Innovation partnership procurement: EU directive impact

Robert Eadie, Samuel Potts

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

In consultations prior to the UK government’s response to changes to the EU procurement directives, the impact and innovation of small to medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) were examined to try to ensure a positive impact across the industry. To produce innovation, a new innovation partnership procedure was introduced. Subsequent to publication of the procedure, this paper examines perceptions from tenderers and the government. Seventy-one completed questionnaire responses were received from tenderers, with a further 19 from government procurers. Thefindings indicate that 69% of tenderers intend involvement in the future, but the government is evenly split on the ability to use the procedure and is unsure as to its benefits. While the majority considered that little change would result in relation to value for money, speed of innovation to market and increase in innovative solutions, more were positive than negative towards the procedure. Even though economic operators are keen to use it, there is little desire for its use within government departments, despite the fact that considering it would increase SMEinvolvement.
LanguageEnglish
Pages238-247
Number of pages10
JournalProceedings of the ICE - Management, Procurement and Law
Volume169
Issue number6
Early online date11 Oct 2016
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 31 Dec 2016

Fingerprint

Innovation
Industry
Economics
Procurement
Government
EU directives

Keywords

  • contracts & law / procurement

Cite this

@article{6ef7e470dfab40abb22addd79ffa82b1,
title = "Innovation partnership procurement: EU directive impact",
abstract = "In consultations prior to the UK government’s response to changes to the EU procurement directives, the impact and innovation of small to medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) were examined to try to ensure a positive impact across the industry. To produce innovation, a new innovation partnership procedure was introduced. Subsequent to publication of the procedure, this paper examines perceptions from tenderers and the government. Seventy-one completed questionnaire responses were received from tenderers, with a further 19 from government procurers. Thefindings indicate that 69{\%} of tenderers intend involvement in the future, but the government is evenly split on the ability to use the procedure and is unsure as to its benefits. While the majority considered that little change would result in relation to value for money, speed of innovation to market and increase in innovative solutions, more were positive than negative towards the procedure. Even though economic operators are keen to use it, there is little desire for its use within government departments, despite the fact that considering it would increase SMEinvolvement.",
keywords = "contracts & law / procurement",
author = "Robert Eadie and Samuel Potts",
note = "Reference text: Arrowsmith S (2012) Modernising the EU’s public procurement regime: a blueprint for real simplicity and flexibility. Public Procurement Law Review 21: 71–82. Cabinet Office (2015) Government Response to the Consultation on UK Transposition of new EU Procurement Directives, Public Contracts Regulations 2015. Cabinet Office, London, UK. See https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/transposing-the-2014-eu-procurement-directives (accessed 26/09/2016). CCS (Crown Commercial Service) (2014a) Reform of the EU Procurement Rules – Public Sector. CCS, Liverpool, UK. See https://www.gov.uk/transposing-eu-procurement-directives (accessed 26/09/2016). Cordis (Community Research and Development Information Service) (2004) Public Procurement Is Stifling Innovation, Claims EU Project. Cordis, Luxembourg, Luxembourg. See http://cordis.europa.eu/news/rcn/22424_en.html (accessed 26/09/2016). DFP (Department of Finance and Personnel for Northern Ireland) (2012) Northern Ireland Public Procurement Policy. Northern Ireland Assembly, Belfast, UK. See https://www.gov.uk/ government/organisations/department-of-finance-and-personnelfor-northern-ireland. Eadie R (2014) Does Europe need a specific prequalification system for highway projects? Proceedings of the International Conference on Civil Engineering Design and Construction (Science and Practice), Varna, Bulgaria, pp. 66–72. EC (European Commission) (2011) Green Paper on the Modernisation of EU Public Procurement Policy towards a More Efficient European Procurement Market. EC, Brussels, Belgium, 27.1.2011, COM(2011) 15 final. See http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/consultations/docs/2011/public_procurement/synthesis_document_en.pdf (accessed 26/09/2016). EC (2014a) Public Procurement Reform. EC, Brussels, Belgium. See http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/publicprocurement/modernising_rules/reform_proposals/index_en.htm (accessed 26/09/2016). EC (2014b) HORIZON 2020 – Work Programme 2014–2015 Annex G. EC, Brussels, Belgium. See http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/wp/2014_2015/annexes/h2020-wp1415-annex-g-trl_en.pdf (accessed 26/09/2016). EC (2014c) SMEs. EC, Brussels, Belgium. See https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/en/area/smes (accessed 26/09/2016). EC (2014d) The SME Instrument. EC, Brussels, Belgium. See https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/en/h2020-section/sme-instrument (accessed 26/09/2016). EC (2015) Why Do We Need an Innovation Union? EC, Brussels, Belgium. See http://ec.europa.eu/research/innovation-union/index_en.cfm?pg=why (accessed 26/09/2016). EC (2016a) Innovation Procurement. EC, Brussels, Belgium. See https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/innovationprocurement#Article (accessed 26/09/2016). EC (2016b) ERA-PRISM (Policies for Research and Innovation in Small Member States to Advance the European Research Area). EC, Brussels, Belgium. See http://cordis.europa.eu/ result/rcn/56072_en.html (accessed 26/09/2016). Edquist C and Zabala-Iturriagagoitia J (2012) Public procurement for innovation as mission-oriented innovation policy. Research Policy 41(1): 1757–1769, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.respol. 