iii global conference on electronic government procurement idb, washington, 9 -11 november 2009
DESCRIPTION
EU Policy for Electronic Public Procurement Julia Ferger, European Commission, DG Internal Market & Services. III GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT IDB, Washington, 9 -11 November 2009. Public procurement rules make a difference. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: III GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT IDB, Washington, 9 -11 November 2009](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814435550346895db0cdf5/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
1
EU Policy for Electronic Public Procurement Julia Ferger,European Commission, DG Internal Market & Services
III GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT
IDB, Washington, 9 -11 November 2009
![Page 2: III GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT IDB, Washington, 9 -11 November 2009](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814435550346895db0cdf5/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
2
Public procurement rules make a difference
• The public sector: by far the biggest buyer in the economy– Estimated total EU public procurement (2007): 1.900 bn EUR
(16% of EU GDP)
– Estimated total above thresholds (TED): 377 bn EUR (3% of EU GDP)
• Recent trends– Public procurement is characterised by greater transparency– Greater transparency means more competition– Potential for tangible macro-economic effects
![Page 3: III GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT IDB, Washington, 9 -11 November 2009](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814435550346895db0cdf5/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
3
EU legal framework: Who procures?
EU public procurement directives
2004/18/EC ‘classic’ (supplies, services, works)
2004/17/EC ‘utilities’ (water, energy, transp, postal services)
Everybody is concerned…
• Classic sector– State– Regional and local authorities– Bodies governed by public law
• Special sectors (water, energy, transport, postal services)
– + public undertakings– + private undertakings (special and exclusive rights)
In 2008 39.000 purchasers published a notice on TED
![Page 4: III GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT IDB, Washington, 9 -11 November 2009](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814435550346895db0cdf5/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
4
EU legal framework: How to procure?
• Above the thresholds Directives• Below the thresholds Treaty
• BUT the Directives do not harmonise, they coordinate• Even above the thresholds national and local legislation and
practice are important (especially in organising the practical details of the procurement process )
![Page 5: III GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT IDB, Washington, 9 -11 November 2009](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814435550346895db0cdf5/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
5
EU legal framework: principles
• Use of electronic communication methods by contracting authorities & suppliers possible for all steps of procurement process
• Contracting authority free to choose method ...• ... but fundamental principles (Treaty, case law) & EU Directives’
rules apply– Non-discrimination– Transparency– Fair competition
• Avoid barriers: interoperability• Flexible and technology-neutral framework
= Dematerialise what is done on paper= Employ new purchasing techniques using electronic means
![Page 6: III GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT IDB, Washington, 9 -11 November 2009](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814435550346895db0cdf5/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
6
EU legal framework: scope
Ordering +Invoicing+Payment
Contracting +Ordering
Monitoringof Contract
Outside the scope of EU public
procurement Directives
Related legislation
- E-commerce Directive
- Electronic Signatures Directive
- E-invoicing (VAT Directive) - Payment Services Directive
- Data protection directive
Publication+Access to
documents
Define contract
specifications
Bidding+Submissionof offers
Evaluation of offer
+Contract award
Choice ofprocedure
Thresholds /Rules of aggregation
Shorter time-limits for online notices & electronicaccess to tender documents
- Online standard forms for OJEU-CPV- SIMAP, TED
Data integrity
Confidentiality
Security &
Authentication
TraceabilityNon- discrimination
- e-certificates- e-catalogues- DPS- e-signatures
Automatedevaluation
Automated award
- e-auctions
Electronic Purchasing Methods
![Page 7: III GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT IDB, Washington, 9 -11 November 2009](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814435550346895db0cdf5/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
7
What are the advantages of e-proc?
• Efficient & inclusive procedures: – Reduce transaction costs for authorities and tenderers
(expected reduction of 50-80% of transaction costs);– Accelerate procedures;– Increase participation rates in tenders – including by SMEs
(IT MEPA: 70% of contracts awarded are to micro or small firms).
• Market aggregation: centralisation of procurement on e-platforms increases market transparency.
• Technology test-bed: e-procurement can stimulate the development of ICT solutions for business processes of wide market relevance.
