain amount of money in creation, development or modernization of production facilities at the territory of Russia while the government guarantees freezing of tax burden and stability of normative requirements to products for the duration of an investment project and is obliged to apply stimulating measures to the investor, including tax benefits. And procurement idea is that starting from September 1, 2016 SPIC investors are entitled to claim the right to sell up to 30 % of produced merchandise under public procurement procedure on a non-competitive basis.
On October 5, 2016, Benedetta Audia (UNOPS) is to present training on UN procurement, presentation-un-procurement-gw-benedetta-audia-oct-5, at George Washington University Law School, 2000 H Street NW, Room L402. Admission is free.
The Public Procurement Institute, Moscow, kindly provided these slides, procurement-in-russia, which were delivered at a briefing at George Washington University Law School on September 21, 2016. Russia may join the WTO Government Procurement Agreement, as Jean Grier discussed in a recent blog posting, and so this sharing of information on the Russian procurement system is both timely and welcome.
An Analysis of American Governance through the U. S. Federal Government’s Green Procurement System
ZHAO Yong, University of International Relations, Beijing, email: yongjao@hotmail.com
(Text is in Mandarin, and available from the author)
[Abstract]
The formation of the green procurement system of the U. S. Federal Government is complex, the influence factors being numerous and the contents being comprehensive. This dissertation aims to provide a reference for the improvement of China’s government procurement system through exploring the cause, contents, features and evolution of the American green procurement system. Furthermore, by in-depth studying the American green procurement system as a breakthrough point so as to analyse the social problem conduction mechanism, interest distribution mechanism and the power allocation mechanism of the U. S. Federal Government, this dissertation tried to discover the characteristics and means of the American governance, promote transforming the mode of China’s Governance and enhance Chinese Governments’ ability of governance and solving the practical problems of the current Chinese society.
After the World War II, the rapid development of American economy aggravated the degree of environment deterioration. An endless stream of environmental incidents and the enhancement of environmental awareness have promoted the awakening of public environmental interests. With the help of environmental organizations and research institutions, the public environmental interests can be effectively expressed, which prompted the politicians to address environmental issues into the political agenda. Then the environmental policies were shaped after the multi-player game. From 1960’s, the importance of environmental policy in the United States has been rising, with the changing of its connotation and the value orientation. In the same period, the Federal Government’s procurement policy stepped into the policy-stage after the liberalization-stage and the standardization-stage. The the overlap of the dense introduction stage of environmental policies and the policy-period of government procurement formed the basis for establishing green procurement laws and actions.
In the process of the formation of the environmental legislation system in America, the macro path is the self-generation and the micro path is bargaining. Citizens, environmental protection organizations, interest groups, administrative agencies, the sub-committees of the Congress and other parties in the process of the legislation played different roles. The development of the governance system is embodied in the progressive development path, during which the interests’ equilibrium of the participating parties in the evolution has been reached. Through environmental legislation, the federal government expanded its powers. In the aspect of government procurement, the laws were becoming more and more plentiful. The objectives were increasingly rich. The maturity of the procurement system makes it possible to combine the the social-economic laws and the procurement laws.
Due to the vast scale of government procurement, the multiplier effect and the little political resistance, the executive branch of the Federal Government launched a series of green procurement programs based on environmental legislation and procurement legislation. By studying the green procurement programs with different legal bases, various objects and goals, diversified implementation bodies and multiple challenges, we could recognize the complexity of governance of the environmental problems.
In order to achieve the objectives of environmental governance, it is necessary to transform the policies, laws and programs into government procurement activities by the contracting officers’ and suppliers’ behavior. The contracting officer will, under the guidance of the policy, laws and the green procurement programs, weigh a variety of the procurement factors and the environmental factors, formulate the green procurement plans and implement green procurement through a variety of procurement tools. Finally, the green governance on the supplier was achieved through the government contract. During the process, the Federal administrative agencies, the Congress, the courts, and the public oversight or supervise the procurement in different forms.
From China’s perspective, the enlightenment of the U. S. Federal Governments’ green procurement system and the governance mode is: it is necessary to establish and improve the environmental problems transmission mechanism and a balanced interest distribution mechanism; to advance green procurement programs cautiously; to actively participate in the GPA negotiation; and to react the climate change negotiations carefully.
[Keywords] U. S. Federal Government, Green Procurement, Governance
New World Bank Procurement Framework Promotes Strengthened National Procurement Systems
By World Bank
Flexible approach will help countries make the best use of public spending
The World Bank’s new Procurement Framework becomes effective tomorrow, July 1, 2016. Aimed at helping countries make the best use of their public spending, the new Framework will enhance the strategic role of procurement in development effectiveness.
“The new Procurement Framework reflects the views, knowledge, and expertise of a wide range of stakeholders from across the globe. The Bank can now offer a more modern and nimble procurement system to help promote sustainable development,” said Hart Schafer, World Bank Vice President for Operations Policy and Country Services .
The new Procurement Framework will allow the World Bank to better respond to the needs of client countries, while preserving robust procurement standards throughout Bank-supported projects. It provides an expanded range of procurement tools to enable a better fit for varying country contexts and client needs.
“With this modernization of the procurement system, the Bank looks forward to working together with its partner countries to strengthen efficiency in public spending and to strengthen procurement systems around the world. This will help assure that public resources are being well used, and countries can better deliver critical services such as education, health, and infrastructure” says Deborah Wetzel, Senior Director of the Governance Global Practice .
The World Bank’s Board of Executive Directors initially approved this new policy framework in July 2015. It governs procurement in Bank-financed projects in 172 countries worth about USD 56 billion. This new Framework is a result of an extensive review and three-year consultation process involving over 5,000 people in 100 countries including partner countries, CSOs, and private sector.
