Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-46n74 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-07T17:54:59.044Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Investment Case for E-Government Procurement: A Cost–Benefit Analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 June 2023

Erica Bosio
Affiliation:
World Bank, United States of America
Gavin Hayman
Affiliation:
Open Contracting Partnership, United Kingdom
Nancy Dubosse*
Affiliation:
Copenhagen Consensus Center, United States of America
*
Corresponding author: Nancy Dubosse; Email: nancy@copenhagenconsensus.com
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In almost every country, government is the largest buyer of works, goods, and services from the private sector. Through the laws and practice of public procurement, governments create competition among firms, thus optimizing public expenditure. However, public procurement is often associated with inefficient allocation of resources and corruption. One method to reduce inefficiencies and abuse in public procurement is the use of e-government procurement (e-GP) platforms. Yet nearly 40% of countries—mostly low- and lower-middle income countries—do not have functioning e-GP platforms. Cost–benefit analysis is used to make the investment case for the development and integration of e-procurement systems in low- and lower middle-income countries. The costs of setting up an e- GP system include an initial investment of $9.03 million, on average, for the planning, design, and build phases spread over a 5-year period. Annual operating and maintenance expenses during pilot and deployment phases are estimated at $1.1 million annually. In total, it is estimated that the net present value of costs to design, build, test, deploy, and operate a robust e-GP system is $16.7 million for a typical low- and middle-income country (at an 8% discount rate). While there are many tangible benefits of e-GP, the benefit assessed here is the reduction in the prices of goods, works, and services paid by government buyers. Using the average percentage reduction in procurement prices of 6.75%, the savings from an e-procurement system are valued at $637.9 million and $5.2 billion for low- and lower middle-income countries, respectively. The benefit–cost ratio of implementing an e-GP system in the average low-income country ranges from 8 to 58 and is 142 to 473 for a lower middle-income country. The size of the procurement market, the reduction in procurement prices, the duration of the implementation process, and the penetration rate of e-GP throughout government are principal determinants in the return on investment.

Information

Type
Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Society for Benefit-Cost Analysis
Figure 0

Table 1. Suggestive evidence for corruption in public procurement.

Figure 1

Table 2. e-GP implementation phase by country case, months.

Figure 2

Table 3. Timing and duration of e-GP implementation phases.

Figure 3

Table 4. Effect sizes.

Figure 4

Table 5. GDP and procurement market projections.

Figure 5

Table 6. Schedule of benefits, with average effect size 6.75%.

Figure 6

Table 7. e-GP costing by country case.

Figure 7

Figure 1. Breakdown of ProZorro program costs by cost input category. Source: Results for Development (2017).

Figure 8

Table 8. Schedule of costs, USD million.

Figure 9

Table 9. Cost–benefit ratios, USD millions.

Figure 10

Table 10. Sensitivity analysis on effect size.

Figure 11

Table 11. Sensitivity analysis on duration of implementation phases.

Figure 12

Table 12. Sensitivity analysis on e-GP penetration.

Figure 13

Table 13. Sensitivity analysis on size of economy.

Figure 14

Table 14. Sensitivity analysis of failed rollout.