![Page 8: III GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT IDB, Washington, 9 -11 November 2009](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814435550346895db0cdf5/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
8
Challenges to deployment
• Legal and policy: create legal environment that supports on-line procedures, removes policy barriers to use.
• Technical: Availability of applications that ensure data integrity, confidentiality, security & authentication, traceability;
• Market infrastructure: some standardisation systems, applications, classifications and protocols;
• Behaviour: inertia by contracting authorities and operators.
• Investment and up-front costs; who pays? in start-up phase, cost of operating paper and electronic circuits.
![Page 9: III GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT IDB, Washington, 9 -11 November 2009](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814435550346895db0cdf5/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
9
What is EU objective?
1. Ensure that the EU legal and policy environment supports the speedy roll-out of e-procurement by Member States;
2. Remove technical, practical and administrative obstacles to cross-border participation in e-procurement. The introduction of e-procurement must not close procurement markets - neither in EU nor internationally.
![Page 10: III GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT IDB, Washington, 9 -11 November 2009](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814435550346895db0cdf5/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
10
EU level activity: Action Plan for e-procurement (2004-08)
• Enabling legislation: change EU procurement rules to permit electronic procedures (2004), allow new e-procedures; explain and support compliant and timely transposition
• Common basic tools: provide standard forms for online procurement notices, Common Procurement Vocabulary
• Monitor and remove other legal/policy barriers (e.g. encourage e-signatures, change VAT rules to facilitate e-invoicing)
• Promote inter-operability: ensure national systems can receive submissions from operators using generally available technology / applications; investigate / promote new tools (e-catalogues, e-attestations)
• Encourage standardisation (e.g. CEN ICT standardisation)• Invest in inter-connectivity: support research on ICT to accelerate use of
new tools and to inter-connect participants in procurement markets (PEPPOL)
• Evaluation and review of EU policy - 2010
![Page 11: III GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT IDB, Washington, 9 -11 November 2009](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814435550346895db0cdf5/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
11
How is market evolving?
• Proliferation of platforms; over 800 national e-procurement and other specialised platforms identified in EU;
• Volumes of put-through unknown: some platforms have high volumes (e-proc Scotland = 30% of Scottish govt purchasing of goods & services);
• E-proc platforms seem best suited to purchasing of repeated small volumes of standard supplies (through framework agreements, qualification systems).
![Page 12: III GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT IDB, Washington, 9 -11 November 2009](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814435550346895db0cdf5/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
12
Assessment of progress so far
• E-procurement takes root – but use varies across MS. n° of MS with functioning e-procurement up from 6 (2004) to 17 (2009).
• Some procurement phases are heavily automated, others less so: notification and access to documents fully automated. Post-award less so – solutions coming on stream.
• Most frequent e-tools are framework agreements and e-auctions (both price only/MEAT). e-auctions seen as useful but not well understood.
• factors limiting x-border e-procurement: main obstacle = e-signatures/identification; then lack of interoperability & language.
• Price effects are perceptible but tentative: minority observing changes noted decrease of >5%. Price effect most noticeable for e-auctions (>15%).
• Positive assessment by all stakeholder groups: investments in e-procurement already paid off or expected to in near future.
