Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2303.14447

Foreign participation in federal biddings: A quantitative approach using the procurement panel

Abstract

The bidding is the Public Administration's administrative process and other designated persons by law to select the best proposal, through objective and impersonal criteria, for contracting services and purchasing goods. In times of globalization, it is common for companies seeking to expand their business by participating in biddings. Brazilian legislation allows the participation of foreign suppliers in bids held in the country. Through a quantitative approach, this article discusses the weight of foreign suppliers' involvement in federal bidding between 2011 and 2018. To this end, a literature review was conducted on public procurement and international biddings. Besides, an extensive data search was achieved through the Federal Government Procurement Panel. The results showed that between 2011 and 2018, more than R\$ 422.6 billion was confirmed in public procurement processes, and of this total, about R\$ 28.9 billion was confirmed to foreign suppliers. The Ministry of Health accounted for approximately 88.67% of these confirmations. The Invitation, Competition and International Competition modalities accounted for 0.83% of the amounts confirmed to foreign suppliers. Impossible Bidding, Waived Bidding, and Reverse Auction modalities accounted for 99.17% of the confirmed quantities to foreign suppliers. Based on the discussion of the results and the limitations found, some directions for further studies and measures to increase public resources expenditures' effectiveness and efficiency are suggested.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Carlos Ferreira. 2023-03-25. Foreign participation in federal biddings: A quantitative approach using the procurement panel. https://doi.org/10.21874/rsp.v72.i4.4628

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Access to Live AI Advice and Behavior Under Risk: An Incentivized Experiment

Generative AI has become an everyday advisor, and the systems people consult are live and interactive, not pre-scripted. We ask whether access to such a system changes behavior under risk. In an incentivized experiment (N = 158), participants made lottery choices with an optional decision aid presented as a conventional pre-written tool, a live one-shot AI, or a live interactive AI they could query, with information format held equivalent across conditions. Risk preferences are elicited via DOSE. We find no evidence that access to a live AI advisor changes risk aversion.

econ.GN

Bricks or Cash? Externalities of Housing Upgrading in High-density Cities

We estimate housing externalities in a high-density city, exploiting the staggered rollout of Singapore's nationwide Main Upgrading Programme for public housing. Controlling for nonrandom neighborhood exposure, we find that upgrading raises treated buildings' prices by 11.5% upon completion and neighboring buildings' resale prices by about 2% within 500 meters, decaying to zero beyond. A model with distance-decaying externalities shows that in dense settings spillovers justify the distortions of in-kind provision; this advantage diminishes and reverses at lower densities. Administrative data on over 2 million residents show that upgrading disproportionately retains older incumbents, suggesting age-specific amenities as an underexplored externality channel.

econ.GN

The Joneses Visit an Economics Lab

Existing literature offers persuasive evidence that individuals care about how their consumption compares to that of peers, and proposes a large variety of explanatory models. The present paper proposes a common framework for many of those models, and compares their ability to predict behavior in a laboratory experiment. We find evidence of Keeping up with the Joneses motivations but also find that conspicuous consumption is enhanced by Veblen motivations arising from peers' ability to observe one's own choice. Among the seven quasi-linear preference models we compare, our data are best explained by a model that contrasts envy and pride (upward vs downward comparisons) using a value function borrowed from Prospect Theory.

econ.GN