Search results

This paper aims to answer the question: What are the impacts of implementing in-state procurement preference policies on the economy of the state of South Carolina?

Toevaluate the impacts, the following six economic indicators were analyzed: jobs, personal income, real disposable income, output (sales), gross state product and value added. The data were collected from the South Carolina Procurement Services Office and were then analyzed using the Regional Economic Model Policy Insight (REMI PI+) for economic forecasting and policy analysis. The results from the REMI PI+ showed that implementing in-state preference policies benefitted the state and its communities economically.

Specifically, from 2010 until 2017, the total economic impact of implementing preference policies generated $17m in total output, 135 total job-years, $10.22m in gross state product (GSP), $10.27m in value added, $7.52m in income and $5.14m in real disposable personal income. The impact on the wholesale trade industry was over $5m in total industry output and approximately 27 jobs-years. In the manufacturing sector, the total impact was over $4m in output and approximately 17 jobs-years. The impact on the construction industry was approximately $3m in output and approximately 30 jobs-years. Although the values of these economic indicators were very small compared to the size of the state economy, they did outweigh the direct cost of implementing preference policies, thus demonstrating that overall the in-state preference policies contributed to South Carolina’s economy. However, further research is warranted to identify more precisely the benefits and costs of implementing preference policies.

The purpose of this paper is to draw on the theory of institutional isomorphism to investigate how Mississippi’s centralized cash management policy affects the cash management practices in the state’s rural and urban counties.

The study uses a sequential exploratory mixed methods design involving a qualitative documentary analysis and a quantitative analysis of a survey of Mississippi counties.

The study finds that institutional isomorphism drives cash management practices in the counties by influencing how they follow state and agency mandates. Moreover, while urban counties have superior socio-economic indicators compared to their rural counterparts, no differences exist regarding standardized financial indicators, which suggest that local governments in the state may be imitating the practices of one another.

First, states should consider the different financial and economic conditions of their local governments when prescribing cash management policies because uniform policies could stifle local innovation and reduce efficiency in cash management. Second, when there is pressure from a higher-level government or a state agency, local governments may end up imitating one another rather than exploring opportunities for innovation within state policies. Third, state policies should consider requiring education and training in cash management practices that help identify strategies to add value to public funds within the scope of local fiscal capabilities.

The study uses one state to investigate a unique case of centralized cash management practices. The lessons learned can apply to other states seeking to develop a policy for their small local governments without placing the larger ones at a disadvantage.

By implementing various forms of preference policies, countries around the world intervene in their economies for their own political and economic purposes. Likewise, twenty-five states in the U.S. have implemented in-state preference policies (NASPO, 2012) to protect and support their own vendors from out-of-state competition to achieve similar purposes. The purpose of this paper is to show the connection between protectionist public policy instruments noted in the international trade literature and the in-state preference policies within the United States. This paper argues that the reasons and the rationales for adopting these preference policies in international trade and the states' contexts are similar. Given the similarity in policy outcomes, the paper further argues that the international trade literature provides an overarching explanation to help understand what states could expect in applying in-state preference policies.

The purpose of this study is to provide a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of publications in the Journal of Public Procurement (JoPP) from 2001 to 2021. The study provides insights into trends in publications, prominent publication themes, influential authors, institutions and countries that have prominently been associated with the journal’s journey.

The study used a bibliometric and content analysis approach using the VOSviewer software to develop insights into the trends, structures and patterns in publications in the journal. Data for the study was extracted from the Scopus and Google Scholar databases.

The study established that there has been consistent growth in the number of papers published by the journal within the last two decades. Yearly average publication by the journal stood at 14 papers between 2002 and 2009, with the annual average rising to approximately 18 papers between 2010 and 2021. The trend in publication has been established and identified the influential citations and contributors to the journal. The study has also clustered out the thematic structures in journal’s publications. The prominent and emerging research issues in the public procurement environment needing immediate research attention have been highlighted.

The study is a one-journal bibliometric analysis and subsequently ignores publications on public procurement from other journals.

The findings of this study highlight to the research community the contributions of JoPP to the public procurement discourse and present important avenues for future research agenda.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first bibliometric study for the JoPP, providing detailed bibliometric indexes of the 21-year period of the journal’s publications. The study comprehensively analyses the contributions in the JoPP to assess the trend and scope in publications in the field of public procurement and draws attention to emerging concerns and critical issues of neglect requiring research attention in the journal.