2012.04.022. EPCEU (European Parliament and Council of the European Union) (2004a) Directive 2004/17/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 coordinating the procurement procedures of entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors. Official Journal of the European Communities L134. EPCEU (2004b) Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts. Official Journal of the European Communities L134. EPCEU (2014a) Directive 2014/23/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on the award of concession contracts. Official Journal of the European Communities L94/1. EPCEU (2014b) Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC. Official Journal of the European Communities L94/65. EPCEU (2014c) Directive 2014/25/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on procurement by entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors and repealing Directive 2004/17/EC. Official Journal of the European Communities L94/243. ERG (Efficiency Reform Group) (2011) Government Construction Strategy. Cabinet Office, London, UK. Erlendsson J (2002) Value for Money Studies in Higher Education. See http://notendur.hi.is/joner/eaps/wh_vfmhe.htm (accessed 26/09/2016). HMG (Her Majesty’s Government) (2013) Consultation Document: Making Public Sector Procurement More Accessible to SMEs. The Stationery Office, London, UK. See https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/243685/SME_consultation_-_publication_version_-_18september.pdf (accessed 26/09/2016). HMG (2015) The Public Contracts Regulations 2015. The Stationery Office, London, UK, Statutory Instrument 2015 No. 102. See http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2015/102/pdfs/uksi_20150102_en.pdf (accessed 26/09/2016). HMT (Her Majesty’s Treasury) (2007) Value for Money Assessment Guide. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, London, UK. Hommen L and Rolfstam M (2009) Public procurement and innovation: towards a taxonomy. Journal of Public Procurement 9(1): 17–56. Interact (2013) Involvement of SMEs in ETC Programmes: Achievements & Future Perspectives. Interact, Bratislava,Slovakia. See http://admin.interact-eu.net/downloads/8322/INTERACT_Publication_Involvement_of_SMEs_in_ETC_programmes_Achievements_Future_Perspectives.pdf (accessed 26/09/2016). Latham M (1994) Constructing the Team. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, London, UK. LGG (Local Government Group) (2011) EU Green Paper: Modernisation of EU Public Procurement Policy. Local Government Group, London, UK. See http://www.local.gov.uk/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=40bdc2be-149a-4e29-bfe7-8f89a1e72cdc&groupId=10180 (accessed 26/09/2016). Nesta (2007) NPRU Policy Briefing: Driving Innovation through Public Procurement. Nesta, London, UK. See https://www.nesta.org.uk/sites/default/files/public_procurement.pdf (accessed 26/09/2016). P4ITS Consortium (2015) D3.2 – Discussion Paper. P4ITS Consortium, Brussels, Belgium. See http://p4its.eu/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2015/03/P4ITS_DEL_D3.2-DiscussionPaper-ExtCons_v1.1.pdf (accessed 26/09/2016). PoIP (Procurement of Innovation Platform) (2014) Public Procurement of Innovation: Draft. Procurement of Innovation Platform, Luxembourg, Luxembourg. See https://www.innovation-procurement.org/fileadmin/editor-content/Guides/Consultation/PPI_Guide__public_consultation _draft_with_case_studies.pdf (accessed 26/09/2016). Rothwell R (1984) Technology based small firms and regional innovation potential: the role of public procurement. Journal of Public Policy 4(4): 307–332, http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ S0143814X00002774. Rubin A and Babbie E (2009) Research Methods of Social Work. Brooks/Cole, Belmont, CA, USA. Scottish Government (2015) Public Procurement. The Public Contracts (Scotland) Regulations 2015. The Stationery Office,Edinburgh, UK, Statutory Instrument 2015 No. 446. Swinney J (2011) Letter to M. Michel Bamier: European Commissioner for Internal Market and Services. Scottish Government, Edinburgh, Scotland. See http://www.gov.scot/Resource/Doc/116601/0118347.pdf (accessed 26/09/2016). Taylor-Powell E (1998) Sampling. Cooperative Extension, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA. Uyarra E, Edler J, Garcia-Estevez J, Georghiou L and Yeow J (2014) Barriers to innovation through public procurement: a supplier perspective. Technovation 34(10): 631–645, http://dx. doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2014.04.003.",
year = "2016",
month = "12",
day = "31",
doi = "10.1680/jmapl.16.00027",
language = "English",
volume = "169",
pages = "238--247",
journal = "Proceedings of the ICE - Management, Procurement and Law",
issn = "1751-4304",
number = "6",

