Australia: Understanding the models for integrating sustainability into the procurement process

Last Updated: 2 March 2018
Article by Scott Alden, Christine Jones, Helena Golovanoff, Troy Lewis, Stephen Burton, Suzy Cairney, Stephen Natoli and Kyle Siebel
Most Read Contributor in Australia, September 2018
  1. Introduction

In a context coloured by environmental degradation, scarcity of resources, rapidly rising consumption rates and persistent social inequality, discussions surrounding sustainable procurement practices are increasingly important. No longer can public and private organisations wilfully blind themselves to the consequences of choices they make regarding what to buy, how to buy it and who to buy it from.

Despite the fact that many organisations are increasingly receptive to the concept of sustainable procurement,ii much confusion persists regarding how sustainability can and should be integrated into purchasing practices and policies. This article considers this dilemma and attempts to provide guidance as to how economic models of valuation and decision making methodologies can be employed by procurement practitioners to successfully and transparently integrate sustainability into the procurement process.

This article will address this issue within a construction-specific context and particularly from a public sector perspective. This is because the government is a major procuring body spending in excess of $32 billion each year on contracted goods and services.iii As such, the government is in the unique position to participate in the market as a purchaser, whilst simultaneously regulating the market to produce sustainable outcomes.

  1. Sustainable Procurement

The term sustainable procurement is defined in the newly introduced ISO 20400:2017, Sustainable procurement – Guidance as "procurement that has the most positive environmental, social and economic impacts possible across the entire life cycle and that strives to minimize adverse impacts".v It is similarly defined in the Victorian Local Government Best Practice Procurement Guidelines as:

A process whereby organisations meet their needs for goods, works and utilities in a way that achieves value for money on a whole of life basis in terms of generating benefits not only to the organisation but also to society and the economy, whilst minimising damage to the environment.

Whilst ISO 20400 and the Victorian Guidelines are relatively new, the notions underlying sustainable procurement are not. Sustainable procurement first emerged following the Rio Earth Summit in 1992vii which led to the introduction of "green procurement" policies, primarily across Europe, which attempted to put environmental considerations on the procurement agenda.viii Soon after, a movement towards "social procurement" saw a similar shift to a consideration of social outcomes and goals.ix However, sustainable procurement differentiates itself from its predecessors in that it attempts to holistically consider environmental, social and economic interests,x or "people, planet and profit".xi This is known as the triple bottom line.xii

  1. Sustainability and the supply chain

It has been said that an organisation "is no more sustainable than its supply chain".xiii The rationale behind this statement is that the mechanics of sustainable procurement operate by purchasers attempting to indirectly inspire social and environmental benefits by exerting pressure on suppliers to reduce their own impacts.xiv These impacts range from reducing pollution and energy consumption, to minimising operational costs and upholding safe labour conditions.

In the Australian context, an awareness of sustainable practices and policies within the supply chain is particularly important as its construction sector utilises thousands of products and services from innumerably different suppliers, rendering the supply chain complex and geographically diverse.xvi Furthermore, much of the procurement activity in Australia involves sourcing materials and or labour from Asia, an area where parts of are known to be high-risk particularly in relation to modern slavery and work health and safety.xvii

Sustainable procurement necessitates a deep change in the ordinary practice of supply chain management and often, in an organisation's supply chain network itself.xviii Sustainable procurement also shifts an organisation's procurement function from a purely low cost/bottom line based system, to a system that aspires to maximise value. This strategic focus enables procurement policies to leverage sourcing functions to improve sustainability performance in the supply chain, thereby leading to long term environmental, social and economic benefits.xix

  1. Integrating sustainable procurement into the tender evaluation process

Support for sustainable procurement is growing with many viewing sustainability as "a fundamental principle of smart management".xx However, many procurement professionals hesitate on implementation as they believe that they lack the necessary skills and knowledge.xxi According to a survey conducted in 2006, more than 80% of people engaged in procurement considered themselves ill equipped to undertake sustainable procurement practices.xxii This is likely because buyers face a new and increasingly complex challenge as they are required to compare suppliers to ascertain who can provide the product or service at the lowest price and highest quality whilst also being environmentally and socially responsible in its practices.xxiii This has consequently exposed the deficiencies in the current tender evaluation process in that it does not easily lend itself to a combination of environmental, social and economic considerations.xxiv

These deficiencies are exacerbated by the fact that the process of evaluating and comparing tender bids will vary considerably depending on the nature of the project. Therefore, any strategy to integrate sustainable procurement within the tender evaluation process will necessarily require a degree of flexibility. Despite this, the core tenets of tender evaluation, being a consideration of both price and non-price components, need not undergo substantial change in order to consider sustainable procurement interests.