“Reflecting the latest thinking in procurement, including greater use of technology, the new Framework emphasizes greater choice and flexibility, quality, and accountability while enabling greater adaptation to country contexts,” said Robert Hunja, Director, Governance Global Practice .
The new Framework enables the Bank to work more closely with country partners in improving their own procurement systems. Furthermore, under this framework, clients can use the procurement arrangements of other multilateral development partners or of national agencies in some circumstances.
The new Framework will introduce an ICT based tracking and monitoring tool Systematic Tracking of Exchanges in Procurement (STEP) to make procurement processes speedier, while promoting transparency and accountability. The Bank will also step up its approach to resolving procurement related complaints.
An interesting comment by Jean Grier on the ongoing EU-U.S. debate over procurement trade data, and the impact that debate is having on TTIP negotiations. Ms. Grier was previously the lead negotiator on procurement for the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, and is an internationally recognized expert on procurement and trade.
2ND INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON PUBLIC PROCUREMENT LAW AFRICA ANNOUNCED
The African Public Procurement Regulation Research Unit (APPRRU), Faculty of Law, Stellenbosch University, is pleased to announce the second International Conference on Public Procurement Law Africa. The Conference will be held from 24 – 25 November, 2016 at the Century City Conference Centre & Hotel, Cape Town, South Africa. The Conference theme is Public Procurement Regulation suited for 21st Century Africa: Reform, Governance and Innovation. The theme will address a range of critically important issues and themes relating to the intersection between procurement regulation, governance, reform, and innovation. Plenary speakers include some of the leading thinkers in public procurement in Africa and internationally, and the conference will feature numerous papers, and workshop presentations. More detail on the conference, including the call for papers, can be found at www.africanprocurementlaw.org/projects/conference2016.
A previous post suggested that the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) might offer a way to fill some of the gaps left by Brexit, Britain’s prospective departure from the European Union. This post flips that proposition, and asks whether TTIP’s goals for opening procurement markets might, in effect, be swallowed up by Brexit, as some in the trade community have suggested despite public support from the White House and the EU for moving forward with TTIP. This means, in turn, that TTIP’s goals for procurement may need to be addressed in another forum, perhaps under the World Trade Organization’s Government Procurement Agreement (GPA).
The previous post used procurement as a case study. The post pointed out that if the European Union agrees to the TTIP agreement before the UK departs (“Brexits”), the TTIP agreement probably will list UK procurements open to competition under TTIP, and will include guarantees of free access to those procurements. After “Brexit,” Britain arguably could then “reenter” TTIP as an independent nation, and adopt those former obligations under the TTIP agreement, in return for reciprocal access to EU and U.S. markets.
This outcome — allowing Britain access to open markets in Europe under TTIP, without any concomitant obligation to allow free movement of persons — would be exactly what the British “Leave” campaigners want for the UK; a separate TTIP arrangement with an independent UK also enjoys support from senior U.S. Republicans. This outcome is, however, exactly what the leaders of the European Union have announced they will not allow. Hope for such a British “back door” to open markets is also, incidentally, what President Obama warned againstbefore the referendum vote, when he said that an independent Britain would be at the “back of the queue” in the United States’ negotiations of trade deals.
Leave Campaign – STOP TTIP
In a raucous speech on the floor of the European Parliament on June 29, 2016, Nigel Farage, the UKIP leader in the “Leave” campaign (and a Member of the European Parliament), paused in a harangue of his fellow MEPs to call for “a sensible tariff-free deal” between the European Union and the UK. (It should be noted that the “Leave” campaign formally opposes TTIP, largely because of the broader integrative measures that might be included in the agreement.)
In the future, we hope to have the UK as a close partner of the EU and we look forward to the UK stating its intentions in this respect. Any agreement, which will be concluded with the UK as a third country, will have to be based on a balance of rights and obligations. Access to the Single Market requires acceptance of all four freedoms.
(Emphasis added.) Even if Britain could side-step this European opposition by using the “TTIP back door,” a TTIP agreement would not solve all of the United Kingdom’s trade problems. Again using procurement as an example, trade agreements such as TTIP and the World Trade Organization’s Government Procurement Agreement (GPA) are really best understood as ambitious nondiscrimination arrangements. Those trade agreements simply do not drive the same rigorous cross-border economic integration, in procurement or otherwise, that the European Union’s governance mechanisms provide.
In sum, although TTIP would hardly be a panacea, because TTIP might give Britain a “back door” to a free trade arrangement with Europe, European leaders may prove reluctant to press forward to conclude the TTIP agreement.
If TTIP does falter, what will this mean for procurement? If TTIP stalls, it may mean that the goals held for TTIP will need to be addressed under other institutions, such as the WTO Government Procurement Agreement (GPA). The GPA’s implementation is administered by the WTO Committee on Government Procurement, and logically the TTIP goals — goals which would address persistent structural obstacles to trade in procurement — could be taken up by the Committee, perhaps under the pending work programs to enhance the GPA.
The EU and U.S. negotiating goals for TTIP (at least as of the ninth round of negotiations, in April 2015) were made clearer as a result of a leak of internal European negotiating documents by Greenpeace Netherlands. According to those leaked materials and the EU and U.S. published statements of position, those TTIP goals include, on the EU side, better access to (and information on) sub-central (state and local) procurements in the United States, and on the U.S. side, stronger commitments by all parties to fighting corruption in procurement. To the extent Brexit derails those goals in TTIP, it may fall to the WTO to take them up as part of a broader effort to strengthen international procurement markets under the Government Procurement Agreement.
pecial Procurement Investment Contracts (SPIC).
On October 5, 2016, Benedetta Audia (UNOPS) is to present training on UN procurement, 
A 