El Banco Mundial ha publicado un análisis comparativo de los datos de contratación pública, que mide la transparencia de la legislación de contratación pública de 77 países con las mayores economías de la OCDE, bajo el título Benchmarking public procurement 2016.
El estudio llega a la conclusión de que la mayoría de los países estudiados tiene alguna deficiencia de transparencia. En algunos casos, las regulaciones guardan silencio sobre los detalles esenciales para los proveedores, tales como el tiempo para obtener una decisión después de la presentación de una queja. En otros casos, las leyes no facilitan la igualdad de acceso a la información para todos los proveedores, por ejemplo, dejando la notificación de los resultados de una licitación a la discreción de la entidad contratante. Otro ejemplo interesante: menos de 10 de las economías encuestadas exigen que la entidad contratante anuncie públicamente que ha consultado al sector privado, cuando esto ocurra. En la elaboración de este estudio han participado 24 expertos españoles.
– Estructura del trabajo:
Overview
1. About Benchmarking Public Procurement 2016
What does Benchmarking Public Procurement 2016 measure?
How are the data collected?
What are the methodological limitations?
What’s next?
2. The procurement life cycle
Preparing bids
Submitting bids
Evaluating bids
Awarding and executing contracts
3. Complaint and reporting mechanisms
Availability of complaint and reporting mechanisms
First-tier review process
Second-tier review process
– Principales conclusiones:
There is a clear move toward the use of electronic means in conducting public procurement.
Of the 77 economies measured, 73 have a website dedicated to public procurement. Some are more advanced than others, and governments are using them for various purposes, whether it is to facilitate the bidding process, the award of contracts to bidders or to support the management of the procurement contract (such as processing of payments online). Electronic platforms range from a website that does not support interactions but allows users to merely access tendering information—all the way to sophisticated platforms for conducting the entire procurement process online.
The many benefits of e-procurement have been widely recognized. They include equal market access and competition, enhanced transparency and integrity and lower transaction costs. The digitization of procurement can reduce in-person interactions that offer opportunities for corruption. But e-procurement as a standalone reform is likely to yield positive transformational results only if it’s fully implemented.
The Benchmarking Public Procurement data shows that in 17 of the economies measured, it is still not possible for users to access tender documents from the electronic procurement portal. Even more worrisome, when website visitors in several countries click on a “tender documents” option, they are led to an empty page. Interestingly, in 31 of the economies measured, bidders may submit their bids through an electronic platform. In a few countries like Chile and the Republic of Korea, electronic submission of bids has become the rule. But in most economies measured, e-bidding remains possible only in limited circumstances—as for a certain type of contract, or a certain industry, or if bidders have special authorization.
Although several economies have modern and sound public procurement regulations, their implementation lags behind.
Implementing the law not only guarantees the respect of the safeguards in place—it also reinforces the efficiency of the procurement process. Benchmarking Public Procurement data provide some evidence on the implementation of laws in practice. For example, although the law provides that the payment of the contract should be processed within 30 days in 32 of the 77 economies surveyed, suppliers receive payments from procuring entities on time only in 14 of them. And in many economies where the law mandates a regulatory time limit for review bodies to assess a complaint and issue their decision, this limit is rarely respected. Depending on the forum reviewing the complaint, this may result in months or even years of delay.
Transaction costs are still high in a number of instances throughout the public procurement process.
High costs affect all types of bidders, but small and medium enterprises (SMEs) to a greater extent, hindering their participation and access to the public procurement market. The requirement to hire a legal counsel in order to file a complaint, a rule in 4 economies, adds to the cost. Interestingly, although the remaining 73 economies do not have such a legal requirement, Benchmarking Public Procurement data shows thatit is a standard practice to hire a legal counsel in 36 economies. Another example of significant transaction costs has to do with the discretion of procuring entities in setting the maximum amount of bid security. In 23 of the economies measured, the maximum amount of bid security that procuring entities are allowed to request is either more than 5% of the bid value or not regulated at all. In some economies, the bid security may be as high as 100% of the estimated value of the contract, which will hinder participation of bidders with limited resources.
– Ver documento (sólo hay versión en inglés): WBG.Benchmarking-Public-Procurement-2016
