Reporting period:
Public procurement
Public procurement is the process by which public authorities, such as government departments or local authorities, purchase works, goods or services from companies. Public procurement accounts for about 14% of the EU’s GDP. It is regulated by law to maximise value for money for the public sector and ensure compliance with three key principles:
- equal treatment
- non-discrimination
- transparency
Public procurement and the single market – why does it matter?
To create a level playing field for businesses across Europe, EU law sets out minimum harmonised public procurement rules. These govern the way public authorities and certain public utility operators purchase goods, works and services. The European Commission’s public procurement strategy is designed to improve EU public procurement practices in a collaborative manner by working with public authorities and other stakeholders.
Overall the public procurement indicators suggest a stable situation at EU level, with slight improvement in areas such as single bids and direct awards.
The number of tenders published continues to increase, albeit more slowly due to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the UK's withdrawal from the EU has resulted in a significant fall in the number of large procurements (in 2020 the UK accounted for 60% of EU awards of more than 100 million euro).
The publication rate of public procurements in terms of GDP continues to increase for most of the EU, with decreases in only a small minority of countries. In 2020, for the first time there was no EU country with a publication rate below 2%, but there are still opportunities for further increases based on the comparison with the EU average.
In 2021, the share of public procurement tenders with single bidder slightly decreased, breaking the continuous upward trend of recent years. There are still several countries (14) with a level higher than the EU average, which shows there is room for improvement in the coming years. The same situation applies in the case of another important indicator, the share of direct awards (“No calls for bids”).
There were significant improvements in the three indicators relating to data quality (“Missing calls for bids”/”Missing seller registration numbers”/”Missing buyer registration numbers”), but as with all indicators there is also still room for improvement.
Performance indicators
“Performance” measures whether purchasers get good value for money. The indicators below measure key influences on public procurement performance in a way that is transparent and easy to understand and compare.
Like all indicators, however, they simplify reality. They are affected by country-specific factors such as what is actually being bought, the structure of the economies concerned, and the relationships between different tendering options, none of which are taken into account. In some cases, a large number of tenders below EU thresholds are published in Tenders Electronic Daily (TED). This publication is voluntary and considered a good practice, as it increases transparency for a significant part of the procurement not covered by the EU rules (for tenders below the EU thresholds, national rules apply, which nevertheless must respect the general principles of EU law).
Moreover, some aspects of public procurement have been omitted entirely or covered only indirectly, e.g. corruption, the administrative burden and professionalism. Although the scoreboard provides useful information, it gives only a partial view of EU countries’ public procurement performance. As a result, the indicators should be interpreted carefully, ideally in the light of additional quantitative and qualitative information.
Overview
The colour thresholds are based on two factors:
- qualitative policy judgment on what constitutes good practice
- recent data for individual countries.
| Indicator | Green | Red |
|---|---|---|
| [1] Single bidder | ≤ 10% | > 20% |
| [2] No calls for bids | ≤ 5% | ≥ 10% |
| [3] Publication rate | > 5% | < 2.5% |
| [4] Cooperative procurement | ≥ 10% | < 10% |
| [5] Award criteria | ≤ 80% | > 80% |
| [6] Decision speed | ≤ 120 days | > 120 days |
| [7] SME contractors | > 60% | < 45% |
| [8] SME bids | > 80% | < 60% |
| [9] Procedures divided into lots | > 40% | < 25% |
| [10] Missing calls for bids | ≤ 3% | > 3% |
| [11] Missing seller registration numbers | ≤ 3% | > 3% |
| [12] Missing buyer registration numbers | ≤ 3% | > 3% |
Indicator [1]: Single bidder
This chart measures the proportion of contracts awarded where there was just a single bidder. Framework agreements are excluded, as they have different reporting patterns. Direct awards – i.e. negotiated without a call for competition/award without prior publication of a contract notice – are also excluded, since the rules on such procedures do not make any provision for competition.
For technical reasons, Slovenian data for 2018 and 2019 are not reliably available.
More bidders are better, as this means public buyers have more options, and can get better value for money. The indicator reflects several aspects of procurement, including competition and bureaucracy.
Indicator [2]: No calls for bids
This chart measures the proportion of procurement procedures negotiated with a company without any call for bids.
Calling for bids (or “calling for tenders”) before starting procurement negotiations is better, as it makes the bidder selection process more transparent and increases competition. This leads to better value for money. The indicator reflect several aspects of procurement, including transparency and competition.
Indicator [3]: Publication rate
This chart measures the value of procurement advertised on TED as a proportion of national GDP.
Owing to delays in data availability, these results are based on 2020 data. However, since this indicator is slow to change, the 2020 results are still relevant. Data for Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway are not available.
A higher score is better, as it means more companies can bid, bringing better value for money. It also means greater transparency, as more information is available to the public.
