| dc.description.abstract | The utilization of government procurement systems by the public sector to outsource the procurement of goods, provision of services, and construction projects to the private sector is a prevalent practice. This modus operandi has ascended to become a fundamental component of public sector activities, playing a pivotal role in the efficacious administration of public affairs and the delivery of public services.
In the realm of government procurement, a categorization system is employed, predicated on procurement tiers (monetary values) and the corresponding procedural requisites for each tier. The category designated as “Bidding cases that do not reach the announced amount” encompasses those procurement instances that fall within the bracket of “not attaining the announced value yet surpassing one-tenth of said amount.” This category persistently represents a substantial fraction, exceeding 50%, of all government procurement cases at the national level, with an annual aggregate of cases surpassing 100,000 and the procurement expenditures reaching several billions of New Taiwan Dollars. Despite the modest procurement value of individual cases, their aggregate significance cannot be understated when considered from a holistic public administration perspective. The type of government procurement where the “ bidding cases do not reach the announced amount”, despite the low budget, surprisingly constitutes 60% of the total case volume. (travel related procurement has approximately 25% of these cases). It has revealed a significant “accountability” gap.
A case in point is the prevalence of travel (observation)-related procurement cases within “Bidding cases that do not reach the announced amount” in the basic level units of Taoyuan City. These cases, predominantly managed by basic level units, typically resolve the awarding of contracts based on the principle of “opting for the most advantageous bid.” The constrained staffing and specialization levels in these units engender a predilection for methods that are streamlined, rapid, and adhere to precedent, thereby neglecting the crucial aspect of “accountability” in procurement cases, and consequently heightening the propensity for “agency problems.” Therefore, this study elects to focus on the travel (observation)-related procurements of grassroots units in Taoyuan City for its secondary data analysis and in-depth interviews, as they epitomize a prototypical scenario within this context.
Pertinent issues warranting scrutiny include the complexity of bidding procedures, exemplified by instruments such as “A List of the Number of Vendors Required for Agencies to Conduct Procurement,” the discrepancy in supervisory protocols between central and local bodies, the predilection for decision-making aligned with the “spirit of the most advantageous bid,” and the absence of stringent legal and regulatory frameworks. Additionally, the challenges associated with split procurement and the ambiguities encountered in the transition to “restricted tendering” are pivotal considerations in the endeavor to formulate an accountability framework and supervisory mechanism for “bidding cases that do not reach the announced amount.”
The objective of this study is to critically appraise and recalibrate the extant regulatory framework through comprehensive literature analysis, secondary data scrutiny, and in-depth qualitative interviews. The aim is to establish a robust accountability pathway and supervisory mechanism for “bidding cases that do not reach the announced amount.” This initiative seeks to mitigate the frequency of agency problems in contract outsourcing activities, align with public expectations for equitable, impartial, transparent, and accountable government procurement practices, and safeguard procurement personnel at basic levels from unwarranted censure owing to nebulous accountability mechanisms and regulatory directives, thereby empowering them to discharge their duties with conviction. | en_US |