Corruption in Public Procurement: Finding the Right Indicators

Joras Ferwerda, Ioana Deleanu, Brigitte Unger

European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research · 2016 · 114 citations · 32 references

DOIFull text

Open access

Concepts

TL;DR

Red flags and other indicators derived from criminal investigations are widely used to mitigate corruption risk in public procurement. The study questions whether these indicators remain viable when evaluated solely on corrupt procurements. The authors analyze a balanced sample of 192 procurements—96 corrupt and 96 non‑corrupt—to identify statistically significant risk indicators. Only a subset of indicators proved significant, with eight—such as large tenders, lack of transparency, and bidder collusion—providing the strongest predictive power for corruption, thereby enhancing detection and investigative efficiency.

Abstract

Red flags are widely used to minimize the risk of various forms of economic misconduct, among which corruption in public procurement. Drawing on criminal investigations, the literature has developed several indicators of corruption in public procurements and has put them forward as viable risk indicators. But are they genuinely viable, if only corrupt procurements are analysed? Using a dataset of 192 public procurements — with 96 cases where corruption was detected and 96 cases where corruption was not detected — this paper addresses the identification of significant risk indicators of corruption. We find that only some indicators significantly relate to corruption and that eight of them (e.g. large tenders, lack of transparency and collusion of bidders) can best predict the occurrence of corruption in public procurements. With this paper we successfully tap into one of the most vulnerable areas of criminological research — selecting the right sample — and consequently, our results can help increase the detection of corruption, increase investigation effectiveness and minimize corruption opportunities.

References

32