This page aims to facilitate the reuse of the TED (Tenders Electronic Daily) open data by collecting links to already existing reuse examples and serving as a repository for sharing ideas. The target audience for this wiki includes researchers, journalists, and data analysts, as well as procurement practitioners and policy makers. Your experience with TED data does not matter: the page should be useful for novices (e.g. students looking for a dataset and a topic for their thesis) as well as experienced professionals (e.g. procurement practitioners who want to submit an idea).
Please note that Digital Whistleblower (DIGIWHIST), a large EU funded research project on procurement data, provides a very comprehensive overview of existing procurement networks, research, legislation, data sets, and government agencies. This wiki does not duplicate this information, thus please refer to the DIGIWHIST website as a primary source of information, especially for an overview of existing articles. However, please note that the scope of the DIGIWHIST project is broader than the research done on the TED dataset.
This page is conceived as a wiki, i.e. editing by any user is possible. Please contribute below!
- Studies on public procurement done for (or by) the European Commission. Out of the more than 30 studies, roughly half use TED data.
- Single Market Scoreboard, a benchmark of countries' performance in public procurement
- Social network analysis of procurement data: http://www.academia.edu/6280420/Social_Network_Analysis_as_a_method_in_the_Data_Journalistic_toolkit
- Studies by the Swedish competition authority (http://www.konkurrensverket.se/en/news/report-with-facts-and-figures-on-public-procurement-in-english, http://www.konkurrensverket.se/globalassets/publikationer/uppdragsforskning/forsk_rap_2015_3.pdf)
- Websites benchmarking national buyers: supervizor.kpk-rs.si (Slovenia), www.redflags.eu (Hungary), www.ro.tendertracking.eu (Romania), firmy.transparency.sk (Slovakia). (These websites also include other data than TED or may be using data published according to TED forms, but at national portals.)
- http://yleborgne.net/opented, https://elvis.tenders.exposed/
Reuse / research proposals
- Some contract notices indicate that tenders are accepted in multiple languages. Does this increase the number of bids? Does this increase cross-border procurement? How does the effect differ depending on the language (e.g. is the effect strongest for English; does it depend on geographical proximity (e.g. German in Czech Republic); on mutual intelligibility (e.g. Portuguese in Spain, Slovak in Czech Republic)).
Is there any impact on cross border procurement by proximity (neighboring regions from different countries), shared currency (eurozone vs. non-eurozone), shared language (e.g. UK / Ireland; regions in Switzerland and EU countries speaking the respective language).
- When contract notices indicate that tenders may be submitted after a longer period than is the legal minimum, does this influence the number of received bids?
Is their a correlation between groups of companies which win and the election cycles in countries? I.e. bigger changes in winning companies around election years than in other years?
What increases the probability of a notice getting cancelled?
- Does repeated awarding of contracts to the same suppliers correlate with lower savings, or any indicators of bad practice? Is is possible to predict vendor lock-in?
- In the USA, "no top 25 supplier of the government has, reportedly, been founded after 1975". What about the EU? How much is the supplier structure changing? Does this follow the same patens as with the private sector, or is it different? (See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3CwGA2SWlc for inspiration.)
- How has the quality of data submitted to TED changed with changes to procurement legislation?
- What is the impact of missing and incorrect information in contract notices such as lack of cpv code on bidding outcomes such as number of bidders or the success of non-local bidders?