Annika Engelbert Livres

Public procurement is a core government activity that is highly prone to corruption. Why, despite joint efforts of national governments and the international donor community to strengthen statutory frameworks, are public procurement systems in Sub-Saharan Africa still insufficiently equipped to prevent corruption? It is the purpose of the book to advance Law and Development research by (a) assessing the effectiveness of institutional means to curb procurement-related corruption in Tanzania, Kenya, and Uganda; (b) treating law as a means to foster development, and (c) applying qualitative research methods to establish causal mechanisms between law and the social phenomenon of corruption. The book shows that while procurement systems are on paper well suited to serve as anti-corruption instruments, implementation gaps are significant; thus, ‘law in books’ and ‘law in action’ differ to a large extent. The reasons are unearthed on the political, institutional, and individual level.

This book presents findings from a three-year research project at Ruhr-University Bochum, funded by the Fritz Thyssen Foundation. It addresses the pervasive issue of corruption in public procurement, which severely hampers development by undermining a state's responsibility to enhance citizens' welfare. Despite the significance of this issue, research on country-specific regulations to combat it has been limited. The book aims to bridge this gap through a systematic comparative analysis of supplier remedies mechanisms in Kenya, Uganda, and Tanzania, exploring their potential as anti-corruption tools. The effectiveness of these mechanisms largely hinges on their actual utilization by suppliers, leading to an examination of three key factors: (1) the institutional framework and independence of the remedies systems; (2) their accessibility for aggrieved bidders; and (3) their efficiency, influenced by bidders' cost-benefit analyses, including procedural fees, duration, available relief, and success prospects. The legislative assessment is enriched by insights from various stakeholders, including public procurement authorities, development organizations, NGOs, and experts. While the systems share similarities due to a common historical context, the analysis reveals significant differences in regulatory and institutional approaches, discussing their varying impacts on the effectiveness of supplier remedies mechanisms.