sustainability
Article
Managing Sustainable Public Procurement: A Nationwide
Survey in China
Mingshun Zhang 1, * , Li Zhang 1 and Meine Pieter van Dijk 2
Citation: Zhang, M.; Zhang, L.; van
Dijk, M.P. Managing Sustainable
Public Procurement: A Nationwide
Survey in China. Sustainability 2022,
14, 11955. https://doi.org/10.3390/
su141911955
Academic Editor: Andrea Appolloni
Received: 27 August 2022
Accepted: 20 September 2022
Published: 22 September 2022
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Sustainability 2022, 14, 11955. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141911955
1 Beijing Climate Change Response Research and Education Centre,
Beijing University of Civil Engineering and Architecture (BUCEA), No. 1, Zhanlanguan Road,
Beijing 100044, China
2 BUCEA and Maastricht School of Management (MSM), Endepolsdomein 150,
6229 EP Maastricht, The Netherlands
* Correspondence: zhangmingshun@bucea.edu.cn
Abstract: Sustainable public procurement (SPP) is an important element of China’s public policy
and a market instrument to achieve sustainable development. This research aims at achieving
insights into China’s SPP through a nationwide survey of Public Procurement Centers (PPCs),
telephone interviews, and an expert workshop. The results show that China’s SPP is a hierarchical
and centralized multi-level system, which is characterized by a top-down structure and is mainly
driven by legal and policy initiatives, social benefits, and commitments of public bodies. There
is huge potential for more SPP that remains untapped in China, and barriers are observed at the
SPP operational level. The main barriers include a lack of trust in sustainability information about
different products, limitations of the two SPP lists used, a lack of knowledge and skills, the perception
of higher prices in the case of SPP, a lack of transparency, a lack of user-friendly tools, and soft social–
environmental criteria that have low operability in the local situation. This research recommends
a reform of SPP, moving from applying technical and functional specifications from the existing
two-list approach to involving state-owned enterprises and infrastructure projects in a different SPP
approach. Theoretical conclusions concern the Chinese SPP practice. In China, SPP is more like
social responsible public procurement. Secondly, it was found that there are advantages to a more
decentralized system, and finally, the implementation of SPP is declining because of specific barriers
identified in this study.
Keywords: sustainable public procurement; public procurement; social sustainability; sustainability;
China
1. Introduction
Sustainable public procurement (SPP) is a highly relevant policy instrument and pro-
vides other organizations the direction to go. In many countries, the total expenditures of all
state agencies and public institutions can exceed the financial impact of the biggest private
players by far. When utilizing this huge lever, governments can incentivize the market for
improving sustainability without directly regulating market actors [1]. International prac-
tices have shown significant progress made by SPP in addressing economic, environmental,
and social challenges. Hence, SPP has been adopted widely by governments pursuing
multiple objectives of resource efficiency, environmental protection, sustainable consump-
tion, cleaner production and circular economy, social justice, and recently low-carbon
development [2–4].
The legal basis for sustainable public procurement in China is provided by the Govern-
ment Procurement Law of China issued in 2002, China’s Bidding Law issued in 1999, and
Promotion Law on Cleaner Production issued in 2002. These laws offer scope for taking
into account the multiple and soft goals defined in Article 9, which emphasizes the needs of
SPP by taking into account protecting the environment, supporting the development of less
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability
Sustainability 2022, 14, 11955 2 of 19

developed areas or ethnic minority areas, and promoting the growth of small and medium-
sized enterprises. China’s SPP started in 2004 when the National Development and Reform
Commission (NDRC) and the Ministry of Finance introduced energy-efficient procurement.
In 2006, China’s Ministry of Finance and the State Environmental Protection Administra-
tion (now the Ministry of Ecology and Environmental Protection) launched an initiative
promoting green public procurement (PP), which focuses on procuring environmentally
friendly products. In both cases, central product lists were issued to guide and support
local procurement decisions. These two lists of energy efficiency and environmentally
friendly products are the basis for SPP in China [5]. The legal and policy framework and
the relevant institutions have been developed in China. China’s PP operates on two levels.
At the national level, the central government formulates the principles and framework for
SPP. At the local level, local public procurement centers implement procurement, specify
and customize regulations, and train procurement officers. China’s PP is centralized and
comprises all purchases for public service units such as municipal administrations, all
public institutes, universities and schools, hospitals, and state-owned enterprises.
SPP is defined as “a process whereby organizations meet their needs for goods, ser-
vices, works and utilities in a way that achieves value for money on a whole life basis in
terms of generating benefits not only for the organization, but also for the society and the
economy, whilst minimizing damage to the environment” [6]. Theoretically, SPP addresses
more environmental considerations and finds ways in which environmental objectives
can be effectively addressed through public procurement [7]. This could explain why
SPP originates from the concept of green public procurement and why most international
SPP practices are characterized by green or environmental public procurement (GPP) and
applied as an environmental policy tool [8]. Due to the massive value of the expenditure
in public procurement, SPP is generally considered to be capable of accelerating a green
transformation in the markets. SPP is being developed in the way that society, economy,
and environment are taken into account and an overall increase in the strength of social
objectives, which, in turn, point toward a growing potential for public procurement to
achieve wider societal benefits [9,10].
Sustainable procurement is also a rapidly increasing research topic. Most of the re-
search on GPP is related to its status in public policies and treaties, its societal importance,
possibilities to incorporate green criteria into procurement processes or public contracts,
and some focus on giving guidelines and sharing good practices [7]. Although considerable
progress has been made worldwide, SPP is still in its infancy, particularly in emerging
economies [2]. In recent years, many researchers have increasingly focused on investigating
barriers, needs, and key elements at different levels in promoting SPP. Walker [11] argues
that there is a need to have greater focus on the linkages and trade-offs between different
sustainability elements. Halonen [7] also argue that works integrating the three dimensions
and discussing the trade-offs between them are scarce. Khan et al. [12], in a multidisci-
plinary and empirical study, have concluded that green supply chains can be enhanced by
green purchasing, eco-design, and green human resource management. Song et al. [13]
have addressed the key elements of product attributes, perceived consumer effectiveness,
eco-labeling, and environmental awareness in promoting sustainable consumption and SPP.
Ayar and Gürbüz [14] studied the key factors from the consumer side and how these factors
influence SPP and sustainable consumption. The key factors are attitude, subjective norms,
perceived behavioral control, and altruistic values. After a systematic literature review,
Sönnich and Clement [15] concluded that awareness and knowledge are important and
that beliefs and values of procurers are highly relevant in the transformation towards SPP
and circular procurement, simply not going for the lowest price, but finding an optimum
combination that includes risk, timeliness, and cost for the public institution on a life-cycle
basis. Eco-labels, standards, life-cycle assessments, and life-cycle costing are core parts of
the process. There has been a considerable amount of work on the selection of suppliers in
promoting SPP by adding more important criteria such as flexibility, risk responsiveness,
and environmental and social criteria, due to changes in technology, economy, politics, and
Sustainability 2022, 14, 11955 3 of 19

consumer orientation [16]. The main SPP issues identified by most researchers of interna-
tional SPP initiatives include the legal and policy framework in use; the criteria chosen;
the technical tools used in sustainability assessment and tendering assessments (life-cycle
analysis, ecolabels, etc.); professional capacities of procurers; awareness and knowledge
of procurers; information availability and trust in sustainable products; transparency of
the process; attitudes of different stakeholders; product groups/categories covered in SPP;
trade-offs between social, economic and environmental considerations; and SPP impacts
on improving sustainability [2,3,17,18].
China’s SPP has many similarities to international SPP initiatives. Interestingly,
China’s SPP is quite centralized, and the main actors are the local Public Procurement
Centers (PPCs) that are always working directly under the responsibility of local authorities
(mostly under the financial department of local governments). Therefore, if doing well,
China’s public purchasing offers more opportunities for effective SPP not given in other
countries where most public organizations take care of their own procurement needs. In
practice, however, huge possibilities still remain untapped under China’s current SPP
system. This study has been inspired by the fact that China’s SPP policies and institutions
are well developed, while the performance of SPP remains relatively weak. The huge
potential of SPP is not yet realized. Therefore, there is a need to systematically assess the
performance of SPP in China.
Many Chinese researchers have investigated the reasons that the great potential of
China’s SPP have not been effectively mobilized. Liu et al. [19], using the data collected
from 139 Chinese local government officials, found that procurement officials’ awareness
of GPP implementation policies exerts a positive, direct impact on their GPP performance.
Wang et al. [20], by analyzing 838 public procurement contracts in Chengdu city, China, con-
cluded that both the price efficiency and the time efficiency of PP are negatively associated
with the implementation of green public procurement (GPP). Many studies have recently
focused on investigating how SPP practices as a sustainability policy tool incentivize envi-
ronmental firms’ environmental performance. Ma et al. [21] have explored the relationship
between GPP market pressure and firms’ environmental certification practice based on
institutional theory, and they found that SPP market pressure is positively associated with
environmental certification practice. Liu et al. [22] have analyzed the black box of the
influence mechanism between external stakeholder drivers and green public procurement
practice and concluded that external stakeholder drivers have a positive relationship with
GPP practices. Through a systematic literature review, Cheng et al. [23] point out that
GPP discussion has mostly focused so far on the specific impacts of GPP implementation,
while the discussion on GPP as compared to other environmental policy tools, in terms of
efficiency and innovation, is still lagging.
This article reports on a nationwide survey of SPP in China. Its aim is to assess the
performance of China’s SPP and answer the question of whether SPP can help China
mobilize the potential for achieving more sustainable development. Specifically, this paper
addresses the following research questions, after giving a profile of SPP in China, including
SPP development, legal and policy frameworks, institutions, and features of local PPCs:
(1) What are the main differences between China’s SPP and international SPP practices?
IISD [5] concluded that China’s SPP is quite different from international SPP in
many respects due to the Chinese centralized SPP system. Placek [24] concludes
that the decentralized SPP system is advantageous compared to the centralized SPP
system. This article intends to explore more deeper differences behind the centralized
SPP system and to compare the effectiveness of the centralized and decentralized
SPP systems.
(2) What are the main driving forces promoting SPP in China? International studies have
pointed out that the main driving forces for upscaling SPP include legal and policy,
environmental benefit, social benefit, economic benefit (less life-cycle costs), market
demand, commitments of public bodies, and good image for public bodies [2,17,25].
Sustainability 2022, 14, 11955 4 of 19

With a survey, this article intends to explore the real driving forces among the variables
above for pushing SPP development in China.
(3) What are the main barriers and constraints in SPP development in China? The litera-
ture [15,26,27] also points out that the main barriers to SPP development include a
lack of legal and policy support, a lack of political support, vagueness of environmen-
tal criteria, vagueness of social criteria, perception of higher prices due to SPP, lack
of knowledge and skills, lack of transparency, and lack of trust in product sustain-
ability information. The above variables are applied to explore the main barriers to
developing China’s SPP.
(4) Do local PPCs have the necessary capacity to implement SPP? In international SPP
practices, relevant capacities are needed for procurers, since procurers need to identify
sustainability features of products and judge whether the products or services to
be procured have sound sustainability [28,29]. In China’s centralized SPP system,
instead of identifying sustainability features of products, procurers (local PPCs) can
only make procurement choices from lists of green product, which should be much
easier compared to international SPP practices.
(5) Do local conditions allow for tapping the potential of SPP under the current situation?
Obvious advantages of the international decentralized SPP are the high flexibility
and the greater power that the procurers have in assessing and selecting sustainable
products and services [3,30]. Such advantages allow for tapping much more potential
of SPP [17], which is essential for upscaling SPP. This article addresses the issue of
whether the SPP potential can be mobilized effectively in China’s local conditions of a
centralized SPP system.
(6) Is SPP more effective at the national level or at lower levels of government? In-
ternational SPP practices show that the effectiveness of SPP can be quite different
between different levels of government, since SPPs at the different levels are indepen-
dent [31,32]. This article will address the interesting issue of whether the effectiveness
of SPP at different governmental levels should be no different in centralized China’s
SPP system.
(7) What recommendations for China can be made for scaling up SPP? The ambition has
always been to formulate policy implications on the basis of this nationwide survey.
This article will provide recommendations to Chinese policymakers on how to deepen
and upscale SPP.

2. Methods
This research builds on the conceptual framework that SPP as a policy instrument
could effectively address the sustainability pillars of economy, society, and environment in
a balanced way. Therefore, SPP is assumed to have a strong effect on the social, economic,
and environmental objectives of the country [7]. By applying this conceptual framework,
we will assess whether China’s SPP is able to achieve the sustainability goal and, if not, the
reasons behind this, as well as how China’s SPP could be improved and strengthened.
This is an empirical study, and the selected methods are a function of the research
questions. Figure 1 presents the methods being used in this research. In order to gain a
full understanding of the profile of SPP in China, we have explored the national public
procurement website (http://www.ccgp.gov.cn/ (accessed on 1 October 2021)), as well
as many websites of local PPCs. Both the national PP website and the local PPC websites
provide all necessary information about the development of PP and SPP, SPP policies
and procedures, organizational aspects of local PPCs, the performance of local PPCs, and
specific features of local PPCs. In addition, legal and policy documents and directives
promoting SPP at both national and local levels have been reviewed. For comparison of
China’s SPP and international SPP practices, a literature review was carried out focusing on
comparing the elements of SPP policy frameworks, tools and criteria applied, organization
of SPP, elements of sustainability being taken into account, and the scale of SPP as a
percentage of the total PP and as a percentage of national gross domestic product (GDP).
 of SPP policy frameworks, tools and criteria applied, organization of SPP, elements of sus-
tainability being taken into account, and the scale of SPP as a percentage of the total PP and
Sustainability 2022, 14, 11955 5 of 19
as a percentage of national gross domestic product (GDP).

Figure 1. Methodologies.
Figure 1. Methodologies.
For identifying driving forces, barriers, and local PPCs’ capacities to implement SPP,
a survey using a pre-coded
For identifying drivingquestionnaire
forces, barriers, andanda number of telephone
local PPCs’ capacitiesinterviews
to implement was SPP,
undertaken. There are 32 provincial PPCs (including 5 PPCs in
a survey using a pre-coded questionnaire and a number of telephone interviews was un- the five autonomous regions
and 4 PPCsThere
dertaken. in the are
four32 municipalities
provincial PPCs directly under the5central
(including PPCs in government), 293 municipal
the five autonomous regions
PPCs, and 2010 county-level PPCs in mainland China. The pre-coded questionnaires were
and 4 PPCs in the four municipalities directly under the central government), 293 munic-
sent to all 2335 PPCs. Among the 2335 PPCs, 1371 responded (a response rate of 58.7%).
ipal PPCs, and 2010 county-level PPCs in mainland China. The pre-coded questionnaires
The survey was carried out in the period of April–June 2019. The pre-coded questionnaire
were
aimedsent to all 2335
at gleaning PPCs. Among
information the 2335ofPPCs,
on the profiles 1371 responded
local PPCs: size of PPC;(a response of
percentage rate of
58.7%).
female staff and percentage of staff who had received higher education on environmentques-
The survey was carried out in the period of April–June 2019. The pre-coded
tionnaire aimed at gleaning
and/or sustainability, drivinginformation
forces, barriers, on the
and profiles of local
constraints; existingPPCs: size of PPC;
performance of per-
centage
implementingof femaleSPP;staff and percentage
environmental criteriaof and
staffsocial
who had received
criteria that havehigher
beeneducation
taken intoon en-
vironment and/or sustainability,
account in procurement activities; driving
tools used forces,
in bidbarriers, and constraints;
evaluations and contract existing
awarding; perfor-
and product
mance categories/groups
of implementing SPP;included in the SPP.
environmental All PPCs
criteria andwere alsocriteria
social invited tothatevaluate
have been
the SPP
taken legal
into and policy
account framework, activities;
in procurement the establishment
tools used of relevant institutions, and
in bid evaluations and the
contract
overall performance of SPP at local level by providing a
awarding; and product categories/groups included in the SPP. All PPCs were also score between 0–10. A low score
invited
means a less powerful or bad performance and a high score means a more powerful or
to evaluate the SPP legal and policy framework, the establishment of relevant institutions,
even excellent performance. Scores obtained from all surveyed PPCs were subsequently
and the overall performance of SPP at local level by providing a score between 0–10. A
added. This yielded an aggregate score with a range of 0 to 10. The answers collected were
low score means a less powerful or bad performance and a high score means a more pow-
first checked and reviewed by a committee that was established to ensure the quality and
erful or even
reliability excellent
of the performance. Scores obtained from all surveyed PPCs were subse-
data collected.
quently added. This yielded
In addition to the survey, we an conducted
aggregatetelephone
score with a range with
interviews of 0 tothe10.
PPCsTheofanswers
Tianjin col-
lected
(a city were
directlyfirst checked
under and
central reviewed by
government), a committee(athat
Qinhuangdao was established
medium-sized seaside tocity
ensure
in the
quality and reliability
Hebei Province), of the data
and Lanzhou collected.
(capital city of Gansu Province). These three PPCs were
selected because the
In addition to thethree cities have
survey, participated
we conducted in a project,
telephone entitled Sustainable
interviews with the PPCs Public
of Tian-
Procurement in Urban Administrations in China (SuPP-Urb
jin (a city directly under central government), Qinhuangdao (a medium-sized seaside cityChina), which was funded
byHebei
in the European
Province), Commission
and Lanzhou (EC contract:
(capital city CN/SWITCH-ASIA/002
of Gansu Province). These (153-224) andPPCs
three was were
implemented
selected because in the
theperiod
three of December
cities 2008 to December
have participated 2011. Through
in a project, entitledthis EC project,
Sustainable Public
technical capacities and real-life experiences of the three PPCs on how to conduct SPP
Procurement in Urban Administrations in China (SuPP-Urb China), which was funded by
should have improved. Telephone interviews with these three PPCs aimed at obtaining
the European Commission (EC contract: CN/SWITCH-ASIA/002 (153-224) and was im-
feedback on the above-mentioned EC projects, in particular, the lessons learned from this
plemented
EU project. in the period
These lessons of areDecember
relevant to2008 to December
improving and scaling2011.up Through this EC
SPP in these project,
three
technical
cities. A total of 12 telephone interviews were conducted, with 4 for each of the three SPP
capacities and real-life experiences of the three PPCs on how to conduct
should have improved.
PPCs. Interviewees Telephone
included the three interviews with these
PPCs’ directors or deputythreedirectors,
PPCs aimed at obtaining
managers of
feedback
the three PPCs’ procurement departments, and two procurement operators from each PPC. this
on the above-mentioned EC projects, in particular, the lessons learned from
EU project.interviews
Telephone These lessons with are
the relevant to improving
staff of these cities’ PPCs and scaling
also aimedup SPP in information
to obtain these three cities.
Aontotal
the key elements
of 12 telephonethat may have had
interviews a major
were impact, negatively
conducted, with 4 fororeach positively,
of theon SPP PPCs.
three and In-
to obtain local PPCs’ recommendations for further improving and
terviewees included the three PPCs’ directors or deputy directors, managers of the three scaling up SPP practices.
PPCs’To procurement
generate recommendations
departments, forand
promoting and upscaling operators
two procurement SPP in China, froma one-day
each PPC.
expert workshop was organized. Fourteen experts participated, including national procure-
Sustainability 2022, 14, 11955 6 of 19

ment authorities, representatives from local PPCs, and experts from relevant universities
and research institutes. At the beginning of the workshop, the findings and relevant issues
coming from the survey, literature review, and telephone interviews were presented. After
this, experts discussed the findings of this research and the issues related to China’s SPP,
allowing an intensive exchange of ideas between experts. After open discussions, each
of the 14 experts gave a speech with their conclusions and suggestions for strengthening
driving forces and overcoming the barriers to promoting and upscaling SPP in China.
Variables used in this research are selected based on the following principles:
(1) Variables are selected that are the most frequently mentioned in the existing literature;
(2) Variables are selected for which data were available in the local existing SPP statisti-
cal system;
(3) Repeated variables were deleted;
(4) Policy relevance, scientific soundness, and measurability were considered.
To understand the profile of China’s SPP, two simple variables for the value of public
procurement and the value of SPP were selected. These two variables are commonly used
in assessing international SPP practices. China’s SPP is solely implemented by provincial
municipal and country-level Public Procurement Centers, and thus, to obtain insight
into China’s SPP institution, the following variables have been used at the provincial,
municipal, and county levels: number of professional staff, educational levels of staff,
and gender distribution of staff. Variables for identifying drivers were selected from the
literature. These variables are legal and policy driving forces, environmental benefits,
social benefits, economic benefits (lower life-cycle costs), market demand, commitments of
public bodies, and good image (green image of public bodies). Variables for identifying
barriers were selected from the literature and green international SPP case studies. These
variables include a lack of legal and policy support, lack of political support, vagueness of
environmental criteria, vagueness of social criteria, perception of higher prices due to SPP,
the lack of knowledge and skills, the lack of transparency, the limitations due to the two
SPP lists, and the lack of trust in product sustainability information.

3. Results
3.1. Profile of China’s SPP
China’s PP is growing in leaps and bounds, given the fast growth in public consump-
tion. Figure 2 indicates that China’s total PP increased from 1638 billion CNY (Chinese
Yuan) in 2013 to 3697 billion CNY, with an annual growth rate of 12.3%, which is slightly
higher than the annual GDP growth rate. However, China’s SPP decreased during the
period of 2013–2020, particularly between 2018 and 2020.
Figure 3 shows that the share of China’s PP in its GDP has stabilized at about 3.5–4.0%,
which is significantly lower than 10–15% of GDP in European countries [28]. The main
reason is, as indicated in Figure 2, that only 10–12% of China’s government expenditures
is spent on PP, and the rest (88–90%) goes to non-public procurements. This is one of the
reasons that China is still in the process of negotiations for complying with the World Trade
Organization (WTO) Government Procurement Agreement (WTO GPA). Figure 3 shows
that the percentage of SPP in total PP decreased rapidly. The reasons will be discussed in
Section 3.5. Despite the initial steps and SPP progress made in 2014, research shows that a
huge potential for SPP remains untapped under the current PP system in China. There is
real untapped potential for SPP.
The structure of China’s PPC includes four levels: national PPC, provincial PPC,
municipal PPC, and county-level PPC. Table 1 shows the manpower at each level of PPCs.
At the provincial level, there are 42.5 staff members on average in each PPC; the majority
(67%) are female, and 88% have received higher education. At the city level, there are on
average 36.2 staff members in each municipal PPC, of whom 60% are female and 86% have
received higher education. At the county level, there are on average 18.1 staff members per
PPC, of whom 63% are female and 26% have received higher education.
Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 19
Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 19

Sustainability 2022, 14, 11955
research shows that a huge potential for SPP remains untapped under the current PP
7 of 19sys-
research shows that a huge potential for SPP remains untapped under the current PP sys-
tem in China. There is real untapped potential for SPP.
tem in China. There is real untapped potential for SPP.

Figure 2.
Figure 2. Development
Developmentof
ofChina’s
China’sPP
PPand SPP.
and Source:
SPP. http://www.ccgp.gov.cn/
Source: (accessed
http://www.ccgp.gov.cn/ on 1 on
(accessed
Figure 2. Development of China’s PP and SPP. Source: http://www.ccgp.gov.cn/ (accessed on 1
1October
October 2021)).
2021)).
October 2021)).

Figure 3. Share of PP in GDP and governmental expenditures and share of SPP in PP.
Figure 3. Share of PP in GDP and governmental expenditures and share of SPP in PP.
Figure 3. Share of PP in GDP and governmental expenditures and share of SPP in PP.
The structure of China’s PPC includes four levels: national PPC, provincial PPC, mu-
3.2. A Comparison
nicipal of SPP Practices
PPC, and county-level PPC.in Table
China 1and Europe
shows the manpower at each level of PPCs. At
The structure
To compare
the provincial
of China’s
SPP there
level, practicesPPC
are in
includes
China
42.5 staffand
four levels: national PPC,
Europeonsystematically,
members average in each
provincial
we PPC;
identified PPC,
the keymu-
the majority
nicipal
elements PPC,
(67%) are of andlegal
the
female, county-level
andand havePPC.
88%policy Tablehigher
framework,
received 1 shows the manpower
institutional
education. at each
arrangements,
At the city level
procedures
level, thereofare
PPCs.
on At
and
the
toolsprovincial
applied,
average level,
andmembers
36.2 staff there are 42.5
the environmental staff members
and social
in each municipal on
criteria
PPC, average
applied
of whom in each
60%[33,34]. PPC; the
are female and 86% havemajority
(67%) arehigher
received female,education.
and 88% At have
thereceived higher
county level, education.
there At the city
are on average 18.1level, there are on
staff members
average
per PPC,36.2 staff members
of whom in eachand
63% are female municipal
26% havePPC, of whom
received 60%
higher are female and 86% have
education.
received higher education. At the county level, there are on average 18.1 staff members
per PPC, of whom 63% are female and 26% have received higher education.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 11955 8 of 19

Table 1. Data on PP/SPP organizations in mainland China.

Number of PPCs at the provincial level 32

Average number of staff working for each of PPCs at the provincial level 42.5
Average number of female staff working for each of PPCs at the provincial level 28.4
Average number of staff who received higher education 37.3
Number of PPCs at the municipal level 374
Average number of staff working for each of PPCs at the municipal level 36.2
Average number of female staff working for each of PPCs at the municipal level 21.6
Average number of staff who received higher education 31.2
Number of PPCs at the county level 2010
Average number of staff working for each of PPCs at the county level 18.1
Average number of female staff working for each of PPCs at the county level 11.4
Average number of staff who received higher education 4.7
Source: primary data, 2019.

Legal and policy frameworks for SPP in China and Europe differ greatly. Two EU
directives on sustainable public procurement were introduced in 2004, which emphasize
the policies, principles, and sustainability requirements that should be taken in SPP. SPP in
EU is, however, fully decentralized, and the EU member states issue their own national
laws and formulate policies for cases below the directives’ threshold. China’s bidding
law (1999), public procurement law (2002), and promotion law on cleaner production
(2002) are the legal basis for China’s SPP. Local authorities may formulate local regulations
and policies for operationalizing the above-mentioned national laws. However, local
policies and regulations should be the same as or higher than the national threshold.
The national government is responsible for formulating laws, policies, and criteria, while
local governments are mainly responsible for developing local actions and strategies for
implementing SPP.
With regard to institutional arrangement, SPP in China is centralized at the local level,
and local PPCs are solely responsible for procurement, including providing procurement
information, organizing tender evaluations, and awarding contracts. Thus, PPCs, other
governmental organizations, and public institutions are the users in China. In the EU, SPP
is decentralized. Public procurement is carried out by all kinds of public authorities, and
the public authorities are often procurers and users as well.
With regard to SPP tools and procedures, the EU Directives on SPP include two
basic tools, performance-based and technical-based specifications. Performance-based
specifications focus on the functions of the products, while technical-based specifications
are more focused on product quality. Sustainability criteria can be included in both tools.
China’s SPP is quite different. To support local administrations, the central government of
China has issued two product lists for SPP. One is the list of Energy Conservation Products
(ECP list, issued by Ministry of Finance and NDRC) and the other is a list of Environmental
Label Products (ELP list, issued by Ministry of Finance and Ministry of Environmental
Protection). The consideration of environmental criteria in government procurement is
mainly based on these two lists.
Prier et al. [35] state that “there are several eco-labels available in Europe, for example
the European Ecolabel, the Nordic Swan, the Blue Angel, the Energy Star or the EU Energy
Label”. In the EU for SPP practices, a tendering document can require that the product
to be procured should be certified with one or more labels. China’s SPPs solely rely on
the ECP list and the ELP list, while products on the ECP list should be certified with
Energy Efficiency Labelling, and products on the ELP list should be certified through China
Environmental Labelling. Both lists specify the name of each product’s manufacturer, the
registered trademarks, and the expiration date of its certification. Both lists have a large
number of products that procurers (mainly local PPCs) can use to make their purchasing
decisions. Table 2 presents the main labels being adopted by the EU and China.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 11955 9 of 19

Table 2. Main labels adopted by the EU and China in their SPP.

Labels Description
Year of introduction: 2002
Program type: voluntary
Verification: manufacturer’s declaration, irregular third-party verification
EU Energy Star
Certificated products: displays, computer equipment (desktop computer, notebook, computer, integrated
desktop computer, thin client, small-scale server, workstation, game console), imaging equipment (copier,
digital duplicator, fax machine, mailing machine, multifunctional device (MFD), printer, scanner)
Year of introduction: 1998
Program type: mandatory, comparative label
EU Energy Label Verification: manufacturer’s declaration, irregular third-party verification
Certificated products: refrigerators, freezers and combined appliances; washing machines, tumble dryers and
combined appliances; dishwashers; ovens; air conditioners; light bulbs; televisions.
Year of introduction: 1978
Program type: voluntary
Verification: third-party verification
Germany Blue Angel
Certificated products: Around 10,000 products in 80 different product categories for many kinds of industrial
and consumer goods, such as furniture, floor coverings, paints, construction machinery, building materials
and office devices.
Year of introduction: 1992
Program type: voluntary
Verification: third-party verification
Certificated products: Cleaning (all-purpose cleaners and cleaners for sanitary facilities; detergents for
dishwashing machines; hand dishwashing detergents; laundry detergents; soaps, shampoos and hair
EU Eco-label
conditioners), clothing (textile products; footwear), paints and varnishes, electronic equipment (personal
computers; portable computers; televisions), floor coverings (wooden coverings; textile coverings; hard floor
coverings), wooden furniture, gardening (growing media and soil improvers), household appliances (light
bulbs, heat pumps), lubricants, mattresses, paper (copying and graphic paper; tissue paper), services
(campsite services; tourist accommodation service).
Introduction of year: 1992
Program type: voluntary
TCO-Certified Verification: Third-party verification by an accredited, independent laboratory.
Certificated products: Displays, desktops, notebooks, all-in-one PC, projectors, headsets, mobile
phones, printers.
Year of introduction: 1993
Program type: voluntary
Verification: Third-party verification, regular supervision (once per year)
Certificated products: Household refrigerators; lead-free gasoline for vehicles; products made from recycled
paper; Hg-Cd-Pb free rechargeable battery; detergents; Hg-free dry cells and batteries; moth resistant
woolens; packaging materials; soft drinks; energy-saving fluorescent lamps; energy-saving low-mercury
double-capped fluorescent lamps; energy-saving electronic ballasts; toys for children; low-noise washing
machines; energy-saving low-noise room air conditioners; energy–saving and low-discharge gas ranges;
aerosol; CFCs-free refrigerating equipment for industry and commerce; household microwave ovens; asbestos
China Environmental Label free building materials; halon-free fire-extinguishers; adhesives; phosphorus gypsum building materials;
ecotypic textile; non-aluminum pressure cooker; safe mothproof agent; low radiant color TV; magnetic electric
antiscald hydrotreater; pipe; wood based panels and finishing products; low pollution motorcycle; plastic
water and sewage copier; ODS substitute; CFCs-free foamed plastics; aerosol products; products made from
recycled plastics; disposable food and drink container; fibrous desiccants for packaging; low pollution light
weight vehicles; clay pigeons; solar-powered watch and clock; smokeless convolve mosquito-repellent
incense; water based coatings; metal welding and cutting gas; energy-saving doors and windows;
microcomputers and displays; sanitary ceramics; blocks for architecture; dry-type power transformers;
furniture; wallpapers; ceramic ware, glass-ceramic ware and glass dinnerware in contact with food; footwear;
lightweight wall boards; printers, fax machines and printer and fax combinations sanitizing incenses.
Year of introduction: 2005
Program type: Mandatory, comparative label
China Energy Label
Verification: Manufacturer’s declaration, third-party verification Certificated products: Listed in the
Catalogue of Products that Require Energy Efficiency Label.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 11955 10 of 19

The European Commission has addressed various social criteria and asked member
states to include these social criteria in SPP. The social criteria cover promoting employment
opportunities, promoting decent work, promoting compliance with social and labor rights,
supporting social inclusion and promoting social organizations, promoting accessibility
and design for all, seeking to achieve wider voluntary commitment to corporate social
responsibility (CSR), protecting against human rights abuse, and encouraging respect for
human rights and promoting small and medium enterprises (SMEs). In practice, member
states are always taking into account the above-mentioned social criteria, but normally not
all social criteria are considered in all member states. China, however, has addressed social
criteria for supporting local SMEs, micro-producers, poverty-reduction-related products,
and the promotion of employment opportunities for people with disabilities.

3.3. Driving Forces of SPP in China

This research has identified seven driving forces, as discussed in the introduction
section, through a literature review. These driving forces are legal and policy drive, en-
vironmental benefits, social benefits, economic profit (minus life-cycle costs), market de-
mand, commitments of public bodies, and good image [36,37]. The data on the sample
of 1371 PPCs in Table 3 suggest that China’s SPP is mainly driven by legal and policy
considerations, social benefits, and commitments of public bodies. According to the litera-
ture, SPP is mainly driven by perceived environmental benefits [38]. However, this is not
the case in China’s SPP, since environmental benefits score low. Many researchers [39,40]
have pointed out that SPP products have relatively lower life-cycle costs and thus enjoy
advantages in public procurement. Lower economic benefit scores of China’s SPP sug-
gest that procurers mostly focus on the prices of products while less attention is paid to
life-cycle costs. Market demand as a driving force scores relatively low, which suggests
that public environmental awareness is still weak and is to be improved by more effective
environmental communication.

Table 3. Driving forces of SPP in China, N = 1371.

Driving Forces Average Score (0–10) Standard Deviation

Legal and policy-driven 9.5 0.87
Environmental benefit 4.7 0.11
Social benefit 8.2 0.72
Economic benefit (less life-cycle costs) 3.9 0.08
Market demand 5.5 0.18
Commitments of public bodies 8.3 0.42
Good image 5.8 0.31
Overall average 6.6 2.11
Source: primary data, 2019.

The average score of driving forces is 6.6, which is worryingly low and it is not strong
enough for driving SPP development in China. The average low score for driving force has
answered the question raised in Figure 2 of why SPP decreased in the past decade.

3.4. Main Barriers of SPP in China

As discussed in the introduction section, the main barriers addressed by the SPP
literature include lack of legal and policy support, lack of political support, unspecified
environmental criteria, unspecified social criteria, the perception of higher prices in the case
of SPP, the lack of knowledge and skills in implementing SPP, the lack of transparency, the
limitation of two SPP lists, and the lack of trust in product sustainability information pro-
vided by producers/suppliers [2,41,42]. Does Chinese SPP suffer from these weaknesses?
Table 4 presents the answers based on the nationwide survey. It seems that a lack of legal
Sustainability 2022, 14, 11955 11 of 19

and policy support (score of 4.8) and a lack of political support (score of 5.3) are not the case
in China’s SPP, since China’s SPPs have a legal basis and the policy framework has been
developed as indicated by Table 3. The weaknesses of China’s SPP are not at the policy
level but at the operational level, because SPP implementation remains rather weak. The
other barriers identified by international practices also exist in China’s SPP. The score of
each barrier, with the exception of legal and policy support and political support, is more
than 7.0.

Table 4. Main barriers of SPP in China, N = 1371.

Barriers Average Score (0–10) Standard Deviation

Lack of legal and policy support 4.8 0.19
Lack of political support 5.3 0.32
Vagueness of environmental criteria 7.3 0.46
Vagueness of social criteria 7.9 0.49
The perception of higher prices due to SPP 8.3 0.79
The lack of knowledge and skills 8.5 0.83
The lack of transparency 7.7 0.38
The limitations due to the two SPP lists 8.5 0.77
The lack of trust in product sustainability
8.8 0.71
information
Overall average 7.5 1.36

It is interesting that the biggest barrier to China’s SPP is a lack of trust in the informa-
tion on the sustainability of the product provided by producers and suppliers. Products on
the lists of ECP and ELP are selected according to criteria described by the Environmental
Labelling certification and the China Energy Label, but these products are limited. In many
cases, local PPCs have to ask for more information (e.g., other energy and environmental
labels, sustainability-related certificates, and even life-cycle analysis data) from the pro-
ducers. Normally, local PPC staff members have no professional knowledge or skills to
check and verify the information provided, and mostly, producers may exaggerate the
sustainability characteristics of their products.
SPP is clearly a complex procurement task because assessing and measuring sustain-
ability quantitatively is difficult. Consequently, having the lists of ECP and ELP in place
represents an important simplification for procurement officers, in particular for those PPCs
with limited capacities. In the initial stage, the two SPP lists have made, without a doubt, a
significant contribution. These lists played a crucial role in raising awareness of sustainable
production and consumption among the actors of public procurement. However, many
disadvantages occur during the SPP development, and the limitations of the two lists have
increasingly been an insuperable obstacle in China. Therefore, as indicated in Table 3, the
limitation of two SPP lists is a major barrier with a score of 8.5, and this can also explain
why SPP development in China is slow and even decreasing. We suggest two options for
China to overcome the existing limitations of the two lists. One is that the two lists should
be revised and strengthened in order to reach their full potential and reflect up-to-date
technical innovations and sustainability progress, and that the product range included in
the lists could be widened. The second option is that the government should move beyond
predefined product lists. A potential new design could include specifying only obligatory
environmental criteria or benchmarks but not concrete manufacturers. From doing this,
China’s SPP could develop toward matching the international method, in which technical
or functional specifications can be adopted for tendering, instead of using the existing
product lists.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 11955 12 of 19

Lack of knowledge and skills has been a barrier in China and other countries. The
quantitative identification of environmental and social values is difficult, and thus high
professional capacities are needed for local PPCs (procurers) to customize national regula-
tions for the optimized fulfillment of economic, environmental, and social targets at the
local level. The adoption of the existing two lists has been an obstacle for local PPCs to
improve their SPP capacities and to reduce internal resistance to change, since it is quite
simple and easy to check products against the lists and local PPCs are not motivated to
learn more about the sustainability criteria used.
The main barriers also include the perception of paying higher SPP prices for sustain-
able products. Additionally, the lack of transparency and the lack of user-friendly tools
and soft social–environmental criteria that have low operability at the local level were
mentioned. The perception of higher SPP prices has been a recognized barrier in other
countries, and many practices have proven that the adoption of a life-cycle analysis (LCA)
approach is the ideal way to overcome this barrier. To improve transparency, there is a
need to reform the existing SPP by establishing a strong and well-functioning procurement
system, in which a clear legal framework establishes the rules for transparency, efficiency,
and mechanisms of enforcement. It remains a challenge to move from the existing soft
social–environmental towards more tangible, quantitative, and measurable criteria.

