MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2758635341 · doi:10.5278/ojs.njcl.v0i1.1982

Sustainability requirements in EU public and private procurement – a right or an obligation?

2017· article· en· W2758635341 on OpenAlexaff
Marta Andrecka, Kateřina Mitkidis

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicPublic Procurement and Policy
Canadian institutionsInstitute on Governance
FundersEuropean CommissionAarhus Universitet
KeywordsProcurementSustainabilityObligationBusinessEnvironmental resource managementPolitical scienceEnvironmental scienceLawMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Procurement is no longer just about buying the cheapest possible supplies or services. Rather, it is understood as a process whereby organisations meet their needs in a way that achieves value for money on a lifetime basis and allows delivering aspects beyond savings, so-called sustainable procurement. This is true both for the public and private sectors. However, there is only limited legal regulation of sustainable procurement, which causes many uncertainties in respect to the possibility to include sustainability concerns into procurement processes as well as consequences of (not) doing so. The article thus focuses on the questions whether pursuing sustainability goals through procurement is an organisation's right or obligation and whether there are any risks of liability associated with pursuing or ignoring sustainability goals. These questions are analysed from the two perspectives of public and private procurement and similarities and differences between the sectors are identified. We find that in both sectors sustainability topics (i) are increasingly considered and implemented into contracts; (ii) deal with similar issues in both contexts; (iii) cover issues that are linked to the subject matter of a contract, including issues that relate rather to production process than the physical qualities of the delivered goods as such; and (iv) proliferate through all stages of the procurement process. However, the drivers of sustainability procurement and the legal regulation differ substantially. Still, it is found that while there is a right to include sustainability considerations into both public and private procurement processes, there are only contours of the legal obligation to do so. In respect to private procurement, the right to give considerations to sustainability issues is not expressly stated by the applicable law as it is in respect to public procurement (though limitations apply there as well). In fact, in both sectors the right mostly stems from the fact that there is no regulation forbidding this. Quite counter-intuitively then, there seem to be more legal risks associated with the inclusion of sustainability requirements into the procurement process (and inadequate enforcement thereof) rather than with ignoring them.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.112

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.009
Scholarly communication0.0140.009
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0070.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.094
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.232 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen)Same topicPublic Procurement and PolicyFrench-language works237,207