What type of study is this?

This is a Systematic Review study.

September 10, 2025Open Access

Structuring Multi-Criteria Decision Approaches for Public Procurement: Methods, Standards and Applications

DADebora AnelliSapienza University of Rome PMPierluigi MoranoPolytechnic University TATiziana AcquafreddaPolytechnic University of Bari

Key Points

MCDA methods improve public procurement processes, integrating qualitative and quantitative criteria effectively.
The Analytic Hierarchy Process is widely used, but emerging techniques like VIKOR show potential for enhanced decision rigor.
Applications of MCDA are predominantly in Europe, while regions like Africa and Latin America show limited adoption.
A proposed six-step framework aims to standardize criteria selection and evaluation processes in public procurement.

Abstract

The selection of the most economically advantageous tender (MEAT) in public procurement procedures requires transparent evaluation systems capable of integrating heterogeneous criteria, including qualitative ones, to reconcile quality and cost. This systematic review analyzes 74 studies published between 1998 and 2023 to explore the application of multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) methods in public construction procurement. The vast majority of MCDA applications focus on the award phase, with constant growth over the last 10 years. However, applications in the prequalification and verification phases are much less frequent and remain under-represented. Geographically, Europe is the most active area in terms of publications, followed by China and some countries in the Asia-Pacific area. In these regions, MCDA has been employed more systematically over time, while in other areas (e.g., Africa, Latin America), applications are sporadic or absent. Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is confirmed as the most widely used technique. Emerging techniques (such as BWM, MABAC, EDAS, VIKOR, advanced TOPSIS) show greater computational rigor and in some cases better theoretical properties, but are less used due to complexity, less practical familiarity and the lack of accessible software tools. The operationalization of environmental and social criteria is still poorly standardized: clear indications on metrics, measurement scales and data sources are often lacking. In most cases, the criteria are treated in a generic or qualitative way, without common standards. Furthermore, the use of sensitivity analyses and procedures for aggregating judgments between evaluators is limited, with a consequent risk of poor robustness and transparency in the evaluation. In order to consider proposing a framework or guidelines based on the review findings, a six-step operational framework that connects selection of criteria and their operationalization, choice of method based on the context, robustness checks and standard minimum reporting, with clear assignment of roles and deliverables, is provided. The framework summarizes and makes the review evidence applicable.

Ask AI

Helpful

Bookmark

View Full Paper