Implementing the OECD Recommendation on Public Procurement in OECD and Partner Countries

3. Conclusions

Abstract

This chapter concludes the report and presents the continued relevance and next steps for the Recommendation on Public Procurement and its implementation. 

Over the past five years, Adherents’ efforts to implement the Recommendation have unfolded in an evolving context, marked by rapid digital transformation, economic and social challenges, and the disruptive impacts of the COVID-19 crisis on global supply chains and geopolitical tensions. Among others, these developments have highlighted the need for resilient procurement systems, effective risk management, enhanced transparency and accountability, and strategies to maximise public procurement’s contribution to achieve multiple objectives, including sustainable development goals. 

3.1. Continued relevance

Since its adoption in 2015, the Recommendation has served as a guiding benchmark, helping Adherents enhance their public procurement systems. However, to remain relevant and continue supporting Adherents in adapting procurement processes and practices to an evolving landscape, it would be beneficial to consider a revision that addresses recent trends and ongoing challenges. The review of the implementation and continued relevance of the Recommendation offers a timely opportunity to assess progress achieved and lessons learned. Meanwhile, it also provides the occasion to reflect on how to revise the content of the Recommendation to ensure its provisions remain relevant, by addressing shifts in technology, economy, and societal expectations to support future-ready public procurement systems.

Notably, the advent of emerging technologies, such as AI and blockchain, the possibilities and risks they provide, and the greater use of digital tools in delivering public services call for revisiting the e-procurement principle. These technologies have significant potential to improve system efficiency, enhance transparency, and support the digital transformation of public procurement. However, their pervasive impact across all procurement dimensions (e.g., integrity, accountability, capacity, participation, etc.), together with the potential risks associated with their use – including bias, discrimination, and threats to data privacy and security – require careful consideration and adequate guidance.

Over the past years, Adherents have become widely aware of the strategic role of public procurement as a tool for advancing broad policy objectives, shifting from a back-office function to a core element of public governance. This shift requires aligning procurement with goals that are central to national agendas, and which can include pressing economic, environmental, social, and other public interest goals. Achieving these priorities while ensuring they are not pursued at the expense of one another amid fiscal constraints calls for robust methodologies to manage trade-offs and assess policy impacts effectively.

Furthermore, the COVID-19 pandemic, the full-scale war of aggression of Russia in Ukraine and other recent geopolitical events shed light on critical supply chain vulnerabilities and the generalised use of emergency procurement for essential goods and services, emphasising the need for public procurement systems that are crisis- and emergency-prepared and resilient. Evidence shows that the scale and breadth of disasters has increased sharply over the last two decades, and that all OECD countries have experienced at least one major crisis or disaster in recent years. (OECD, 2023[1]) Despite this, there remains potential to better capitalise on the experiences learnt during those challenging times, including the global pandemic, through a stronger focus on crisis and emergency preparedness of public procurement systems.

Considering the low levels of trust observed across Adherents, it would also be beneficial to highlight the significance of leveraging innovative stakeholder engagement methods and enhancing transparency and accountability of public procurement, as a core function of modern public administrations, to restoring trust in public institutions and reinforcing democratic processes. Moreover, greater focus could be placed on fostering competition, potentially as a standalone principle, to comprehensively address declining competition observed in several Adherents. This would entail clearly outlining the multiple aspects to consider throughout the procurement lifecycle to ensure an environment that encourages fair competition. Additionally, in light of the uneven levels of transparency across different procurement phases among Respondents, including a stronger focus on timely, stage-appropriate disclosure could help balance the principles of transparency and competitiveness throughout the procurement cycle.

Lastly, reorganising and possibly reducing the number of principles in the Recommendation by streamlining some of them to better highlight their interconnectedness could further clarify and reinforce the cohesive framework that a sound public procurement system requires.

Beyond concluding that the Recommendation requires a revision, the Report identifies areas where additional support and guidance may help Adherents advance their procurement practices. For example, further continuing the work on professionalisation and expanding the support to risk management and use of emerging technologies initiatives.

In conclusion, the findings of this Report, along with inputs from LPP discussions, provide an initial basis for assessing how the Recommendation could be revised to better reflect developments occurred since its adoption in 2015. Potential areas for revision include digitalisation, sustainability, emergency preparedness and crisis resilience, transparency, accountability, and efficiency, especially in a context of budgetary constraints. By addressing these areas, the Recommendation would continue to remain a cohesive and coherent resource for building effective public procurement systems for the future.

3.2. Next steps

Considering the above, it is proposed that Adherents continue their efforts to implement the Recommendation. In this regard, Adherents should focus in particular on the findings and challenges identified in this Report. Additionally, they should further promote and raise awareness of the Recommendation among relevant government bodies and other stakeholders.

In turn, the OECD Secretariat will continue supporting Adherents in strengthening their public procurement systems, including through policy dialogue on lessons learned, insights and evidence from Public Governance Reviews, thematic reports, policy papers and working papers. The LPP will lead the policy dialogues, multidisciplinary policy exchanges in the framework of the LPP open exchange series, expert groups on the use of AI in public procurement or focusing on developing measurement frameworks to assess the impact of public procurement strategies, OECD regional networks, and international conferences and events.

It is suggested that the OECD provide additional targeted support to Adherent’s implementation by developing practical tools and guidance to assist Adherents in addressing the challenges identified in the Report.

Finally, the OECD will consider revising the Recommendation to ensure its continued relevance and usefulness to countries.

References

[1] OECD (2023), Report on the Implementation of the OECD Recommendation on the Governance of Critical Risks.