Page 58 - Procurement guidelines for smart sustainable cities - A U4SSC deliverable

Why it’s important

Emergencies can make it difficult for buyers to ensure quality and value for money when using
public funds. In particular, risks can include:

• “price gouging”, where suppliers take advantage of high demand and supply bottlenecks to
charge unreasonable prices;

• the supply of counterfeit or substandard products and services; and

• lack of competition, for example only one supplier is directly awarded a contract to provide
essential products or services.

What it means

To avoid overcharging or price gouging public officials and stakeholders should:

• use pricing data to get an overall picture of market conditions before and during the emergency;
• use a “should cost model” to estimate how reasonable prices are;

• pool forces and conduct “aggregated” or joint procurements with other departments or
authorities; and

• report any instances of price gouging to the relevant authorities.

To avoid counterfeit goods public officials and stakeholders should:

• check standards for emergency goods provided by international bodies and relief agencies;
• include minimum standards in their requirements and evaluation criteria; and

• gain additional information on the origin and transport of supplies, from credible sources, using
first-hand evidence when possible.

To ensure competitive bidding public officials and stakeholders should:

• avoid using over-prescriptive or tailored requirements that can only be supplied by one supplier;
• conduct a fast-track competitive procedure whenever possible, even if only between two to
three suppliers; and

• if using a direct award procedure, check that the supplier with whom they intend to contract is
the only one able to provide the required goods, services and/or works on time.

44 Procurement guidelines for smart sustainable cities | May 2023