The following section of this article will consider how sustainable procurement can be integrated into these traditional limbs of tender evaluation to produce greater sustainable outcomes.

4.1 Factoring price

Cost has consistently been perceived as a major barrier to the implementation of sustainable procurement.xxv This is likely the result of a common misconception that sustainable products and practices carry a significant premium.xxvi However, in many instances this premium does not exist at all, or if it does, it is mitigated by employing a wider definition of value for money.xxvii
Value for money is a key consideration within the public procurement space, and is a "core rule" under the Commonwealth Procurement Rules.xxviii This rule mandates that procurement professionals must weigh price, which is traditionally perceived as the cost of acquisition,xxix against other factors including the quality of the goods and services, the environmental sustainability of the goods, the flexibility of the proposal and (arguably) most importantly, the whole-of-life costs.xxx

It should be noted here that the terms whole-of-life costs, life-cycle costing and total cost of ownership are regarded by many as interchangeablexxxi and will be treated as such for the purpose of this article. However, this article will use the term "total cost of ownership" when referring to this principle this is considered to be a more accurate descriptor.

In calculating the total cost of ownership, procurement professionals should take into consideration all costs related to the product or service throughout its entire lifecycle, including the purchase price, installation costs, usage or operational costs, maintenance and repair costs and also any costs associated with the disposal of the asset or service.xxxii Consideration of this broad range of factors is necessary as, for many products and services, usage and maintenance costs form a predominant portion of the cost burden faced by a purchaser.xxxiii While consideration of total cost of ownership has traditionally been limited to consideration of the costs of acquisition, maintenance and disposal, there is also room within the process to consider broader costs such as resource depletion, and the creation of harmful and unusable by-products such as pollution and waste.xxiv The recognition of such a broad spectrum of considerations pertaining to the value recognises a shift in the procurement landscape where value for money is no longer confined solely to the purchase price, or a good or service.xxxv

The Australian Government's Sustainable Procurement Guide provides one example of a methodology that can be employed by individuals when evaluating the total cost of ownership under a tender bid. Firstly, the Guide suggests that the purchaser should determine the scope of the assessment and consider what factors will or will not be included in the evaluation.xxxvi Secondly, the purchaser should identify the different "cost elements", being the parts of the procurement that will incur a cost.xxxvii This step should be conducted in accordance with value for money principles and, as such, should consider cost elements throughout the entire lifecycle. The third step requires the purchaser to develop a cost structure whereby the cost and frequency of the identified "cost elements" are recorded.xxxviii In some complex tenders, it may be appropriate to draft a costings template and require any bidders to complete the form as part of the tender application process.xxxix The final step involves discounting, or adjusting, the future costs to appropriately align the costs with their present value.xl The need to discount future costs is necessary as the value of a currency fluctuates as a result of inflation. The figures produced as a result of this methodology can then be easily compared and scored by a tender assessor accordingly.

In employing the above total cost of ownership methodology or similar cost comparison tool, a purchaser can account for sustainability principles in a transparent manner, and more fully undertake its duty to ascertain the tender bid that represents the best value for money.

4.2 Factoring for non-price criteria

In order to assess a tender bid, it is common practice for the purchaser to establish a criteria intended to review the competency of the bidder in undertaking the particular project.xli Such criteria usually include factors such as relevant experience, past performance, personnel, technological resources and management systems.xlii The use of such a criteria is essential in assisting purchasers in obtaining value for money, being the "optimum combination of quality, quantity, risk, timeliness, on a whole-of-contract and whole-of-asset-life basis".xliii
However, this non-price criteria methodology does have one major flaw in that it often fails to account for "externalities".xliv Externalities are costs or benefits which result from the activities of an otherwise uninvolved party who did not choose to incur such consequences.xlvPublic procuring entities may be particularly susceptible to failing to account for externalities as the departmental structure means that it is easier to view some externalities as falling within another department or organisation's function.xlvi For example, the decision of one department to enter into a project with an organisation who will likely produce a higher degree of air pollution may not have any immediate effect on the project implementation itself, but may have longer term consequences for residents with regards to health issues or to the local ecosystem. Similarly, a decision to award a tender to an organisation whose supply chain manufactures products overseas rather than by a local producer may have environmental implications with regards to pollution from freight and also social consequences with regards to modern slavery.

