Informal relations in public procurement - Статья

Informal relations in public procurement informal public procurement national Public procurement accounts for a considerable part of public spending. Within the OECD area, an estimated 15 per cent of GDP is spent on procurement. In many non-OECD states the figure is even higher. Not surprisingly, therefore, corruption represents a serious problem. As the factors motivating it may differ across geographical and cultural borders, not only the corruption as such but also the mechanisms facilitating it need to be examined. Drawing on 774 elite in-depth interviews this paper seeks to establish how two aspects of post-communist culture - attitudes towards the law and informal practice - affect procurement. More specifically, it investigates elite perceptions of the legal framework regulating procurement; the procurement officials; and the procurement process itself, in seven states in East Central Europe (Czech Republic, Slovenia), South East Europe (Bul-garia, Romania) and the West Balkans (Serbia, Macedonia and Bosnia-Herzegovina). It is assumed that disregard for the law and informal practice affect procurement more extensively and in a more negative manner in WB than in ECE and SEE, and also that their impact on procurement is greater in SEE than in ECE. The European expansion eastwards has been referred to not only as a political and economic, but also as a culture - and value-based, project. Hofstede and Bond define culture as «the collective programming of the mind that distinguishes the members of one category of people from those of another. Culture is composed of certain values, which shape behaviour as well as one’s perception of the world». While cultural patterns may change as a result of external influences, social norms «informing» people’s behaviour, rarely change through the direct adaptation of outside values. Mihai notes that «although the Europeanization is visible as far as structures are concerned, when it comes to the essence, the process of adopting European values and standards is more cumbersome». Following from this, if negative attitudes to the law and informal practice are rooted in social norms, shaped by national culture, they are not likely to disappear over night. Our previous research suggests that informal practice rooted in the historical and political past is still prevalent in post-communist Europe. Informal problem-solving is most common in post-communist states that have experienced prolonged periods of foreign rule and big distance between rulers and the ruled; and that have been under Ottoman, as opposed to Habsburg, rule. Citizens residing in such states have had to «try harder» to achieve outcomes requiring some kind of interaction with the state. Informal practice provided them with a means by which to compensate for their perceived or real disadvantages in this regard. Such practice was also used as a tool for dealing with bureaucracy also during communism and it continues to affect the public sector, including procurement, at present. Based on the above, we assume that informal practice in procurement is more widespread in SEE and WB than in ECE. We also assume that it is more common in WB than in SEE, given that the former has been badly affected by political conflict and war, and as legal and institutional reform have been less extensive than in the post-communist EU member states. Although our respondents were not specifically asked about the essence of national «culture» or «mentality» as such, some of them referred to these concepts while answering our questions on informal practice. From their statements it is possible to single out three distinct types of «culture» common in post-communist Europe: «culture» in a broader sense (all countries), «informal culture» (SEE, WB), and «legal culture» (all countries except the Czech Republic).