Governance in public procurement: the reform of Turkey’s public procurement system
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Regulation and control of public procurement constitute a crucial field for the application of governance ideals and practices. This study explores the public procurement reform process in Turkey with reference to the implementation of governance as part of an ongoing neoliberal discourse and practice. Turkey’s public procurement system was reformed in 2002 in line with governance principles of transparency, anti-corruption, securing competition and by establishing an independent regulatory institution. A decade after this reform, our analysis shows that political will, economic forces in the procurement market and problems in the institutional-organizational setting are factors that play a role in the relapses from governance ideals and practices. Points for practitioners Reforms aimed at achieving good governance in public procurements are hard to sustain. The specific institutional traditions of local contexts, interventions of political authorities and powerful economic interests play an important role in the success of reforms. Persistent ad hoc modifications of public procurement laws erode the regulatory scope, change the composition and political autonomy of board membership, and undermine the principles of transparency, accountability and competitiveness. There is a need to actively ensure sustainability of governance principles through strong defense mechanisms which should be institutionalized within local social dynamics.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it