Addressing economic efficiency–sustainability tensions in public procurement decision-making: unpacking the role of decision framings

Engineering notes

Key topics: autonomous driving. See the paper for implementation details and experimental results.

Chinese explanation / 中文解读

中文解读待补充：本站会优先为端到端自动驾驶、BEV感知、3D目标检测、轨迹预测、路径规划、LiDAR感知等高价值论文补充中文说明。

Original abstract

Purpose Sustainable supply chain management (SSCM) research recognizes sustainable public procurement (SPP) as a key lever for addressing global sustainability challenges. However, translating these ambitions into procurement decisions frequently create tensions between internal economic efficiency and sustainability objectives. This study investigates how public organizations address these tensions through procurement decision-making. Design/methodology/approach We adopt a multiple case study design involving 10 public organizations, drawing on interviews, archival documents, and field observations, analyzed abductively with the Gioia method. Findings We identify three SPP decision-making approaches – cost-driven, values-driven and ambidextrous – that differ in how internal economic efficiency and sustainability are prioritized. These approaches are underpinned by two decision framings: a rational and a public value-oriented framing. Variation across approaches reflects whether one framing predominates or whether both are concurrently combined. Originality/value This study advances SSCM research by offering a decision framing perspective that complements and extends the institutional logics lens in explaining organizational responses to sustainability-related tensions. It reveals rational and public value–oriented decision framings as generative mechanisms through which distinct SPP decision-making approaches emerge in public organizations. The study also enriches research on ambidexterity in public organizations by showing that it arises from the capability to hold together different decision framings.

Links and sources

• PDF from original source

Comments