This indicator reflects the value of national public procurement advertised to businesses, i.e. the accessibility and openness of public procurement markets.
Indicator [4]: Cooperative procurement
This chart measures the proportion of procurement procedures with more than one public buyer.
Although not all types of purchase are suitable for joint procurement, excessively low rates suggest lost opportunities.
This indicator reflects how often public buyers buy together. Buying in bulk often leads to better prices and offers an opportunity to share knowledge.
Indicator [5]: Award criteria
This chart measures the proportion of procedures awarded solely because the offer was the cheapest one available.
While the choice of criteria depends on what is being purchased, over-reliance on price suggests better criteria could have been applied, so a better purchase could have been made.
The indicator reflects how public buyers choose the companies they award contracts to. Specifically, it shows whether they decide based on price alone, or whether they also consider quality.
Indicator [6]: Decision speed
This chart measures the mean decision-making period, i.e. the time between the deadline for receiving offers and the date the contract is awarded. To ensure comparability, only notices published under the open procedure, which do not include framework agreements, are considered.
For technical reasons, Slovenian data for 2018 and 2019 are not reliably available.
Very lengthy procedures are bad because they are expensive and cause uncertainty for both the public buyers and companies. This indicator reflects the speed of the public buyers’ decision-making.
Indicator [7]: SME contractors
This chart shows how many contractors are smaller firms (small and medium-sized enterprises – SMEs).
For technical reasons, Romanian data for 2018, 2019 and 2020 are not reliably available.
High percentages are desirable, as most companies in the EU fall into this category.
Low percentages could indicate barriers preventing smaller firms from participating in procurement procedures (e.g. red tape, calls for tender biased against smaller firms or low capacity among smaller firms to compete).
Indicator [8]: SME bids
This chart measures the proportion of bids from SMEs.
For technical reasons, Romanian data for 2018 is not reliably available.
High percentages should be the rule, as most companies in the EU fall into this category.
Low percentages indicate barriers preventing smaller firms from participating in public procurement procedures (e.g. red tape, calls for tender biased against smaller firms or low capacity among smaller firms to compete).
Indicator [9]: Procedures divided into lots
This chart measures the proportion of tenders divided into lots.
Lots are beneficial, particularly for SMEs, making it easier for them to make an offer.
Low percentages show that large companies are more easily able to bid for public contracts. This means that public buyers are missing the opportunities smaller firms can offer.
Indicator [10]: Missing calls for bids
This charts measures the proportion of contracts awarded after a call for tender whose name and conditions were not clear.
For technical reasons, Slovenian data for 2018 and 2019 are not reliably available.
A lower score is preferable, because it means businesses and the public can understand how contractors have been selected.
However, a higher score suggests that public buyers are failing to provide enough information about their procurement activities, and are therefore in breach of EU law.
Indicator [11]: Missing seller registration numbers
This chart measures the proportion of procedures that did not include the seller's registration number.
A lower score is preferable. Buyers’ and sellers’ registration numbers (provided by business registries) are crucial for understanding who is buying from whom across different procurement procedures.
A higher score suggests that public buyers are failing to provide enough information about the party selected, following a procurement procedure, to sell goods, works or services.
Indicator [12]: Missing buyer registration numbers
This chart measures the proportion of procedures that did not include the buyer’s registration number.
A lower score is preferable. Buyers’ and sellers’ registration numbers (provided by business registries) are crucial for understanding who is buying from whom across different procurement procedures.
A higher score indicates that public buyers are failing to provide enough information about their procurement activities.
More information on public procurement
The indicators show how different EU countries are performing on key aspects of public procurement.
Although the picture they give is rather simplified, they nonetheless highlight basic aspects of countries’ procurement markets.
All indicators are based on notices published in the Tenders Electronic Daily (TED) database, under four EU Procurement Directives (general, sectoral, concessions and defence).
These data are available at the EU Open Data Portal. More data and indicators are also available at opentender.eu, an EU-funded research project.
For more detailed information on public procurement, see: EU public procurement.
For general information on public procurement, see Your Europe.
eCertis
eCertis is an online database that lists eligibility criteria and documentary evidence. Both are needed in each European Economic Area (EEA) country for companies to take part in public procurement. eCertis is a useful tool for EEA-based companies wishing to participate in public procurement and for public buyers evaluating bids received from various EEA countries.
eCertis in a nutshell
• Due to a restructuring of eCertis, encoded data was adjusted and simplified to support multiple domains. This led to an increase in the number of items in the service, which now contains a total of 2 156 records (criteria, items of evidence, and issuing bodies). This is a 2.9% increase from last year, where the number stood at 2 095. 1 209 criteria (a 6% increase on last year) and 661 items of evidence (a 1.8% decrease from last year) were listed on eCertis on 10 November 2022.
