Assessing the Design Coherence of a Social Procurement Regulatory System: Victoria’s Experiment
Social procurement can attain particular traction when governments leverage large-scale infrastructure programmes to mandate the procurement of goods and services from categories of people in society that have historically be disadvantaged. However, frictions can arise within a system of regulation...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2025-07-01
|
| Series: | Buildings |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2075-5309/15/14/2521 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1849732973982646272 |
|---|---|
| author | David Goodwin Riccardo Natoli Catherine Xiaocui Lou |
| author_facet | David Goodwin Riccardo Natoli Catherine Xiaocui Lou |
| author_sort | David Goodwin |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Social procurement can attain particular traction when governments leverage large-scale infrastructure programmes to mandate the procurement of goods and services from categories of people in society that have historically be disadvantaged. However, frictions can arise within a system of regulation when operational choices in the structural design of a regulatory regime are not well matched with the nature of the social opportunity being addressed. In 2018, the Australian State of Victoria introduced a Social Procurement Framework, intending to create economic and employment opportunities for historically disadvantaged groups. Applying Sheehy and Feaver’s theory of regulatory coherence, and taking into account findings from interviews with stakeholders, this article assesses the coherence of the Australian State of Victoria’s social procurement regulatory regime, as it applied from 2018 to 2023. This article explains Victoria’s framework, makes recommendations for its improvement, and, drawing upon pertinent theoretical perspectives, extends the regulatory coherence debate into the domain of social procurement. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-289cefb878874bcf9820a44ff3978bd7 |
| institution | DOAJ |
| issn | 2075-5309 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-07-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Buildings |
| spelling | doaj-art-289cefb878874bcf9820a44ff3978bd72025-08-20T03:08:10ZengMDPI AGBuildings2075-53092025-07-011514252110.3390/buildings15142521Assessing the Design Coherence of a Social Procurement Regulatory System: Victoria’s ExperimentDavid Goodwin0Riccardo Natoli1Catherine Xiaocui Lou2Nottingham University Business School, University of Nottingham Malaysia, Semenyih 43500, MalaysiaInstitute for Sustainable Industries & Liveable Cities, Victoria University, Melbourne, VIC 3000, AustraliaInstitute for Sustainable Industries & Liveable Cities, Victoria University, Melbourne, VIC 3000, AustraliaSocial procurement can attain particular traction when governments leverage large-scale infrastructure programmes to mandate the procurement of goods and services from categories of people in society that have historically be disadvantaged. However, frictions can arise within a system of regulation when operational choices in the structural design of a regulatory regime are not well matched with the nature of the social opportunity being addressed. In 2018, the Australian State of Victoria introduced a Social Procurement Framework, intending to create economic and employment opportunities for historically disadvantaged groups. Applying Sheehy and Feaver’s theory of regulatory coherence, and taking into account findings from interviews with stakeholders, this article assesses the coherence of the Australian State of Victoria’s social procurement regulatory regime, as it applied from 2018 to 2023. This article explains Victoria’s framework, makes recommendations for its improvement, and, drawing upon pertinent theoretical perspectives, extends the regulatory coherence debate into the domain of social procurement.https://www.mdpi.com/2075-5309/15/14/2521infrastructuregovernment purchasingregulatory coherencesocial procurement |
| spellingShingle | David Goodwin Riccardo Natoli Catherine Xiaocui Lou Assessing the Design Coherence of a Social Procurement Regulatory System: Victoria’s Experiment Buildings infrastructure government purchasing regulatory coherence social procurement |
| title | Assessing the Design Coherence of a Social Procurement Regulatory System: Victoria’s Experiment |
| title_full | Assessing the Design Coherence of a Social Procurement Regulatory System: Victoria’s Experiment |
| title_fullStr | Assessing the Design Coherence of a Social Procurement Regulatory System: Victoria’s Experiment |
| title_full_unstemmed | Assessing the Design Coherence of a Social Procurement Regulatory System: Victoria’s Experiment |
| title_short | Assessing the Design Coherence of a Social Procurement Regulatory System: Victoria’s Experiment |
| title_sort | assessing the design coherence of a social procurement regulatory system victoria s experiment |
| topic | infrastructure government purchasing regulatory coherence social procurement |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2075-5309/15/14/2521 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT davidgoodwin assessingthedesigncoherenceofasocialprocurementregulatorysystemvictoriasexperiment AT riccardonatoli assessingthedesigncoherenceofasocialprocurementregulatorysystemvictoriasexperiment AT catherinexiaocuilou assessingthedesigncoherenceofasocialprocurementregulatorysystemvictoriasexperiment |