}

Innovation partnership procurement: EU directive impact. / Eadie, Robert; Potts, Samuel.

In: Proceedings of the ICE - Management, Procurement and Law, Vol. 169, No. 6, 31.12.2016, p. 238-247.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Innovation partnership procurement: EU directive impact

AU - Eadie, Robert

AU - Potts, Samuel

N1 - Reference text: Arrowsmith S (2012) Modernising the EU’s public procurement regime: a blueprint for real simplicity and flexibility. Public Procurement Law Review 21: 71–82. Cabinet Office (2015) Government Response to the Consultation on UK Transposition of new EU Procurement Directives, Public Contracts Regulations 2015. Cabinet Office, London, UK. See https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/transposing-the-2014-eu-procurement-directives (accessed 26/09/2016). CCS (Crown Commercial Service) (2014a) Reform of the EU Procurement Rules – Public Sector. CCS, Liverpool, UK. See https://www.gov.uk/transposing-eu-procurement-directives (accessed 26/09/2016). Cordis (Community Research and Development Information Service) (2004) Public Procurement Is Stifling Innovation, Claims EU Project. Cordis, Luxembourg, Luxembourg. See http://cordis.europa.eu/news/rcn/22424_en.html (accessed 26/09/2016). DFP (Department of Finance and Personnel for Northern Ireland) (2012) Northern Ireland Public Procurement Policy. Northern Ireland Assembly, Belfast, UK. See https://www.gov.uk/ government/organisations/department-of-finance-and-personnelfor-northern-ireland. Eadie R (2014) Does Europe need a specific prequalification system for highway projects? Proceedings of the International Conference on Civil Engineering Design and Construction (Science and Practice), Varna, Bulgaria, pp. 66–72. EC (European Commission) (2011) Green Paper on the Modernisation of EU Public Procurement Policy towards a More Efficient European Procurement Market. EC, Brussels, Belgium, 27.1.2011, COM(2011) 15 final. See http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/consultations/docs/2011/public_procurement/synthesis_document_en.pdf (accessed 26/09/2016). EC (2014a) Public Procurement Reform. EC, Brussels, Belgium. See http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/publicprocurement/modernising_rules/reform_proposals/index_en.htm (accessed 26/09/2016). EC (2014b) HORIZON 2020 – Work Programme 2014–2015 Annex G. EC, Brussels, Belgium. See http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/wp/2014_2015/annexes/h2020-wp1415-annex-g-trl_en.pdf (accessed 26/09/2016). EC (2014c) SMEs. EC, Brussels, Belgium. See https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/en/area/smes (accessed 26/09/2016). EC (2014d) The SME Instrument. EC, Brussels, Belgium. See https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/en/h2020-section/sme-instrument (accessed 26/09/2016). EC (2015) Why Do We Need an Innovation Union? EC, Brussels, Belgium. See http://ec.europa.eu/research/innovation-union/index_en.cfm?pg=why (accessed 26/09/2016). EC (2016a) Innovation Procurement. EC, Brussels, Belgium. See https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/innovationprocurement#Article (accessed 26/09/2016). EC (2016b) ERA-PRISM (Policies for Research and Innovation in Small Member States to Advance the European Research Area). EC, Brussels, Belgium. See http://cordis.europa.eu/ result/rcn/56072_en.html (accessed 26/09/2016). Edquist C and Zabala-Iturriagagoitia J (2012) Public procurement for innovation as mission-oriented innovation policy. Research Policy 41(1): 1757–1769, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.respol. 