Cost and EU Public Procurement Law: Life-Cycle Costing for Sustainability
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
Public institutions, companies and governments in the EU and around the world are increasingly engaging in sustainable public procurement – a broad concept that must consider the three pillars of economic equality, social welfare and public health and environmental responsibility when designing public tenders and finalizing government contracts.<br/><br/>This book contributes to the development of life-cycle criteria tools and methodologies for public procurement in the EU. It collects both sector-crossing contributions analysing the most relevant theoretical and legal aspects, including both EU law and contract theory, and sector-specific contributions relating to some of the most important sustainable goods and services markets. The book starts with a chapter that discusses the different approaches to including sustainability considerations in buying decisions by both private and public purchasers, and then goes on to examine the EU law on LCC and how it is implemented in different Member States. These chapters address the challenges in balancing economic and sustainability objectives under EU internal market law. One chapter develops the analysis with specific reference to public-private partnership.<br/><br/>Another chapter elaborates how multi-stakeholders’ cooperation is necessary to develop LCC, based on a case study of a lighting services procurement. Three sector-specific studies relating to social housing, textile and clothing and IT close the book.<br/><br/>With contributors from a range of backgrounds including law, business, management, engineering and policy development, this interdisciplinary book provides the first comprehensive study on LCC within the framework of EU public procurement law.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.076 | 0.008 |
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