The detrimental consequences of failing to account for such externalities are multiplied when you consider that governments have a greater duty to "safeguard the environment and the social fabric... (and) protect the interests of vulnerable members of society and of future generations".xlvii Therefore, consideration of externalities within the tender evaluation process is particularly important in assessing value for money.

This article proposes two primary mechanisms that can be employed by either public or private purchasers to integrate sustainability and account for externalities in the tender evaluation process.

Hedonic Pricing Method

The hedonic pricing method is one tool that may be employed by purchasers in assessing the value of different characteristics or cost elements. Practically, hedonic pricing operates by recognising that goods or services are comprised of a "bundle of characteristics" which combine to influence the overall value of the good or service.xlviii To this extent, value is the sum of both the internal, external, positive and negative attributes of the good or service.xlix In distinguishing the value of certain characteristics within the bundle from others, the hedonic pricing method enables parties to assess the "influencing affect" of certain characteristics on the overall value of a good or service.l This technique is known as regression analysisli and is often represented by the equation:

Market price = factors (structural, locational and neighbourhood factors)lii

Hedonic pricing has traditionally been used in real property appraisal to measure the contribution of certain property attributes to the overall value of a property (hence the reference to neighbourhood factors above).liii For tenders that involve the acquisition or disposal of land, the hedonic pricing model can be used in this traditional sense. However, in this article we also propose that hedonic pricing may be employed in reviewing bids involving non-property related goods or services in order to give insight regarding the value of a transaction. While such an application of hedonic pricing techniques is notably novel, it is being increasingly employed in various markets.liv

One example of a situation in which hedonic pricing may be employed in the tender evaluation process is where two tender bids are very similar except that one results in greater rates of air pollution. Under the hedonic pricing model, the two prices for the project should necessarily differ to the extent that people/society are willing to pay for a cleaner, less polluted environment. lv The notion of willingness to pay, and its impact on value, is therefore central to the practical operation of the hedonic pricing method.

It should however be noted here that while the hedonic pricing model can be a valuable tool for assessing externalities in a transparent and rationale manner, it can also be complex to implement and is heavily reliant on statistics and data analytics. To this end, it is perhaps most appropriately used in large-scale complex tenders involving analysis of multiple externalities.

Analytical Hierarchy Process

The analytical hierarchy process is an alternative methodology that can assist purchasers in setting priorities and managing complex decision-making processes. It does so by assisting decision makers to select the factors that are most important to the decision and generate a hierarchic structure to guide their assessment.lvi By organising and structuring the process in a transparent and logical manner, the analytical hierarchy process can assist purchasers in overcoming the knowledge barrier discussed earlier in this article by clarifying what to consider and at what stage to consider it.lvii
The analytical hierarchy process is a weighted point system which coverts subjective inputs on criteria into scores.[lviii] Practically, the analytical hierarchy process works by comparing the scores achieved by certain tender bids against a hierarchical criteria to assess which bid most effectively meets the purchaser's needs. In this way, the analytical hierarchy process binds decision makers to follow a rational process by "synthesizing all available information about the decision in a system-wide and systematic manner". The analytical hierarchy process has the additional benefit that, as a weighted point system, the process is inherently more familiar to procurement professionals. As such, it is likely to be more easily understood, and readily implemented, within the procurement process, as opposed to the hedonic pricing method which requires a specific knowledge base and skill set.

An example of when use of the analytical hierarchy process might be appropriate is when an organisation is required to consider the trade-off associated with, for example, a project plan which involves substantial reliance on chemical agents, but the organisation has achieved ISO 14000 certification.lix The analytical hierarchy process is appropriate here as the "pairwise comparison" structure which underpins the process enables two different and unconnected elements to be compared against each other, and prioritised in a way that is justifiable, transparent and free from extraneous influences.lx