2012.04.022. EPCEU (European Parliament and Council of the European Union) (2004a) Directive 2004/17/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 coordinating the procurement procedures of entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors. Official Journal of the European Communities L134. EPCEU (2004b) Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts. Official Journal of the European Communities L134. EPCEU (2014a) Directive 2014/23/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on the award of concession contracts. Official Journal of the European Communities L94/1. EPCEU (2014b) Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC. Official Journal of the European Communities L94/65. EPCEU (2014c) Directive 2014/25/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on procurement by entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors and repealing Directive 2004/17/EC. Official Journal of the European Communities L94/243. ERG (Efficiency Reform Group) (2011) Government Construction Strategy. Cabinet Office, London, UK. Erlendsson J (2002) Value for Money Studies in Higher Education. See http://notendur.hi.is/joner/eaps/wh_vfmhe.htm (accessed 26/09/2016). HMG (Her Majesty’s Government) (2013) Consultation Document: Making Public Sector Procurement More Accessible to SMEs. The Stationery Office, London, UK. See https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/243685/SME_consultation_-_publication_version_-_18september.pdf (accessed 26/09/2016). HMG (2015) The Public Contracts Regulations 2015. The Stationery Office, London, UK, Statutory Instrument 2015 No. 102. See http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2015/102/pdfs/uksi_20150102_en.pdf (accessed 26/09/2016). HMT (Her Majesty’s Treasury) (2007) Value for Money Assessment Guide. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, London, UK. Hommen L and Rolfstam M (2009) Public procurement and innovation: towards a taxonomy. Journal of Public Procurement 9(1): 17–56. Interact (2013) Involvement of SMEs in ETC Programmes: Achievements & Future Perspectives. Interact, Bratislava,Slovakia. See http://admin.interact-eu.net/downloads/8322/INTERACT_Publication_Involvement_of_SMEs_in_ETC_programmes_Achievements_Future_Perspectives.pdf (accessed 26/09/2016). Latham M (1994) Constructing the Team. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, London, UK. LGG (Local Government Group) (2011) EU Green Paper: Modernisation of EU Public Procurement Policy. Local Government Group, London, UK. See http://www.local.gov.uk/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=40bdc2be-149a-4e29-bfe7-8f89a1e72cdc&groupId=10180 (accessed 26/09/2016). Nesta (2007) NPRU Policy Briefing: Driving Innovation through Public Procurement. Nesta, London, UK. See https://www.nesta.org.uk/sites/default/files/public_procurement.pdf (accessed 26/09/2016). P4ITS Consortium (2015) D3.2 – Discussion Paper. P4ITS Consortium, Brussels, Belgium. See http://p4its.eu/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2015/03/P4ITS_DEL_D3.2-DiscussionPaper-ExtCons_v1.1.pdf (accessed 26/09/2016). PoIP (Procurement of Innovation Platform) (2014) Public Procurement of Innovation: Draft. Procurement of Innovation Platform, Luxembourg, Luxembourg. See https://www.innovation-procurement.org/fileadmin/editor-content/Guides/Consultation/PPI_Guide__public_consultation _draft_with_case_studies.pdf (accessed 26/09/2016). Rothwell R (1984) Technology based small firms and regional innovation potential: the role of public procurement. Journal of Public Policy 4(4): 307–332, http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ S0143814X00002774. Rubin A and Babbie E (2009) Research Methods of Social Work. Brooks/Cole, Belmont, CA, USA. Scottish Government (2015) Public Procurement. The Public Contracts (Scotland) Regulations 2015. The Stationery Office,Edinburgh, UK, Statutory Instrument 2015 No. 446. Swinney J (2011) Letter to M. Michel Bamier: European Commissioner for Internal Market and Services. Scottish Government, Edinburgh, Scotland. See http://www.gov.scot/Resource/Doc/116601/0118347.pdf (accessed 26/09/2016). Taylor-Powell E (1998) Sampling. Cooperative Extension, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA. Uyarra E, Edler J, Garcia-Estevez J, Georghiou L and Yeow J (2014) Barriers to innovation through public procurement: a supplier perspective. Technovation 34(10): 631–645, http://dx. doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2014.04.003.