• The system contains information on 286 bodies that issue certificates, meaning that 5 more issuers were registered in 2022
• There were 12 789 unique visitors in the last quarter of 2021, an increase of 14.4% from last year
• 14% of evidence is accessible online
• A sample is available for 25% of the items of evidence listed in the system.
Disclaimer: eCertis is managed by the Commission. Participating countries are obligated to make sure the information in it is accurate and up to date. It is for reference purposes only and is not legally binding. It shows what evidence is required to fulfil a criterion. For example, how can a supplier show a country A that it has paid taxes in country B.
eCertis and the single market - why does it matter?
eCertis helps:
• suppliers (tenderers) identify what proof they need to submit when they are awarded a contract in an EEA country
• contracting authorities (buyers) in EEA countries understand which documents they can accept or they need to ask tenderers to provide.
The Commission aims to support both suppliers and buyers in the field of public procurement by making all needed information regarding grounds for exclusion and selection criteria available through a single service. Accessible information is needed to help make the single market a reality.
According to the eCertis indicators below, the availability of data provided by the EU countries remained stable between 2021 and 2022. Overall, most countries show a positive trend in terms of criteria completeness and evidence recorded, especially on grounds for exclusion. Nevertheless, there are differences between countries in the number of pieces of evidence made available, the type of evidence, their accessibility online, the price to access them and the provision of a sample or not.
The data below covers the period from 1/2021 to 10/11/2022.
Performance indicators
Overview
Legend
The final classification takes into account the “total” score for each indicator (last row of each table) and is calculated as follows:
| Red | Both sub indicators are red |
|---|---|
| Yellow | All other |
| Green | If both sub indictors are green or if there is a mix between green and yellow |
Participating countries must upload all the necessary information relating to two categories of criteria: grounds for exclusion (EG) and selection criteria (SC).
Categories of criteria
Data are collected in three categories of “grounds for exclusion” (EG):
- criminal convictions (CC): contracting authorities may exclude a supplier (economic operator) from participation in a procurement procedure if it has participated in a criminal organisation
- non-payment of taxes and social security contributions (PT): contracting authorities may exclude an economic operator from participation in a procurement procedure if it is in breach of its obligations relating to the payment of taxes or social security contributions
- insolvency, conflict of interests or professional misconduct (INS): contracting authorities may exclude an economic operator from participation in a procurement procedure if it is bankrupt, subject to insolvency or winding-up proceedings, guilty of grave professional misconduct or a conflict of interest.
… and four categories of “selection criteria” (SC):
- economic and financial standing (EF): contracting authorities may impose requirements ensuring that economic operators possess the necessary economic and financial capacity to perform the contract
- quality assurance schemes and environmental management standards (QA): contracting authorities may require economic operators to demonstrate that they have such schemes and standards in place
- suitability to pursue the professional activity concerned (ST): contracting authorities may require economic operators to be enrolled in one of the professional or trade registers kept in their country of establishment or to comply with any other request set out in that Annex XI of Directive 2014/24/EU
- technical and professional ability (TP): contracting authorities may impose requirements ensuring that economic operators possess the necessary human and technical resources and experience to perform the contract to an appropriate quality standard.
Indicator [1]: Criteria Completeness
The graph shows the percentage of criteria set at EU level that have been recorded in eCertis for each country. Higher scores show countries have entered more data in the eCertis database.
Legend
| Red | ≤ 0 % |
|---|---|
| Yellow | > 0 %, ≤ 50 % |
| Green | > 50 % |
Indicator [2]: Evidence recorded
This indicator groups the countries that use eCertis by type of criterion based on the number of items of evidence recorded in the system.
Legend
If the country has not entered any evidence data, the indicator is red. If it has entered more than one item of evidence, the indicator is green.
The final classification considers the “total” score for each table (last row of each table) and is calculated as follows:
| Red | All criteria are red |
|---|---|
| Yellow | A mixture of red and green values Red: min 1, max 3 (for exclusion grounds) or 4 (for selection criteria) Green: idem |
| Green | All criteria are green |
Facts and figures
Evidence types
The following graph depicts the number of items of evidence in participating countries that may be required and may be used in a public procurement contract. These items of evidence are broken down into three types: certificates, declaration on path, and self-declaration. The graph does not cover online evidence. It shows the differences in regulatory systems used in each country.
Priced evidence
This graph shows the number of items of priced evidence recorded in the system for each country. These items are accessible by payment of a fee. Free access to evidence increases participation in public procurement procedures.
Percentage of items of evidence available online, by country, & items of evidence with samples
This graph shows
- online evidence by country as a percentage of all items of evidence recorded in the database. The link to the online evidence allows eCertis users to access the database and look at the evidence.
- the percentage of items of evidence entered in eCertis for which a PDF sample is available, by country. There may be no samples available for certain types of evidence.