Saaty in Decision Making in the Analytical Hierarchy Process summarises the implementation of the analytic hierarchy process as involving four primary stages. Firstly, it is essential to define the problem and determine the nature of the knowledge/solution sought.lxi After this broad-picture has been established, it is then necessary to develop the hierarchy. Here, decision-makers are required to develop a criteria based on the elements affecting the decision, sub-criteria and alternatives which sit on a descending level of the hierarchy.lxii This process should result in a set of criteria being established which, when organised, will be used to assess the effectiveness of tender bids in meeting the procurer's needs. The next stage involves engaging in a process of pairwise comparisons whereby each criteria is judged in pairs for their relative importance in achieving the goals established under stage one.lxiii This stage necessarily requires decision-makers to "express their opinions about the value of one single pair-wise comparison at a time using a fundamental scale."lxiv Rankings are then made using a numerical scale ranging from 1 to 9 where a score of 1 represents that the two criteria are of equal importance and 9 means that the first criteria is strongly preferred over the second criteria.lxv This process should result in a matrix which converts qualitative judgements into quantitative values.lxvi Finally, decision-makers are then instructed to weigh the priorities obtained in stage 3's pairwise comparisons against those in the level immediately below.lxvii Repeat this descending comparison for each element, adding its weighed values, so that an overall global priority matrix is established.lxviii
If followed, the analytical hierarchy process will enable purchasers to "identify, quantify, assess, and select the best supplier in terms of both operational performance (cost, quality, delivery, technology, etc.) and environmental performance (reducing waste and maximising resource efficiency."lxix Further to this, in the context of sustainable procurement, the analytical hierarchy process will also enable the quantification of values related to social outcomes such as a prioritisation of suppliers engaging in local production, or those with clean records in relation to modern slavery.

  1. Conclusion

When faced with the reality that "there is no alternative to sustainable development",lxx procurement practitioners are increasingly being required to consider how sustainability can and should be integrated into the tender evaluation process. This necessarily requires procuring entities to consider the definition of sustainability and whether best practice requires not only organisational compliance, but conformity within all levels of the supply chain. Further to this, practitioners are also required to consider how, on a practical level, sustainable procurement can be undertaken within an organisation's established processes.

To this end, this article has proposed three methods that may be employed to effectively and transparently integrate sustainable procurement within the tender evaluation process. The first of these methods involves factoring sustainability into the calculation of price by employing a total cost of ownership assessment. The second method involves using the hedonic pricing method to moderate value by assessing and considering externalities. Finally, this article also suggests that practitioners may employ the analytical hierarchy process to develop a weighted scoring system which considers and priorities a range of values, including those embodied within sustainable procurement.

The authors hope that this article encourages procurement professionals to consider implementing sustainable procurement within tender evaluations by employing the above techniques. By engaging in practical and meaningful implementation, the "quest for sustainability"lxxi can be transformed from a perceived burden to an opportunity for innovation, development, and greater global social and environmental outcomes for both current and future generations.

Footnotes

iKate Harris and Shaila Divakarla, 'Supply Chain Risk to Reward: Responsible Procurement and the Role of Ecolabels' (2017) 180 Procedia Engineering 1603, 1606.

ii Christopher McCrudden, 'Using public procurement to achieve social outcomes' (2004) 28 Natural Resources Forum – A United Nations Sustainable Development Journal, 257-297, 257.

iii Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (2013) Sustainable Procurement Guide, 6.

iv Stephen Brammer and Helen Walker, 'Sustainable Procurement in the Public Sector: An International Comparative Study' (2010) 31(4) International Journal of Operations & Production Management 452, 453.

v International Organisational for Standardisation (ISO) ISO 20400:2017, Sustainable procurement – Guidance, (April 2017) https://www.iso.org/standard/63026.html.

vi State Government Victoria, 'Victorian Local Government Best Practice Procurement Guidelines 2013' (Guidelines, Victorian Local Government, 2013) 15 ('Guidelines 2013').

vii Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (2013) Sustainable Procurement Guide, 6.

viii Christopher McCrudden, 'Using public procurement to achieve social outcomes' (2004) 28 Natural Resources Forum – A United Nations Sustainable Development Journal, 257-297, 257.

ix Christopher McCrudden, 'Using public procurement to achieve social outcomes' (2004) 28 Natural Resources Forum – A United Nations Sustainable Development Journal, 257-297, 257.

x Cathy Berry and Shaun McCarthy, Guide to Sustainable Procurement in Construction (CIRIA, 2011) 5.

xi Markus Milne and Rob Gray, 'W(h)ither Ecology? The Triple Bottom Line, the Global Reporting Initiative, and Corporate Sustainability Reporting' (2013) 118 J Bus Ethics 13-29, 18.

xii Markus Milne and Rob Gray, 'W(h)ither Ecology? The Triple Bottom Line, the Global Reporting Initiative, and Corporate Sustainability Reporting' (2013) 118 J Bus Ethics 13-29, 13.

xiii D. R. Krause, S. Vachon and R. D. Klassen, 'Special topic forum on sustainable supply chain management: Introduction and reflections on the role of purchasing management' (2009) 45(4) Journal of Supply Chain Management 18-24, 18.