![Page 13: III GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT IDB, Washington, 9 -11 November 2009](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814435550346895db0cdf5/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
13
Availability of e-procurement platforms
Country National
URLs Other URLs
TotalNational
URLs Other URLs
Total
Austria 6 14 20 Liechtenstein 5 5 10Belgium 5 25 30 Lithuania 7 3 10Bulgaria 10 10 20 Luxembourg 6 4 10Croatia 5 5 10 Malta 9 1 10Cyprus 9 1 10 Netherlands 12 18 30Czech Republic 14 16 30 Norway 5 5 10Denmark 6 14 20 Poland 21 29 50Estonia 6 4 10 Portugal 20 10 30Finland 7 13 20 Romania 15 15 30France 20 30 50 Slovakia 14 6 20Germany 11 39 50 Slovenia 6 4 10Greece 24 6 30 Spain 10 40 50Hungary 17 13 30 Sweden 7 13 20Iceland 5 5 10 Switzerland 10 10 20Ireland 3 7 10 Turkey 25 25 50Italy 9 41 50 United Kingdom30 20 50Latvia 7 3 10
+ national eprocurement platform and other specialized platforms
Source: IDC (2009) i2010 e-procurement indicator
![Page 14: III GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT IDB, Washington, 9 -11 November 2009](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814435550346895db0cdf5/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
14
Usage of e-procurement platforms
Up-Take of e-Procurement is still low:• In 2004, 6 MS had implemented a system • In 2009, 17 MS had implemented a system
Factors limiting use, especially across borders• Difficult use of e-signatures• Lack of interoperable systems and tools• Linguistic issues • Need to operate double circuits (paper and electronic)• Lack of trust• Resistance to change
![Page 15: III GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT IDB, Washington, 9 -11 November 2009](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814435550346895db0cdf5/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
15
The PEPPOL project
- ‘Pan-European Public Procurement On-line’ -
Objective: Enabling EU-wide public eProcurement
A Large Scale Pilot focused on Interoperability– Key actors: Member States/national authorised representatives– Outcome: an open, common interoperable solution – EU contributes up to 50% of costs for achieving interoperability
From 1.11.2009 – based on enlargement proposal– 19 beneficiaries from 13 countries– Total budget 30,8 M€ – 8 work packages, <1.600 person months – Project start up: 1 May 2008, duration 42 months
![Page 16: III GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT IDB, Washington, 9 -11 November 2009](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814435550346895db0cdf5/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
16
PEPPOL vision
Any business in the EU can communicate electronically with any public purchaser for all procurement processes
![Page 17: III GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT IDB, Washington, 9 -11 November 2009](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814435550346895db0cdf5/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
17
National solutions will not be replaced. Instead they will be aligned with common European standards and linked through a common interoperability infrastructure
PEPPOL strategy
Common EU Standards and Infrastructure
Source: PEPPOL
![Page 18: III GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT IDB, Washington, 9 -11 November 2009](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814435550346895db0cdf5/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
18
PEPPOL expected results
A secure, reliable and scalable European electronic transport infrastructure
Demonstrator software supporting public procurement processes
Guidance and building blocks for connecting national e-procurement solutions to the PEPPOL infrastructure
A methodology to encompass all Member States Long term sustainability
![Page 19: III GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT IDB, Washington, 9 -11 November 2009](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814435550346895db0cdf5/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
19
Thank you
European CommissionInternal Market and Services DGC4 - Economic aspects of public
procurement, e-procurement
Julia FERGER
Tel.: (32 2) 2998389Fax: (32 2) 2950127E-mail: [email protected]
![Page 20: III GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT IDB, Washington, 9 -11 November 2009](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814435550346895db0cdf5/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
20
SIMAP http://simap.europa.eu - TED http://ted.europa.eu (standard forms, CPV, publication of notices, links)
Commission – e-procurement pageshttp://ec.europa.eu/comm/internal_market/publicprocurement/e-procurement_en.htm (Action Plan, explanatory documents, studies)http://ec.europa.eu/idabc/eprocurement(tools, technical background documents, demonstrators)
PEPPOL project www.peppol.eu (large-scale cross-border pilot project)
eProcurement Forum at ePractice (user forum) http://www.epractice.eu/community/eprocurement
FOR MORE INFORMATION
![Page 21: III GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT IDB, Washington, 9 -11 November 2009](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814435550346895db0cdf5/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
21
Background slides
![Page 22: III GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT IDB, Washington, 9 -11 November 2009](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814435550346895db0cdf5/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
22
Points for discussion
(1) Do findings reflect situation in your country?
(2) How satisfactory is the shift from paper to e-procurement?
(3) What factors do you consider most important in explaining observed delays?
(4) In your country, is there a trend towards fragmentation or consolidation? At regional/local level?
(5) In light of the market situation, is the evolutionary approach still appropriate or is more prescriptive action needed? Of which kind?
