skip to main content
10.1145/2691195.2691265acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesicegovConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

ICT for governance in combating corruption: the case of public e-procurement in Portugal

Published:27 October 2014Publication History

ABSTRACT

Literature has highlighted the potential of information and communication technology (ICT) in building new models of public governance that promote fairness and accountability, which are key requirements in the fight against corruption. In this context, it is worth mentioning the sector of public procurement, since it is one of the most sensitive concerning any corruption risk.

There have been a number of investments by governments towards the implementation of public e-procurement. Portugal is referenced by the European Commission as a good example in this regard. The question that arises is whether this would have an impact on the degree of trust between the citizens and governance, i.e. regarding perception of corruption.

This paper explores the theme "ICT governance and transparency in the fight against corruption - the case of public e-procurement in Portugal." Thus, the aim is to discuss the abovementioned issue with a view in developing future investigations.

References

  1. Capra, F. 1982. O Ponto de Mutação: A Ciência, a Sociedade e a Cultura Emergente. Cultrix, Ltd, São Paulo.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Jackson, M. 2003. Systems Thinking: Creative Holism for Managers. John Wiley & Sons Ltd, University of Hull, UK.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Ackerman, S. R. 2002. Corrupção e Governo. Prefácio, Lisboa.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Melgar, N., Rossi, M. and Smith, T. W. 2010. The perception of corruption. Documento No. 05/08. Departamento de Economía, Faculdad de Ciencias Sociales, Universidad de la República. DOI=http://decon.edu.uy/publica/2008/0508_v2010.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Treisman, D. 2000. The causes of corruption: a cross-national study. Journal of Economics, 76, 399--457.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. OECD. 1995. Governance in Transition: Public Management Reform. OECD, Paris.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. United Nations. 2008. People Matter Civic Engagement in Public Governance. World Public Sector Report. UN, NY. DOI=http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/un/unpan028608.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Moreira, M. 2002. Ética, Democracia e Estado. Principia, Cascais.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Moore, M.1995. Creating Public Value: Strategic Management in Government. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. OECD. 2009. Efficiency Study. OECD, Paris.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Scholl, H. J. 2008. Discipline or interdisciplinary study domain?, In Hsinchun ed. Digital Government: e-government research, case studies and implementation, 21--43.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Ramanujam, P. G. 2012. E-Government: Strategies for Successful e-procurement. International Journal of Engineering and Management Sciences, 3(1), 53--59.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Evans, D. and Yen, D. 2006. e-Government -- envolving relationship of citizens and government, domestic and international development. Government Information Quarterly, 23, 207--235.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Hovy, E. 2008. An outline for the foundations of digital government researh. In Hsinchun ed. Digital Government: e-government research, case studies and implementation, 44--59.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Soares, S. 2009. Interoperabilidade entre Sistemas na Administração Pública. Tese de Doutoramento. Universidade do Minho.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. OECD. 2013. Globalization and Governance. OECD, Paris.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Anderson, S. and Heywood, P. M. 2008. The Politics of Perception: Use and Abuse of Transparency International's Approach to Measuring Corruption. Political Studies, 57, 746--767.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. World Bank. 2006. Governance and Anti-Corruption, Ways to Enhance the World Bank's Impact. DOI=http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTOED/Resources/governance_anticorruption.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Attila, G. 2008. Corruption and quality of public institutions: evidence from Generalized Method of Moment. Etudes et Documents. CERDI-CNRS, University Clermont I DOI=http://publi.cerdi.org/ed/2008/2008.13.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Speck, B. W. 2000. Mensurando a corrupção: uma revisão de dados provenientes de pesquisas empíricas. Cadernos Adenauer n.° 10. Transparência Brasil. DOI=http://www.transparencia.org.br/docs/BSpeck4.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Comissão Europeia. 2014. Relatório Anticorrupção da União Europeia. DOI=http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/e-library/documents/policies/organized-crime-and-human-trafficking/corruption/docs/acr_2014_pt.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Chul, S. D. and Ho, E. T. 2009. L'influence des technologies de l'information et de la communication (TIC) et du capital social sur la lutte contre la corruption. Revue Internationale des Sciences Administratives, 75, 109--128.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. European Network on Debt and Development -- EURODAD. 2009. Procurement and Development Effectiveness: A literature Review. DOI=https://eurodad.org/uploadedfiles/whats_new/reports/literature_review_procurement_and_development_final.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Fraunhofer {Institute Systems and Innovation Research}. 2005. Innovation and Public Procurement - Review of Issues at Stake. Technical Report. European Comission.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Bof, F. and Previtali, P. 2010. National models of public e-procurement in Europe. Journal of e-Government Studies and Best Practices. DOI=www.ibimapublishing.com/journals/JEGSBP/jegsbp.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Kassim, E. S. and Hussin, H. 2010. Public e-Procurement: A Research Synthesis. In Proceedings of the Paper read at the 2010 International Conference on e-Education, e-Business, e-Management and e-Learning. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Comissão Europeia. 2010. Livro Verde relativo ao alargamento da utilização da contratação pública eletrónica na UE. DOI=http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/consultations/docs/2010/e-procurement/green-paper_pt.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Ronchi, et al. 2010. What is the value of an IT e-procurement systems?. Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management, 16, 131--140.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Talero, E. 2001. Electronic Government Procurement: Concepts and Country Experiences. Technical Report. World Bank. DOI= http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INFORMATIONANDCOMMUNICATIONANDTECHNOLOGIES/Resources/StrategicOverview.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Comissão Europeia. 2012. Uma estratégia para a contratação pública eletrónica. DOI= http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/PT/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52012DC0179&from=PTGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Instituto da Construção e do Imobiliário, I. P. 2011. Contratação Pública em Portugal -- Relatório Síntese 2010. DOI=http://www.inci.pt/portugues/inci/estudosrelatoriossectoriais/estudosrelatrios%20sectoriais/contratacao%20publica%20-%20relatorio%20sintese%20-%202010.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Instituto da Construção e do Imobiliário, I. P. 2012. Contratação Pública em Portugal 2011. DOI=http://www.inci.pt/Portugues/inci/EstudosRelatoriosSectoriais/EstudosRelatrios%20Sectoriais/RelContr_Pub_2011_final.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Instituto da Construção e do Imobiliário, I. P. 2014. Contratação Pública em Portugal 2012. DOI=http://www.inci.pt/Portugues/inci/EstudosRelatoriosSectoriais/EstudosRelatrios%20Sectoriais/Rel_Anual_Contratos_Publicos_2012.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. European Comission. 2006. 0pinions on organised, cross-border crime and corruption. Special Eurobarometer. DOI=http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_245_en.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. European Comission. 2008. The attitudes of Europeans towards corruption. Special Eurobarometer 291. DOI=http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_291_en.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. European Comission. 2009. The attitudes of Europeans towards corruption -- full report. Special Eurobarometer 325. DOI=http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_325_en.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. European Comission. 2012. Corruption Report. Special Eurobarometer 374. DOI=http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_374_en.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. European Comission. 2014. Corruption Report. Special Eurobarometer 397. DOI=http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_397_en.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. ICT for governance in combating corruption: the case of public e-procurement in Portugal

                Recommendations

                Comments

                Login options

                Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

                Sign in
                • Published in

                  cover image ACM Other conferences
                  ICEGOV '14: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance
                  October 2014
                  563 pages
                  ISBN:9781605586113
                  DOI:10.1145/2691195

                  Copyright © 2014 ACM

                  Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

                  Publisher

                  Association for Computing Machinery

                  New York, NY, United States

                  Publication History

                  • Published: 27 October 2014

                  Permissions

                  Request permissions about this article.

                  Request Permissions

                  Check for updates

                  Qualifiers

                  • research-article

                  Acceptance Rates

                  ICEGOV '14 Paper Acceptance Rate30of73submissions,41%Overall Acceptance Rate350of865submissions,40%

                PDF Format

                View or Download as a PDF file.

                PDF

                eReader

                View online with eReader.

                eReader