xiv Stephen Brammer and Helen Walker, 'Sustainable Procurement in the Public Sector: An International Comparative Study' (2010) 31(4) International Journal of Operations & Production Management 452, 455.

xv Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (2013) Sustainable Procurement Guide, 7.

xvi Kate Harris and Shaila Divakarla, 'Supply Chain Risk to Reward: Responsible Procurement and the Role of Ecolabels' (2017) 180 Procedia Engineering 1603, 1606.

xvii Kate Harris and Shaila Divakarla, 'Supply Chain Risk to Reward: Responsible Procurement and the Role of Ecolabels' (2017) 180 Procedia Engineering 1603, 1606.

xviii Florence Crespin-Mazet and Emmanuelle Dontenwill, 'Sustainable procurement: Building legitimacy in the supply network' (2012) 18 Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management, 207.

xix Oracle, 'Embedding Sustainability in the Sourcing and Procurement Process' (White Paper, Oracle, April 2015) 3.

xx Andrew Savitz and Karl Weber, The Triple Bottom Line (Jossey-Bass, 2006)14.

xxi Stephen Brammer and Helen Walker, 'Sustainable Procurement in the Public Sector: An International Comparative Study' (2010) 31(4) International Journal of Operations & Production Management 452, 456.

xxii Paul Snell, Struggle with Sustainability (16 November 2006) Supply Management < https://www.cips.org/supply-management/news/2006/november/struggle-with-sustainability/ >.

xxiii Robert Handfield et al., 'Applying environmental criteria to supplier assessment: A study in the application of the Analytical Hierarchy Process' (2002) 141 European Journal of Operational Research 70-87, 71.

xxiv Robert Handfield et al., 'Applying environmental criteria to supplier assessment: A study in the application of the Analytical Hierarchy Process' (2002) 141 European Journal of Operational Research 70-87, 73.

xxv Darryl Iles and Pail Ryall, 'How Can the United Kingdom Construction Industry Implement Sustainable Procurement Strategies?' (2016) 2 Association of Researchers in Construction Management 1121, 11123.

xxvi Forum for the Future, 'Buying a Better World: Sustainable Public Procurement' (Report, Forum for the Future, December 2007) 12.

xxvii Forum for the Future, 'Buying a Better World: Sustainable Public Procurement' (Report, Forum for the Future, December 2007) 12.

xxviii Department of Finance, Commonwealth Procurement Rules, 1 March 2017, r 4.4.

xxix State Government Victoria, 'Victorian Local Government Best Procurement Guidelines 2013' (Guidelines, Victorian Local Government, 2013) 15, 98.

xxx Department of Finance, Commonwealth Procurement Rules, 1 March 2017, r 4.5.

xxxi Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (2013) Sustainable Procurement Guide, 31.

xxxii Oracle, 'Embedding Sustainability in the Sourcing and Procurement Process' (White Paper, Oracle, April 2015) 3.

Australian Procurement and Construction Council, above n 13, 3.

xxxiii European Commission, Buying Green! A Handbook on Green Public Procurement (European Union, 2nd ed, 2011).

xxxiv Jonathan Linton, Robert Klassen and Vaidyanathan Jayaraman, 'Sustainable supply chains: An introduction' (2007) 25 Journal of Operations Management 1080.

xxxv Dacian Dragos and Bogdana Neamtu, 'Sustainable Public Procurement: Life Cycle Costing (LCC) in the New EU Directive Proposal (2013) 1 European Procurement & Public Private Partnership Law Review 20.

xxxvi Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (2013) Sustainable Procurement Guide, 34.

xxxvii Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (2013) Sustainable Procurement Guide, 34.

xxxviii Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (2013) Sustainable Procurement Guide, 35.

xxxix Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (2013) Sustainable Procurement Guide, 35.

xl Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (2013) Sustainable Procurement Guide, 35.

xli Department of Treasury and Finance, 'Guidelines on Tender Evaluation using Weighted Criteria for Building Works and Services' (Guidelines, Department of Treasury and Finance of the Tasmanian Government, May 2014) 4.

xlii Department of Treasury and Finance, 'Guidelines on Tender Evaluation using Weighted Criteria for Building Works and Services' (Guidelines, Department of Treasury and Finance of the Tasmanian Government, May 2014) 4.

xliii State Government Victoria, 'Victorian Local Government Best Procurement Guidelines 2013' (Guidelines, Victorian Local Government, 2013) 15 ('Guidelines 2013') 96.