![Page 23: III GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT IDB, Washington, 9 -11 November 2009](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814435550346895db0cdf5/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
23
COM stakeholder survey: SampleCountry
Intitutions Responsible
Economic Operator
Contracting Authorities
Central Purch. Bodies Sub-totals
AUSTRIA 3 32 35 3 73BELGIUM 13 59 34 3 109BULGARIA 5 19 26 1 51CYPRUS 8 14 11 0 33CZECH REPUBLIC 6 27 22 2 57DENMARK 11 33 41 5 90ESTONIA 9 24 23 1 57FINLAND 6 33 69 4 112FRANCE 12 68 270 7 357GERMANY 9 101 201 6 317GREECE 13 39 29 1 82HUNGARY 11 24 19 1 55ICELAND 7 19 14 0 40IRELAND 7 26 48 3 84ITALY 16 83 135 8 242LATVIA 4 29 25 0 58LIECHTENSTEIN 4 2 2 0 8LITHUANIA 7 21 28 1 57LUXEMBOURG 5 11 14 1 31MALTA 7 19 13 3 42NORWAY 9 24 34 1 68POLAND 5 31 105 5 146PORTUGAL 17 21 26 1 65ROMANIA 7 39 54 2 102SLOVAKIA 8 23 21 1 53SLOVENIA 10 29 22 1 62SPAIN 10 77 123 0 210SWEDEN 9 30 41 2 82THE NETHERLANDS 11 72 75 6 164UNITED KINGDOM 17 119 156 13 305ORGANISATIONS 23 23Sub-totals 289 1148 1716 82 3235
![Page 24: III GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT IDB, Washington, 9 -11 November 2009](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814435550346895db0cdf5/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
24
COM stakeholder survey: Response rate
![Page 25: III GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT IDB, Washington, 9 -11 November 2009](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814435550346895db0cdf5/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
25
What is e-procurement?
EU legal framework: Time-table
Apr 2004 Entry into force of new EU public procurement directives
- 2004/18/EC ‘classic’ (supplies, services, works) - 2004/17/EC ‘utilities’ (water, energy, transp, postal services)
Dec 2004 Action plan on e-procurement (2005-2008)
31 Jan 2006 Transposition by MS (21 months)
2009-2010 Review of Action Plan & follow-up strategy
![Page 26: III GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT IDB, Washington, 9 -11 November 2009](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814435550346895db0cdf5/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
26
1. Common Basic Tools
• E-notification – Regulation (EC) n°1564/2005 on standard forms
• Common Procurement Vocabulary (CPV)– Regulation (EC) n°213/2008 of 28 Nov 2007
(published 15 March 2007, effective 15 Sept 2008)
– Online explanatory notes (on-going)
• Accessible at EU public procurement portals – SIMAP http://simap.europa.eu– TED http://ted.europa.eu
![Page 27: III GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT IDB, Washington, 9 -11 November 2009](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814435550346895db0cdf5/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
27
0
25
50
75
100
janv-
04
mar
s-04
mai-
04
juil-0
4
sept
-04
nov-
04
janv-
05
mar
s-05
mai-
05
juil-0
5
sept
-05
nov-
05
janv-
06
mar
s-06
mai-
06
juil-0
6
sept
-06
nov-
06
janv-
07
mar
s-07
mai-
07
juil-0
7
sept
-07
nov-
07
janv-
08
mar
s-08
Jan – 2008 84,0%
% struct2004 13,09%2005 36,50%2006 59,20%
2007 76,40%
Example: N° of notices received in XML format
Dec – 2008 86,0%
![Page 28: III GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT IDB, Washington, 9 -11 November 2009](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814435550346895db0cdf5/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
28
2. Interoperable tools & standards
• Explanatory tools
– Explanatory Document on EU Directives (2005)
– Preliminary functional requirements & Learning demonstrators (2005)
– IDABC XML model schemas (2005)
• Interoperability studies
– Compliance verification mechanism(s) (2007)
– e-catalogues (2007)
– e-certificates & attestations (2008)
– e-signatures (2007) e-signatures Action Plan (2009-2010)
![Page 29: III GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT IDB, Washington, 9 -11 November 2009](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814435550346895db0cdf5/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
29
3. Interoperability pilot projects
• CIP large-scale cross-border e-procurement pilot ‘PEPPOL’ (2008-2010)
– Provide common specifications & building blocks in 4 areas • e-signature
• Virtual Company Dossier (e-certificates)
• e-catalogues (pre- and post-award)
• e-invoicing
• CEN BII e-procurement and ePPS standardisation workshops (2008-2009)
• eSignatures Action Plan (28 Nov. 2008)
• eProcurement Forum at ePractice http://www.epractice.eu/community/eprocurement
![Page 30: III GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT IDB, Washington, 9 -11 November 2009](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814435550346895db0cdf5/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
30
MOVING AHEAD: Action Plan Progress Review
Objectives • Evaluate the effective up-take of e-procurement
– extent to which PP procedures have been digitised– How: legal, organisational, economic, technical aspects
• How the AP contributed to it• 4 work packages
1) Overview of the state of play2) Assess extent to which AP objectives have been reached3) Identify issues, gaps + recommendations 4) Provide a methodology for future monitoring
• Results available by mid-2009
![Page 31: III GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT IDB, Washington, 9 -11 November 2009](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814435550346895db0cdf5/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
31
MOVING AHEAD: Action Plan Progress Review
Preliminary findings (mid-2009)• Transposition of PP directives
- All MS have completed transposition
• E-Procurement portals and functionalities- All MS implemented some form of portal; 25% more than one- 22 MS developed eNotification module- 15 MS do not yet permit e-submission- 17 eAccess, 9 eAuctions, 5 eInvoicing
• eNotification- 86% of all notices transmitted electronically to OJEU (2008)- From 2006-2007 n° of visits to TED website increased by 36%
• New tools referenced in TED notices (2006-2007)- Buyer Profile (200 notices), eAuction (1500), DPS (50)
![Page 32: III GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT IDB, Washington, 9 -11 November 2009](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814435550346895db0cdf5/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
32
Availability / exposure
e-procurement is still in its infancy, but there is now real momentum across MS towards greater use
Accumulated number of countries implementing an e-procurement system, over years 1999-2009
12 2
56
8
11
1314
15
17
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Co
un
trie
s
![Page 33: III GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT IDB, Washington, 9 -11 November 2009](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814435550346895db0cdf5/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
33
Specific phases and tools
Certain phases are heavily automated, others less so
• Processes: e-notification and e-access to documents first to be
made electronic and most used • Tools: framework agreements and e-auctions (both on price and
MEAT) most used • Post-award phases (e-ordering, e-invoicing and e-payment) not
frequent today but forecast for future use
![Page 34: III GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT IDB, Washington, 9 -11 November 2009](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814435550346895db0cdf5/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
34
Specific phases
• Today 87% of notices in structured format
• Majority of MS ready to make e-notices mandatory …• … but buyer profiles are not well understood
eSenders 44%
eNotices 40%
paper 4%
fax 4%email 8%
Notices – means of transmission to TED (2008)
![Page 35: III GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT IDB, Washington, 9 -11 November 2009](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814435550346895db0cdf5/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
35
Specific tools
• e-auctions
– Large majority of all stakeholders considers useful
– but often not well understood
– … as confirmed by TED data
• Dynamic Purchasing Systems
– very little operational usage of DPS today, but
– 2/3 of respondents consider DPS useful, although not well understood at all
– … as confirmed by TED data
13
12
1
6 Useful
Useful, but notsufficiently well understood/ applied
Not useful
Don't know
Usefulness of e-Auctions (answers by MS)
6
13
1
4
6
Useful
Useful, but notsufficiently wellunderstood / applied
Make no difference
Not useful
Don't know
Usefulness of DPS (answers by MS)
![Page 36: III GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT IDB, Washington, 9 -11 November 2009](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814435550346895db0cdf5/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
36
Factors limiting cross-border use
Opinions differ…
• MS– difficult use of e-signatures– lack of interoperable systems and tools – linguistic issues
• CAs, CPBs – need to operate double circuits (paper and electronic)
• CPBs– lack of trust – resistance to change by CAs
• Note: Lack of interest from suppliers not often noted
![Page 37: III GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT IDB, Washington, 9 -11 November 2009](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56814435550346895db0cdf5/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
37
Cost and benefits
• Effects on price perceptible but still inconclusive– majority of MS do not know the impact on prices– those available indicate a decrease of at least 5%
• Price effect strongest for e-auctions on price only (15% <)
• Overall positive experience– CAs, CPBs and operators say investments have already paid
off or are expected to in near future– only a few CAs say expected benefits have not materialised