3.5. Performance of SPP in China

There are various tools being used internationally in conducting SPP [43,44]. The list
approach is only being used in China. Other tools commonly used in international SPP
practices include life-cycle analysis (LCA), life-cycle costs (LCC), environmental labels
or ecolabels, energy certificates, environmental certificates, and ISO certificates. Table 5
presents the tools being used in China’s SPP practices.

Table 5. Tools used in SPP in China, N = 1371.

Tools Numbers of PPCs Percentage

Energy Conservation Products (ECP) list 1371 100%
Environmental Label Products (ELP) list 1012 73.8%
Life-cycle Analysis (LCA) 21 1.5%
Life-cycle Costs (LCC) 33 2.4%
International Energy Star 17 1.2%
International Eco-labels 25 1.8%
ISO certificates (e.g., ISO 14000) 64 4.7%

China’s PPCs are inviting different parties for tendering to purchase products from
the ECP list and primarily, but not compulsorily, to purchase products from the ELP list.
Thus, as presented in Table 4, all 1371 PPCs surveyed are adopting the ECP list. Although
adopting ELP is not compulsory, it is given priority. Of the 1371 surveyed PPCs, 73.8% are
still adopting ELP lists. There is an argument that this reflects the fact that saving energy is
a high priority for achieving low-carbon development in China [5]. Our interviews with
central PPC staff show that this is not the case. In practice, energy saving and environmental
protection are equally important to China’s sustainability agenda. It is a technical issue that
ECP is compulsory but ELP is not, since energy saving is easily measured and assessed.
However, environmental performance is defined too broadly and may cover many issues,
which means that it is always difficult to measure quantitatively.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 11955 13 of 19

In addition to the list approach, as indicated in Tale 4, other approaches that are
commonly used internationally are rarely used in China’s SPP. Except for the complexity
of LCA/LCC that may restrict their applications, eco-labels, energy labels, and various
international certificates are easy to use and have been adopted by many products and
services. Therefore, linking the two lists to international labels and certificates would be a
real opportunity for China to upscale SPP.
As one of the three fundamental elements of sustainability, social criteria are being
increasingly considered in international SPP practices, and socially responsible public
procurement (SRPP) can illustrate how social and economic considerations can be mutually
reinforcing and thus how SRPP can contribute to enhancing compliance with national
or international commitments to social development goals [45–47]. Through a literature
review, key social criteria being adopted by international SPP practices have been identified
and are presented in Table 5. During the survey, 1371 local PPCs answered the question:
what are the social criteria being considered in the operation of your procurements? Table 6
presents the survey results.

Table 6. Social criteria considered in SPP in China, N = 1371.

Social Criteria Numbers of PPCs Percentage

1. Support to local SME producers/suppliers 1371 100%

2. Poverty-reduction-related products 1017 78.1%

3. Creating employment opportunities for those with disabilities 889 64.8%

4. Creating employment opportunities for disadvantaged groups 119 8.7%

5. Compliance with occupational health and safety laws 1339 97.7%

6. Gender equality and non-discrimination 118 8.7%

7. Creating employment opportunities for older workers 19 1.4%

8. Promoting “corporate social responsibility” (CSR) 37 2.7%

All 1371 local PPCs surveyed are adopting the social criterion of supporting local SME
producers, and this has been the most important principle that every PPC should comply
with. In addition, 97.7% of the surveyed PPCs are adopting social criteria of compliance
with occupational health and safety standards. Social criteria of poverty reduction, using
local products (in particular agricultural products that are produced in poverty-stricken
areas), and promotion of employment opportunities for people with disabilities are also
highly adopted by local PPCs. As compared to environmental criteria, China’s SPP pays
more attention to including social considerations. As indicated by Figure 4, strategic
perspectives of China’s SPP are more focused on supporting local producers and suppliers
(specifically local SMEs) than on overall systemic advantages. The average share of PP
supporting local SMEs is about 76% of total PP, which is much higher than the share of
SPP in total PP, as indicated in Figure 3. In this sense, China’s SPP is closer to socially
responsible public procurement, since the environmental consideration of China’s SPP is
far from the requirements of the existing SPP.
Three methods are being used by China’s PP in tendering evaluation and awarding
contracts. The first is the method of the lowest quotation bid evaluation, which means
the bid with the lowest quotation will be awarded the contract. This method is the most
commonly used, and it is suitable for procuring products that are quite standardized
with simple technical and functional specifications, e.g., IT products. The second is the
comprehensive scoring method, and this method is used in procuring complex or normally
non-standardized products or services. The full score is 100, and scoring factors include
technical factors, the quotation, environmental and social criteria, and after-sale services.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 11955 14 of 19

The third one is the value-for-money method, which is not used commonly in China’s PP.
This method has many similarities to comprehensive scoring.
Based on Table 7, the following conclusions can be drawn concerning China’s SPP
tendering evaluation and contract-awarding practices:
(1) Applying ECP lists and supporting SMEs are compulsory.
(2) About 65% of PPCs give a 10% score to the products on ELP lists, and about 30% of
PPCs give an 11–15% score to the ELP products. Very few PPCs (less than 6%) give a
score of more than 16% to the ELP products.
(3) Social criteria are commonly considered in the tendering evaluation in a case-by-case
way. This is the same as in Europe [45]. Normally, the weights of social criteria
are higher than those used for environmental criteria. On average, the score of
social criteria is about 20%, while the score of environmental criteria is about 10–15%
in China.
(4) Adoption of different tendering evaluation methods has no impact on the degree to
which social and environmental criteria are being considered in China’s SPP practices.

Table 7. Tendering criteria for awarding contracts in SPP in China, N = 1371.

Social Criteria Numbers of PPCs Percentage

A. Applying the lowest quotation bid evaluation method
1. Energy Conservation Products (ECP) list is compulsory. 1371 100%
2. Supporting local SMEs is compulsory. 1371 100%
3. The quotation will decrease by 10% when procuring products on the Environmental Label
892 65.1%
Products (ELP) list.
4. The quotation will decrease by 11–15% when procuring products on the ELP list. 461 33.6%
5. The quotation will decrease by 16% or above when procuring products on the ELP list 18 1.3%
6. Social criteria are considered in a case-by-case way, and the weights are more than the
1279 93.3%
environmental criteria.
B. Applying the comprehensive scoring method
1. ECP is compulsory. 1371 100%
2. Among the total of 100 points, the ELP list product will be given 10 points. 912 66.5%
3. Among the total 100 points, the ELP list product will be given 11–15 points. 371 27.1%
4. Among the total 100 points, ELP list product will be given 16 points or above. 88 6.4%
5. Social criteria are considered in a case-by-case way, and there are more points than for the
1319 96.2%
environmental criteria.
C. Applying the value-for-money method
1. ECP is compulsory. 1371 100%
2. A 10% weight is allocated to environmental criteria. 928 67.7%
3. An 11–15% weight is allocated to environmental criteria. 361 26.3%
4. A 16% or above weight is allocated to environmental criteria. 82 6.0%
5. Social criteria are considered in a case-by-case, normally their weight is more than 20%. 1348 98.3%
Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 19

Sustainability 2022, 14, 11955 15 of 19

responsible public procurement, since the environmental consideration of China’s SPP is
far from the requirements of the existing SPP.

Figure 4.
Figure 4. Development of PP
PP and
and PP
PP for
for SMEs
SMEs in
in China.
China.

4. Discussion
Three methods are being used by China’s PP in tendering evaluation and awarding
contracts. The our
We relate firstfindings
is the method
to theof the lowest
theory quotation
of using relevantbid evaluation,
criteria which means
[4] to centralized or the
de-
bid with theprocurement
centralized lowest quotation willtobewhy
[42], and awarded the contract.
implementing This method
sustainable is the most
procurement com-
practices
is so difficult
monly used, [35].
and it is suitable for procuring products that are quite standardized with
The adoption
simple technical and of the two lists,specifications,
functional ECP and ELP, is controversial
e.g., IT products. in China.
The secondOn the isone
the hand,
com-
the lists provide
prehensive scoringspecific products,
method, manufacturers,
and this trademarks,
method is used location
in procuring of production,
complex or normallyand
relevant certificatesproducts
non-standardized and their or expiry date.
services. TheThus, no knowledge
full score is 100, and and skills
scoring are required
factors include
for procurers
technical implementing
factors, the quotation, SPP.environmental
The lists approach can also
and social increase
criteria, transparency
and after-sale and
services.
improve
The thirdtheoneefficiency of SPP implementation.
is the value-for-money On the
method, which is other hand,
not used the approach
commonly of using
in China’s PP.
two lists obviously has many disadvantages compared
This method has many similarities to comprehensive scoring. to commonly and normally used
international
Based on approaches
Table 7, the of technical
followingand functionalcan
conclusions specifications. Product groups
be drawn concerning covered
China’s SPP
by the two lists are limited, and thus only
tendering evaluation and contract-awarding practices: a small part of the necessary goods can be
selected from the lists. Obtaining certifications is time-consuming, the process is always
(1) Applying ECP lists and supporting SMEs are compulsory.
bureaucratic, and the certificate may not take into account up-to-date technical innovations
(2) About 65% of PPCs give a 10% score to the products on ELP lists, and about 30% of
or reflect all sustainability criteria. In the mid and long terms, it is recommended that
PPCs give an 11–15% score to the ELP products. Very few PPCs (less than 6%) give a
approaches of technical and functional specifications using the relevant environmental and
score of more than 16% to the ELP products.
social criteria replace the existing lists approach used in China for SPP.
(3) Social criteria are commonly considered in the tendering evaluation in a case-by-case
The SPP literature points to the use of centralized systems as an important factor
way. This is the same as in Europe [45]. Normally, the weights of social criteria are
hindering the promotion and upscaling of SPP [2,41,42]. Does Chinese SPP also suffer from
higher than those used for environmental criteria. On average, the score of social cri-
this weakness? The Chinese SPP is a hierarchical and centralized multi-level system. An
teria isofabout
advantage 20%, while
this system theefficient
is the score ofand
environmental
direct transfercriteria is about 10–15%
of directives to local in China.
levels. A
(4) Adoption
centralized system of different
can also tendering evaluation
facilitate the methods
implementation has
and no impactofon
operations SPP theatdegree to
the local
level which socialthat
and ensure andtheenvironmental
same criteriacriteria are being
are applied to theconsidered
SPP everywherein China’s
in theSPP prac-
country.
tices.
However, up-to-date practices have already shown that there are obvious disadvantages
of centralized SPP systems. Two challenges remain. One is that China still uses the
Table 7. Tendering criteria for awarding contracts in SPP in China, N = 1371.
centralized SPP system, but reforms are certainly needed. The second challenge is that
Social Criteria China’s SPP moves towards a decentralized system, which is Numbers more efficient,
of PPCs as Percentage
proven by
A. Applying the lowest quotationinternational
bid evaluation SPP practices. A decentralized system is characterized by high accountability
method
and (ECP)
1. Energy Conservation Products transparency. Transparency and accountability can be more easily
list is compulsory. 1371implemented 100%in a
decentralized system. At the same time, mechanisms of control should
2. Supporting local SMEs is compulsory. also exist to100%
1371 ensure
a more accountable governmental organization [48].
Governments (the public institutions and the state-owned sector together) are the
biggest consumer in China, and thus China’s public procurement system is very powerful.
PP in China plays a crucial role in demonstrating and promoting sustainable consumption
Sustainability 2022, 14, 11955 16 of 19

and uses sustainable procurement practices, although the emphasis is not on environmental
criteria as in Europe. China’s SPP is more focused on socially responsible public procure-
ment, or blue public procurement as it is called in China, since more attention is paid to
social criteria in PP practices, while environmental criteria are only being considered by the
product lists of energy conservation and environmental protection, which include limited
product groups and categories.
An interesting result of the survey is that the implementation of SPP practices remains
rather weak in China, where the SPP legal and policy framework and institutions have
been sufficiently developed. China’s SPP experiences have resulted in discussing an
important issue, namely the issue of whether a centralized SPP system is functioning better
than a decentralized system. International experience favors a decentralized SPP system,
and we argue that the most difficulties in implementing PP reform consist in the extent
to which the procurement functions are decentralized [49]. Sharma [50] also points out
that corruption scandals in public procurement are rampant even in countries such as
Switzerland, Germany, France, UK, and the USA, where public procurement institutions
and the judiciary are quite evolved, and independent and public procurement is quite
decentralized. The United Nations Environment Program [2] argues that “Problems of
inefficiency and lack of accountability associated with such a centralized system has,
however, led many countries to move towards a more decentralized arrangement where
the user agencies manage all the procurement for their own needs”.

5. Conclusions
SPP offers immense potential for resource efficiency, emissions reductions, innova-
tion, and the development of micro-, small, and medium-sized enterprises. A crucial
challenge associated with this study is how the huge SPP potential could be tapped within
the existing centralized PP system in China. This research has shown that there is no
obvious weakness in the existing legal and policy framework and institutional set-up. In
addition to overcoming the main barriers indicated in Table 3, this leads to the following
recommendations:
(1) Vigorously expanding the SPP coverage and involve as many products and services
into SPP as possible, since the existing two lists are limited.
(2) Including China’s state-owned enterprises (SOEs) in SPP. There are great challenges to
involving SOEs in Chinese SPP, and this has created many discussions in the academic
sector and negotiations between China and the EU. The state sector is huge in China,
and its procurement is also powerful. SPP should be made mandatory for SOEs in
order to better leverage the purchasing power of public procurement and to improve
SOEs’ innovations and sustainability.
(3) Infrastructure projects should be included in China’s SPP. Environmental and social
considerations should be included in the procurement of infrastructure. The full
potential of Chinese PP cannot be fully leveraged to advance sustainable consumption
without including infrastructure projects, as they form an important part of PP and
give rise to significant environmental and social impacts.
This research evaluated the status of China’s SPP development in a systematic way
through a nationwide survey. Given the well-developed legal and policy framework of SPP
and the existing institutional structure, great progress has been made in China. However,
SPP in China has not achieved the expected result, due to the fact that the share of SPP in
total PP is very low and the total values of SPP decreased in recent years, while PP and
GDP are growing by almost 10%. In summary, there are more barriers than driving forces
in China’s SPP development, and the untapped great market potential of SPP would be a
crucial argument for upscaling SPP in China.
This research concludes that China’s SPP is more similar to socially responsible public
procurement since more concrete social criteria are used compared to more environmental
criteria in the European Union. To ensure the high sustainability of publicly procured
products, it is recommended that China’s SPP may move from the existing predefined
Sustainability 2022, 14, 11955 17 of 19

