Assignment Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3000 words

Assignment - Essay Example Uses of Standard Tender Document 8 f. Pre Disclosure of Relevant Information 8 g. Public Bid Opening 9 h. Evaluation of Tender in Monitory Terms 10 i. Qualification of Bidders on the Basis of Pass/ Fail Requirement 10 j. Award to the Lowest Evaluated Bidder Meeting the Stated Criteria 11 k. Accessible to Applicable Laws and Regulation 12 l. Appeal Mechanism 13 m. Standstill Period 13 n. Debriefing 14 o. Publication of Award 14 Bibliography 15 1. Introduction Public Procurement refers to the process of purchasing of goods and services on behalf of the public authority, through government agencies. Public procurement involves government expenditure that is aimed at securing inputs and resources in order to achieve objectives, hence establish a significant impact on the crucial key holders and the society. Besides, government purchasing occurs through both domestic and international trade. In fact, about ten to fifteen percent of the GDP involves government expenditure on procurement; t herefore, public procurement makes a significant contribution to the global economy1. Transparency has been considered an essential standard that facilitates improvement of public procurement; in fact, it involves a procurement process that is open for public scrutiny. Furthermore, this facilities competition, thereby increasing the efficiency of the process and the threat posed by issues such as corruption are alleviated. Transparency enables people to monitor public bodies, thereby holding these organizations accountable for their undertakings. The main objective of transparent public procurement is to facilitate fairness, competition and economic value in the process; this objective is achieved through effective and efficient procurement process that is developed by the principals monitoring the process. Apparently, sufficient controls are incorporated in order to promote competition, thereby reducing the risk associated with corruption, fraud, mismanagement and wastage of public resources. In this case, transparency is considered to be an effective tools aimed at hampering corruption and ensuring that there is value for money2. In addition, transparency is employed in different ways along with different practices such as advances publication of procurement plans, procurement policies are published, tender notices are advertised, the criteria for evaluation is disclosed, there are payment of prices and contract awards are published. a. Transparency Needed to Foster Competition International liberalization is applied in fostering competition among public procurement markets. Besides, competition can also be facilitated through participation in WTO Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA)3. In this case, competition can be fostered in four different ways, which include provision of vehicles by GPA in order to facilitate progressive opening of parties to markets in order for the to engage in international competition. On the other hand, there are other provis ions that involve agreement focusing on offering information based on framework aimed that ensuring that the process is transparent4. Fostering competition involves signing agreements with GPA parties in order to facilitate establishment of domestic reviews and operations, where participants are allowed to challenge decisions that are deemed questionable. Therefore, decision made by national procurement authorities should be subjected to review by the competitors in order to avoid unfairness or discrimination. In addition, competition can

DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE - Essay Example After pulling some strings, his family was able to arrange a liver for Krampitz. The donor heard about the need of his liver through the media campaign launched by Krampitz’s family. However, a liver transplant only bought Krampitz another eight months. Doctors had already foretold that due to the aggressive nature of cancer, the disease will not be cured even after a transplant. At the time Krampitz got a donor, there were 16000 other better suited candidates on the UNOS wait list. Krampitz was able to jump this queue of 16000, better suited candidates because of his publicity stunt. The question is, was it ethically correct for Krampitz to jump ahead of so many people only because he could? This publicity stunt may have found a donor who would not have been found otherwise but the ethical dilemma of distribution of organs is still there. This dilemma when viewed under Distributive justice can provide a better understanding and analysis of situations such as the one mentioned above. What Krampitz did is legal, technically speaking he never breached any law (Delvoye, 2004). It all boils down to the matter of ethics, how well Krampitz’s case weighs on the moral scale? Distributive justice pertains to ‘fair’ distribution of economic resources among widespread community (Maiese, 2003). This distribution revolves around three factors, number or resources, the procedure and the pattern of distribution (Maiese, 2003). Distributive justice applies to organ donation because there are simply not enough for everyone (Center for Bioethics, 2004). Going back to Krampitz’s case, the procedure, pattern as well as the number of resources (healthy livers available for transplant) all seem to be against Krampitz. What Krampitz did is a violation of ethics, knowing that he was dead anyway, regardless of the transplant. Still he jumped ahead of 1600 people and got himself a healthy liver. Critically speaking, for his own survival he had to take e very chance to save himself which is not wrong. But when you’re a citizen, you are part of the social fabric, people are knitted together to keep the society strong. Otherwise, the law of ‘survival of the fittest’ prevails and that means chaos. The matter of distributive justice in healthcare is not a matter of consequential theory. It is not about creating an equitable society; it is about what is in the best interest (mutual interest) of everybody. The idea of Distributive Justice arises in cases of organ donation because there is a wide gap between the supply and demand of human organs. Human organs for transplantation purposes are very scarce. This shortage begs a more just distribution of organs. Distributive justice aims to provide a fair distribution of scarce resources such as human organs. The distributive justice theory employs various criteria to judge and rightfully prefer one individual over another in matters of organ distribution. The theory measur es the overall utility of choosing the recipient of an organ. There is another side to this story, the supporters of Krampitz’s case. They say that the media campaign launched by Krampitz found a person who with his own will agreed to donate the liver, therefore adding another donor to the pool of donors. Had this person not reached by Krampitz’s family, he would have chosen not donate at all. This makes the case very strong for Krampitz. Krampitz identified