Wells, J and Hawkins, J (2010) Increasing 'local content' in infrastructure procurement. Part 2. Proceedings of Institution of Civil Engineers: Management, Procurement and Law, 163(2), pp. 71-75. ISSN 17514312
Abstract
Part 1 of this paper argued that more could be done to ensure that funding invested in infrastructure in low-income countries benefits contractors, suppliers and workers in those countries. Increasing local content in the construction and maintenance of infrastructure would generate income and employment locally and contribute to economic growth and poverty reduction. The use of procurement to achieve this objective is supported by international agencies and has been practised by a number of countries over many years. While recognising that there are very real capacity constraints, this paper shows that there is room - within existing procurement guidelines and without contravening international procurement rules - to do more to promote local content in infrastructure projects. This can be done without necessarily sacrificing on cost or quality. Suggestions include actions at earlier stages of the procurement cycle (during project planning and design processes) and some minor modifications to the tender process.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | developing countries; infrastructure planning; procurement |
| Index terms: | infrastructure project, economic growth, income, funding, infrastructure planning, procurement guideline, poverty, employment, agency, project planning, developing country, design process |
| Subjects: | economic analysis, strategic project management, development economics, economic development, design methods, control systems, infrastructure and transport systems, procurement strategy, sociology, management |
| Topics: | Ethics, Sustainability, Procurement, Engineering Principles, Project Management, Design Practice, International Construction, Human Resources, Business Strategy, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here