xliv Dacian Dragos and Bogdana Neamtu, 'Sustainable Public Procurement: Life Cycle Costing (LCC) in the New EU Directive Proposal (2013) 1 European Procurement & Public Private Partnership Law Review 20.

xlv Marleen Lodder, Roebin Huffenreuter, Michael Braungart and Diana den Held, 'Regenerative Sustainable Development: Towards a Triple Top Line Approach and Increasing Positive Externalities (Working Paper, 5th International Sustainability Transitions Conference, August 27-29 2014) 3.

xlvi Forum for the Future, 'Buying a Better World: Sustainable Public Procurement' (Report, Forum for the Future, December 2007) 13.

xlvii Christopher McCrudden, 'Corporate Social Responsibility and Public Procurement' (Working Paper No 9, University of Oxford Faculty of Law, April 2006) 12.

xlviii Ben Monty and Mark Skidmore, 'Hedonic Pricing and Willingness to Pay for Bed and Breakfast Amenities in Southeast Wisconsin' (2003) 42 Journal of Travel Research 196.

xlix Rotimi Abidoye and Albert Chan, 'Critical review of hedonic pricing model application in property price appraisal: A case of Nigeria' (2017) 6 International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment 251.

l Matt Monson, 'Valuation Using Hedonic Pricing Models' (2009) 7 Cornell Real Estate Review 64.

li Ibid.

lii Rotimi Abidoye and Albert Chan, 'Critical review of hedonic pricing model application in property price appraisal: A case of Nigeria' (2017) 6 International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment 251.

liii Ibid.

liv Sofia Lundberg, 'Influence of Green Public Procurement on Bids and Prices' (Work in Progress, the National Institute of Economic Research, March 2016) 8.

lv V Reddy, Matthew Kurian and Reza Ardakanian, Life-cycle Cost Approach For Management of Environmental Resources, (Springer International Publishing, 2015) ch 2, 32.

lvi Thomas Saaty, 'How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process', (1990) 48 European Journal of Operational Research 9.

lvii Ibid.

lviii Robert Handfield et.al, 'Applying environmental criteria to supplier assessment: A study in the application of the Analytical Hierarchy Process' (2002) 141 European Journal of Operational Research 75.

lix Robert Handfield et.al, 'Applying environmental criteria to supplier assessment: A study in the application of the Analytical Hierarchy Process' (2002) 141 European Journal of Operational Research 76.

lx Patrick Sik-Wah Fong and Sonia Kit-Yung Choi, 'Final contractor selection using the analytical hierarchy process' (2000) 18 Construction Management and Economics 549.

lxi Thomas Saaty, 'Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process' (2008) 1 International Journal of Services Sciences 85.

lxii Patrick Sik-Wah Fong and Sonia Kit-Yung Choi, 'Final contractor selection using the analytical hierarchy process' (2000) 18 Construction Management and Economics 549.

lxiii R.W. Saaty, 'The analytic hierarchy process – what it is and how it is used' (1987) 9 Mathematical Modelling 163.

lxiv Adebayo Oladapo and Henry Odeyinka, 'Tender evaluation methods in construction projects: a comparative case study' (2006) 13(1) Acta Structilia 106, 113.

lxv Robert Handfield et.al, 'Applying environmental criteria to supplier assessment: A study in the application of the Analytical Hierarchy Process' (2002) 141 European Journal of Operational Research 79.

lxvi MM Akarte et al., 'Web based casting supplier evaluation using analytical hierarchy process' (2001) 52 Journal of the Operational Research Society 516.

lxvii Thomas Saaty, 'Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process' (2008) 1 International Journal of Services Sciences 85.

lxviii Thomas Saaty, 'Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process' (2008) 1 International Journal of Services Sciences 85.

lxix Robert Handfield et.al, 'Applying environmental criteria to supplier assessment: A study in the application of the Analytical Hierarchy Process' (2002) 141 European Journal of Operational Research 74.

lxx Ram Nidumolu, C.K. Prahalad and M.R. Rangaswami, 'Why Sustainability is Now the Key Driver of Innovation; (2009) Harvard Business Review.

lxxi Ibid.

This publication does not deal with every important topic or change in law and is not intended to be relied upon as a substitute for legal or other advice that may be relevant to the reader's specific circumstances. If you have found this publication of interest and would like to know more or wish to obtain legal advice relevant to your circumstances please contact one of the named individuals listed.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
Scott Alden
Christine Jones
Suzy Cairney
Kyle Siebel
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
 
Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Related Topics
 
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
 
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions