2010
DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-5965.2009.02051.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Explaining Non‐Compliance with European Union Procurement Directives: A Multidisciplinary Perspective

Abstract: Since their adoption in the 1970s, compliance with European Union (EU) procurement directives has been problematic. Many studies have reported on the effectiveness of the directives, mostly in terms of the impact on the openness of public procurement and the impact on cross-border trade. However, research on the explanation (or the lack) of compliance with EU directives is limited. This article identifies the directives which are most sensitive to non-compliance. A multidisciplinary model for explaining compli… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
22
1

Year Published

2012
2012
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(26 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
(75 reference statements)
2
22
1
Order By: Relevance
“…A second innovative approach in the study of enforcement and application was presented by Gelderman et al (2010), who analyse the reasons for practical non-compliance with EU public procurement legislation in the Netherlands. To gather information on practical compliance with the rules enshrined in EU public procurement directives, they conducted a survey among 'users' of the legal provisions, i.e., purchasing professionals in the Dutch Ministry of Defence, asking them about the extent to which they adhered to several key rules laid down in EU directives, and about a couple of items from which they constructed their explanatory variables.…”
Section: The Fourth Wave: Overcoming the Focus On Positive Integratiomentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…A second innovative approach in the study of enforcement and application was presented by Gelderman et al (2010), who analyse the reasons for practical non-compliance with EU public procurement legislation in the Netherlands. To gather information on practical compliance with the rules enshrined in EU public procurement directives, they conducted a survey among 'users' of the legal provisions, i.e., purchasing professionals in the Dutch Ministry of Defence, asking them about the extent to which they adhered to several key rules laid down in EU directives, and about a couple of items from which they constructed their explanatory variables.…”
Section: The Fourth Wave: Overcoming the Focus On Positive Integratiomentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, scholars should invest more time into producing new or uncovering existing quantitative data on norm application and rule compliance. More quantifiable evidence on rule application could be gathered by surveys among 'users' of the norms or among people affected by certain rules (Gelderman et al 2010).…”
Section: Measuring Compliancementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Rolling out of the training program was also encompassed by professionalization and certification modules development. Literature points to the importance of the role played by professionalism in public procurement (Hunja, 2003;Goldernman, et al, 2010;Bhaseka & Mugabira, 2008), whose value hinges much on staffing and resourcing decisions which should place great significance on the ethical status of procurement personnel (Lan, et al, 2005). Ethical and moral uprightness is central to the procurement profession (Saini, 2010).…”
Section: Public Procurement In Zimbabwementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Second, available estimations of the costs of cross-compliance are generally approximately 10 euros, and as high as 100 euro/ha, which is clearly a significant amount for both farmers and public decision-makers (Bartolini et al, 2008a;De Roest, 2008). Third, a relevant policy design issue arises from the fact that the effects of cross-compliance are conditioned by the ability of the public regulator to design appropriate incentives for farmers to achieve compliance (Davies & Hodge, 2006;Gelderman et al, 2010). This would be a trivial problem under full information for the public decision-maker.…”
Section: Introduction and Objectivesmentioning
confidence: 98%