Public Procurement for Crises
Esmee Peters is a PhD student in the department Entrepreneurship, Technology, Management. (Co)Promotors are prof.dr. L.A. Knight from the faculty Behavioural Management and Social Sciences and prof.dr.ir. F.K. Boersma from the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, faculty of Social Sciences, Organization Sciences.
The COVID-19 pandemic, along with subsequent geopolitical shocks such as the Russian invasion of Ukraine and US-China trade tensions, has reshaped how practitioners, scholars, and policymakers understand global supply chain vulnerabilities. These crises have placed supply chain resilience (SCRES)—the ability of supply chains to recover from disruptions—at the center of discussions. Yet, the role of public procurement—how governments acquire goods and services—remains strikingly underexplored. Despite accounting for over 12% of global GDP, the idea that public authorities, or private companies, can influence the availability of essential products remains underrepresented.
The COVID-19 pandemic brought unprecedented scrutiny to public procurement processes worldwide. In the Netherlands, for instance, public procurement’s visibility was shaped by the actions of Sywert van Lienden and systemic challenges such as stockpiling failures, hijacked supplies, and price gouging (BBC, 2020; The Guardian, 2020; The New York Times, 2020). While public procurement’s influence was particularly visible during COVID-19, public procurement has long played a crucial role in disaster management (e.g., Hurricane Katrina, Holguín-Veras & Jaller, 2012) and continues to be central in addressing crises like the energy transition (European Commission, 2022b) and climate change (Lăzăroiu et al., 2020). The challenges faced by public procurement during COVID-19 are neither new or nor isolated.
This dissertation aims to understand public procurement in crisis response, answering the central research question: What should public procurement for crises look like?
Study 1, using the Awareness-Motivation-Capability (AMC) framework and a network perspective, explored the early-stage challenges faced by public procurement professionals during COVID-19, highlighting five interconnected themes: governance, knowledge, information systems, regulation, and supply base issues. It emphasized that these themes should not be treated in isolation and called for a shift toward buyer-centric thinking (in addition to supplier-centric thinking), recognizing the importance of trust, rivalry, and cooperation across buying organizations.
Study 2 used the Kraljic Matrix and Factor Market Rivalry (FMR) theory to understand hospital purchasers’ strategies. The Kraljic Matrix showed how the pandemic reclassified PPE from non-critical to bottleneck items. Applying the FMR theory highlights that purchasing strategies involve not only securing supply but also shaping demand, such as through reuse and alternative solutions. This underscores the role of purchasers and governments as gatekeepers in balancing resource allocation, mitigating harmful competition, and fostering trust across institutions.
Study 3 applied high-reliability theory (HRT) to a network of Dutch buyers managing critical supplies. It showed that operational solutions are ineffective without trust and familiarity between buyers and argued for extending resilience thinking to include buyer-to-buyer networks. The study indicates that organizing for reliability is an ongoing process, requiring continuous evaluation and sustained interaction, rather than treating disruptions as exceptions.
Study 4, guided by network learning theory, used longitudinal data from 115 experts across 40 countries to explore whether a shared understanding of crisis procurement has emerged. It proposes a ‘third pillar’ of public procurement—‘public procurement for crises’ (PPfC)—distinct from the cost efficiency and strategic procurement pillars, emphasizing expertise in securing supplies, managing supply security, and developing a crisis-specific ‘rule book’. The study argues public procurement’s role in SCRES extends beyond traditional purchasing and supply management, for example, by supporting liquidity of suppliers—including those not providing crisis-specific supplies—to prevent broader economic disruption. Unlike the typical ‘fragility’ perspective that seeks to minimize disruption, it suggests public procurement can use crises as opportunities to grow SCRES (Nikookar et al., 2021, 2024).
The dissertation pursued three objectives. First, I sought to understand the socio-technical challenges of COVID-19 by turning complex crisis responses into situations that can be comprehended explicitly in words (Weick, 2005), by applying multiple theoretical sensemaking devices (AMC, FMR, HRT, network learning). Second, it explored how this understanding could serve as “a springboard into action” (Weick, 2005), identifying four SCRES implications: (1) public procurement is integral to supply chain resilience; (2) the need to study and build resilience networks which (include buyers, rather than focus only on supplier networks; (3) the insufficiency of solely focusing on finding solutions often through operational and supply-focused interventions for scarcity—there is a need for focusing on changing underlying structures and processes; and (4) The imperative to routinise organising for crises, rather than regarding crises as black-swan events Third, it examined broader public procurement implications. Echoing a panel participant’s observation that “COVID provided visibility of all the flaws already present but never addressed” (Panel discussion, August 2024), the studies reveal a need for deep systemic change. Both traditional procurement pillars—efficiency-focused and strategic procurement—are valid, but do not encompass what is discussed across the different studies of this PhD dissertation. Neither fully captures public procurement’s influence on building resilient supply chains and addressing resource scarcity.
Together with my co-authors, I call for a broader and deeper understanding of public procurement’s strategic importance: as a field of research, a tool of public policy, and a matter of everyday practice. From a research perspective, this means exploring how to organize for continuous resilience, embracing buyer complexity, and embedding public sector responsibilities and opportunities within supply chain resilience research. From a policy perspective, it calls for reforms in regulation, contingency planning, and procurement strategy, embedding resilience-centered principles to help governments balance operational efficiency, strategic objectives, and supply security. From a practice perspective, it urges a fundamental shift in how procurement professionals view their roles and relationships with suppliers, and in their conceptions of resilience, to include routinizing resilience, adopting a network perspective, and embracing public procurement’s ambitious potential.
Advancing the concept of public procurement for crises (PPfC), this dissertation bridges crisis management, SCRES, and public procurement literatures to offer theoretical, policy, and practical insights. It shows that PPfC is not simply about procurement during crises, but about embedding resilience into procurement systems before, during, and after disruptions. Future research and practice must continue to explore how public procurement can become a proactive force capable of shaping resilient supply chains for an era of permacrisis; without formal recognition of its strategic role, public procurement will remain sidelined despite its transformative potential to shape how we prepare for and respond to future disruptions.