PY - 2016/12/31

Y1 - 2016/12/31

N2 - In consultations prior to the UK government’s response to changes to the EU procurement directives, the impact and innovation of small to medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) were examined to try to ensure a positive impact across the industry. To produce innovation, a new innovation partnership procedure was introduced. Subsequent to publication of the procedure, this paper examines perceptions from tenderers and the government. Seventy-one completed questionnaire responses were received from tenderers, with a further 19 from government procurers. Thefindings indicate that 69% of tenderers intend involvement in the future, but the government is evenly split on the ability to use the procedure and is unsure as to its benefits. While the majority considered that little change would result in relation to value for money, speed of innovation to market and increase in innovative solutions, more were positive than negative towards the procedure. Even though economic operators are keen to use it, there is little desire for its use within government departments, despite the fact that considering it would increase SMEinvolvement.

AB - In consultations prior to the UK government’s response to changes to the EU procurement directives, the impact and innovation of small to medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) were examined to try to ensure a positive impact across the industry. To produce innovation, a new innovation partnership procedure was introduced. Subsequent to publication of the procedure, this paper examines perceptions from tenderers and the government. Seventy-one completed questionnaire responses were received from tenderers, with a further 19 from government procurers. Thefindings indicate that 69% of tenderers intend involvement in the future, but the government is evenly split on the ability to use the procedure and is unsure as to its benefits. While the majority considered that little change would result in relation to value for money, speed of innovation to market and increase in innovative solutions, more were positive than negative towards the procedure. Even though economic operators are keen to use it, there is little desire for its use within government departments, despite the fact that considering it would increase SMEinvolvement.

KW - contracts & law / procurement

U2 - 10.1680/jmapl.16.00027

DO - 10.1680/jmapl.16.00027

M3 - Article

VL - 169

SP - 238

EP - 247

JO - Proceedings of the ICE - Management, Procurement and Law

T2 - Proceedings of the ICE - Management, Procurement and Law

JF - Proceedings of the ICE - Management, Procurement and Law

SN - 1751-4304

IS - 6

ER -