A journalist’s guide to reporting on procurement

Public procurement and contracting in Sub-Saharan Africa extend far beyond mere figures on a budget sheet. Consuming a significant portion of government spending, ranging from 30% to 70%, they wield immense influence over the continent’s development trajectory. This makes them essential areas for journalists to scrutinise.

The World Bank’s confirmation of this fact, with an average of 17% of GDP dedicated to public procurement in Africa, underscores the profound impact of this process. It not only shapes economic growth but also influences the provision of social services and even democratic governance. Public procurement goes beyond the allocation of funds; it entails building essential infrastructure, securing vital supplies, and ultimately, enhancing livelihoods.

Public contracting serves as the linchpin of government spending, moulding infrastructure, services, and the overall development direction of the continent. Its impact permeates every aspect of life in Africa, from the educational materials used in classrooms to the medical supplies stocked in hospitals. The quality of goods, services, and infrastructure hinges on the responsible and transparent practices governing contracting. However, inefficiencies in these processes can lead to delays in construction projects, inflated costs for essential supplies, and the provision of substandard services that ultimately disadvantage communities.

According to the OECD Principles for Integrity in Public Procurement, weak governance in public procurement not only hampers market competition but also drives up the costs borne by the administration for goods and services, directly impacting public expenditures and taxpayers’ resources. Given the significant financial interests involved and the close interaction between the public and private sectors, public procurement stands out as a major risk area demanding vigilant oversight and transparency.

Journalists are essential watchdogs in this arena. By examining contracts, exposing irregularities, and holding authorities accountable, they ensure responsible use of public funds and protect communities from inefficiencies and substandard services.

Despite the significant role of public procurement and contracting, many journalists often hesitate to dive into the subject, leaving this area primarily to economy and business reporters. However, this arena holds vast potential for investigative journalism, with reporting areas such as:

• Corporate accountability. By scrutinising public procurement contracts and assessing company performance against agreed-upon terms, journalists can ensure both accountability (delivering on promises) and transparency (open dealings) in government-company interactions.
• Budget monitoring and resource allocation. Journalists that examining how public funds are allocated and spent through procurement processes can highlight instances of mismanagement, embezzlement, or inefficient resource allocation.
• Service delivery. Investigating delays, substandard quality or inflated costs in procurement contracts can uncover obstacles to effective service delivery and advocate for improvements in public service provision.
• Transparency and corruption. By exposing corruption, collusion, and irregularities in the procurement process, journalists can contribute to fostering a culture of transparency and integrity in public procurement and contracting.

Public procurement and contracting can be likened to intricate games with numerous players vying for influence, profit and power. Understanding the dynamics of these processes involves unravelling the roles and motivations of the various stakeholders involved.

Citizens are the ultimate beneficiaries and stakeholders of public procurement and contracting processes. Citizen monitoring and feedback mechanisms can help identify irregularities, ensure that procurement projects meet community needs, and hold government officials and contractors accountable for delivering quality services and infrastructure. However, challenges such as limited access to information, low awareness of rights and responsibilities, and barriers to participation may hinder effective citizen engagement in procurement oversight.

Government officials, including procurement officers, play a central role in the procurement process. They are responsible for initiating procurement activities, drafting tender documents, evaluating bids, and awarding contracts.  However, government officials are also susceptible to influence, bribery, and conflicts of interest, which can undermine the integrity and fairness of the procurement process.

Contractors and suppliers compete for procurement contracts, offering goods, services, or works to government entities. These entities range from large corporations to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), each seeking to secure lucrative government contracts. Contractors may engage in various tactics to gain a competitive advantage, including lobbying, networking, and offering kickbacks or bribes to government officials.

Intermediaries, such as procurement consultants or brokers, often facilitate interactions between government officials and contractors. They may offer insider knowledge, connections or assistance with navigating the procurement process in exchange for fees or commissions. While some intermediaries operate within legal and ethical boundaries, others engage in corrupt practices to secure contracts for their clients.

Procurement departments or agencies at government ministries are responsible for managing the procurement process, drafting tender documents, and awarding contracts. They initiate procurement for goods, works, or services related to their areas of responsibility.

Government agencies initiate procurement processes, draft tender documents, evaluate bids, and award contracts based on established criteria. They oversee the execution of contracts to ensure compliance with terms and conditions. Transparent and accountable procurement practices by government agencies can enhance public trust and confidence in the procurement process. However, lack of transparency and accountability may lead to favouritism, inefficiency, and corruption, compromising the delivery of public services.

Parliament approves budgets and scrutinises government spending, including procurement expenditures, through parliamentary committees. They review procurement processes to ensure compliance with legal and regulatory frameworks. Political interference or lack of resources may hinder parliamentary oversight, allowing for irregularities and mismanagement in procurement processes.

Oversight agencies investigate and prosecute cases of corruption and misconduct in government procurement. They conduct audits to assess the legality, regularity, and efficiency of procurement activities. Robust oversight by anti-corruption agencies and audit institutions can deter corruption and promote transparency in procurement.

CSOs and NGOs advocate for transparency, accountability, and integrity in government procurement. They monitor procurement processes, expose irregularities, and advocate for reforms to improve procurement practices. Challenges such as limited resources, political pressure, and reprisals against activists may hinder their effectiveness in advocating for procurement reforms.

International organisations and donors provide technical assistance, funding, and capacity-building support for improving procurement systems in developing countries. Support from international organisations and donors can strengthen procurement systems and promote transparency and accountability. However, conditional aid, conflicting priorities, and donor-driven agendas may influence procurement policies and priorities, potentially undermining national ownership and sustainability.

While the ideal outcome in public procurement involves fair competition, transparency and responsible use of public funds, the reality often presents a more intricate challenge. Here is what to keep in mind as you explore this subject in your reporting:

• Competition and collusion: As with any competition, fair play is paramount. However, the temptation to manipulate the system for personal gain can lead to collusion, where contractors join forces to eliminate competition and inflate prices. Bid-rigging, market allocation, and other deceitful practices undermine the integrity of the game, ultimately harming taxpayers and hindering development goals.
• The allure of power: For officials, contracts represent an opportunity to leave their mark, deliver on promises, or even bolster their careers. This opens the door to lobbying, where companies shower decision-makers with gifts, lavish meals, or campaign contributions, hoping to sway their judgment in favour of their bids. In extreme cases, bribes or kickbacks might be offered, blurring the lines between influence and outright corruption.
• The muscle of money: Businesses, armed with financial resources, aren’t passive players either. They can leverage their economic clout to exert pressure, sponsoring events, donating to charities favoured by officials, or even threatening to relocate jobs if their bids are rejected. This creates an imbalance, where powerful companies can use their financial muscle to influence decisions that should be based purely on merit.

• Influence and corruption: Government officials, entrusted with making critical decisions, can be susceptible to various forms of pressure, from bribes and kickbacks to promises of future favours. Such corrupt practices, whether blatant or subtle, distort the game, leading to inefficient spending, wasted resources, and ultimately, a betrayal of public trust.
• Transparency and accountability: To ensure fairness and responsible use of public funds, transparency and accountability are vital components of the game. However, opaque processes, hidden contracts, and lack of information create fertile ground for manipulation and wrongdoing. Journalists play a crucial role in shining a light on these shadowy corners, holding stakeholders accountable and ensuring the game is played by the rules.