2010
DOI: 10.1080/19448953.2010.531202
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Corruption and public procurement: example from Croatia

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
16
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
16
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Firms may be exposed to corrupt pressure on the global market due to an unfair competitive advantage gained by other companies that offer corruption deals to a third party. Companies doing business with the public sector may use corrupt practices more often because public procurement is especially sensitive to corruption (Ateljević and Budak, 2010;Grødeland and Aasland, 2011).…”
Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Firms may be exposed to corrupt pressure on the global market due to an unfair competitive advantage gained by other companies that offer corruption deals to a third party. Companies doing business with the public sector may use corrupt practices more often because public procurement is especially sensitive to corruption (Ateljević and Budak, 2010;Grødeland and Aasland, 2011).…”
Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Ateljevic and Budak (2010, 385) reflect on the decentralization efforts that emerged as a result of the democratization and economic liberalization steps in western Balkans as the major culprit behind the increased corruption levels. Instead of eradicating or reducing corruption, they argue that such policies have instead encouraged the spread of its mutant forms, which have proven even more resistant to interference (Ateljevic and Budak 2010).…”
Section: Methodology and Case Selectionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Contracts are awarded to those private firms that have political affiliations with performed public servants instead of based on the tenderer's performance (Khan et al, 2019). This point of view is supported by Ateljevic and Budak (2010) who state that one of the challenges towards the growth of SMCEs is when more and more contracts cannot be secured by SMCEs as they do not have political influence in government contracting bidding process. The illegal connection between performing public servants and private organization are formed by paying bribes and other benefits.…”
Section: Factor 5: Anti-corruption Needsmentioning
confidence: 99%