product lists that are based on concrete manufacturers to specifying only obligatory environ-
mental characteristics or benchmarks. The predefined product lists are the existing major
operational tools for fostering China’s SPP. Compared to most international tools of green
labeling, LCA analysis, and ISO certificates, China’s product lists are more operational and
may require less skill for procurers. Although the lists are updated twice every year, there
are limitations such as limited scope and relatively low standards, which might impair the
future success of SPP.
It is also recommended that China’s national SPP policies should encourage using more
international tools and making life-cycle costing mandatory. To ensure high environmental
sustainability, the score of environmental criteria could increase from the existing 10% to
more than 15% in the tendering evaluations.
As supporting policies to the above recommendations, a national capacity-building
program appears highly recommendable, and SPP capacity building has also been recog-
nized by international SPP practices [51]. Capacities need to be built up for local PPCs
on issues such as life-cycle analysis, sustainability aspects of SPP tendering, international
eco-labels, and information management.
There are limitations to this study. There is now a rapid development of more decen-
tralized PP happening in China’s PP. Thus, this study may not represent the whole picture
of updating the development of PP in China, and future studies are therefore needed.
Although the conclusion made by this research builds on a nationwide survey, 1371 of the
total 2335 PPCs responded. A response rate of 58.7% is not high enough to achieve the all
insights into China’s SPP, and there may have been a selection bias in the sampling methods.
For example, the larger procurement organizations in urban areas in the eastern part of
China may have reacted more often than smaller organizations in the western part of China.
It is suggested that China’s central government could initiate a national comprehensive
evaluation program by involving not only the procurers of all PPCs but also the main users
of public bodies and the main producers and suppliers of the goods and services to achieve
a more complete insight into SPP performance in China. Another interesting issue for
future research could be a comparison of cases of corruption among centralized SPP and
decentralized SPP.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, M.Z. and M.P.v.D.; methodology, M.Z. and L.Z.; valida-
tion, M.Z. and M.P.v.D.; formal analysis, L.Z.; investigation, M.Z. and L.Z.; resources, M.Z.; data
curation, L.Z.; writing—original draft preparation, M.Z. and L.Z.; writing—review and editing,
M.Z. and M.P.v.D.; supervision, M.P.v.D.; project administration, M.Z.; funding acquisition, M.Z. All
authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by European Commission’s Switch Asia Programme (project
entitled: Sustainable Public Procurement in Urban Administrations in China (SuPP-Urb China),
contract number: CN/SWITCH-ASIA/002 (153-224)) and the Seed Fund for International Research
Cooperation of Beijing University of Civil Engineering and Architecture.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Acknowledgments: We would like to thank all the local public procurement centers (PPCs), local
procurement authorities and experts involved in this survey, and all the interviewees that contributed
to this research.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 11955 18 of 19

References
1. Kalubanga, M. Sustainable procurement: Concept, and practical implications for the procurement process. Int. J. Econ. Manag.
Sci. 2012, 1, 1–7.
2. United Nations Environment Programme. Global Review of Sustainable Public Procurement; United Nations Environment Pro-
gramme: Nairobi, Kenya, 2017; pp. 41–45. Available online: https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/20919
/GlobalReview_Sust_Procurement.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y (accessed on 12 July 2021).
3. EU Commission. Buying Green! A Handbook on Green Public Procurement, 3rd ed.; EU Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2016; Avail-
able online: https://ec.europa.eu/environment/gpp/pdf/Buying-Green-Handbook-3rd-Edition.pdf (accessed on 10 Septem-
ber 2021).
4. Igarashi, M.; de Boer, L.; Pfuhl, G. Analyzing buyer behavior when selecting green criteria in public procurement. J. Public Procure.
2017, 17, 141–186. [CrossRef]
5. International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD). How green public procurement contributes to sustainable development
in China. In IISD Report; IISD: Winnipeg, MB, Canada, 2015; pp. 17–31. Available online: https://www.iisd.org/publications/
how-green-public-procurement-contributes-sustainable-development-china (accessed on 15 April 2021).
6. United Nations Environment Programme. Sustainable Public Procurement: A Global Review, Final Report; United Nations Environ-
ment Programme: Nairobi, Kenya, 2013; pp. 40–43. Available online: https://globalecolabelling.net/assets/Documents/unep-
spp-report.pdf (accessed on 6 May 2021).
7. Halonen, K.-M. Is public procurement fit for reaching sustainability goals? A law and economics approach to green public
procurement. Maastricht J. Eur. Comp. Law 2021, 28, 535–555. [CrossRef]
8. Wang, J.; Wang, J.; Jian Gao, J. Effect of green consumption value on consumption intention in a pro- environmental setting: The
Mediating role of approach and avoidance motivation. SAGE Open 2020, 10, 2158244020902074. [CrossRef]
9. Hartlaap, M. Measuring and comparing the regulatory welfare state: Social objectives in public procurement. ANNALS Am. Acad.
Polit. Soc. Sci. 2020, 691, 68–83. [CrossRef]
10. Sack, D.; Sarter, E.K. Collective bargaining, minimum wages and public procurement in Germany: Regulatory adjustments to the
neoliberal drift of a coordinated market economy. J. Ind. Relat. 2018, 60, 669–690. [CrossRef]
11. Walker, H.; Miemcyzk, J.; Johnsen, T.; Spencer, R. Sustainable procurement: Past, present and future. J. Purch. Supply Manag. 2012,
18, 201–206. [CrossRef]
12. Khan, A.; Tao, M.; Ahmad, H.; Shafique, M.N.; Nawaz, M.Z. Revisiting green supply chain management practices: The mediating
role of emotional intelligence. SAGE Open 2020, 10, 2158244020914637. [CrossRef]
13. Song, Y.; Qin, Z.; Qin, Z. Green marketing to gen Z consumers in China: Examining the mediating factors of an eco-label–informed
purchase. SAGE Open 2020, 10, 2158244020963573. [CrossRef]
14. Ayar, I.; Gürbüz, A. Sustainable consumption intentions of consumers in Turkey: A research within the theory of planned
behavior. SAGE Open 2021, 11, 21582440211047563. [CrossRef]
15. Sönnichsen, S.D.; Clement, J. Review of green and sustainable public procurement: Towards circular public procurement. J. Clean.
Prod. 2020, 245, 118901. [CrossRef]
16. Sarkis, J.; Dhavale, D.G. Supplier selection for sustainable operations: A triple-bottom-line approach using a Bayesian framework.
Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2015, 166, 177–191. [CrossRef]
17. Alhola, K.; Ryding, S.-O.; Salmenpera, H.; Busch, N.J. Exploiting the potential of public procurement. J. Ind. Ecol. 2018, 23, 96–109.
[CrossRef]
18. Seuring, S.; Muller, M. From a literature review to a conceptual framework for sustainable supply chain management. J. Clean.
Prod. 2008, 16, 1699–1710. [CrossRef]
19. Liu, J.; Shi, B.; Xue, J.; Wang, Q. Improving the green public procurement performance of Chinese local governments: From the
perspective of officials’ knowledge. J. Purch. Supply Manag. 2019, 25, 100501. [CrossRef]
20. Wang, Q.; Zhang, R.; Liu, J. Price/time/intellectual efficiency of procurement: Uncovering the related factors in Chinese public
authorities. J. Purch. Supply Manag. 2020, 26, 100622. [CrossRef]
21. Ma, Y.; Liu, Y.; Appolloni, A.; Liu, J. Does green public procurement encourage firm’s environmental certification practice? The
mediation role of top management support. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2021, 28, 1002–1017. [CrossRef]
22. Liu, J.; Ma, Y.; Appolloni, A.; Cheng, W. How external stakeholders drive the green public procurement practice? An organiza-
tional learning perspective. J. Public Procure. 2021, 21, 138–166. [CrossRef]
23. Cheng, W.; Appolloni, A.; D’Amato, A.; Zhu, Q. Green public procurement, missing concepts and future trends—A critical review.
J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 176, 770–784. [CrossRef]
24. Placek, M. The effects of decentralization on efficiency in public procurement: Empirical evidence for the Czech Republic. Lex
Localis 2017, 15, 67–92. [CrossRef]
25. Bakirtas, D.; Aysu, A. Public procurement in the framework of demand side innovation policy: Theory and examples of practice.
Amme Idaresi Derg. 2017, 50, 143–189.
26. Knutsson, H.; Thomasson, A. Innovation in the public procurement process. Public Manag. Rev. 2014, 16, 242–255. [CrossRef]
27. Tiryakioglu, M.; Yulek, M.A. Development-based public procurement policies: A selective survey of literature, cross-country
policy experience and the Turkish experience. Innov. Eur. J. Soc. Sci. Res. 2015, 28, 344–359. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2022, 14, 11955 19 of 19

28. Amann, M.; Roehrich, J.K.; Essig, M.; Harland, C. Driving sustainable supply chain management in the public sector: The
importance of public procurement in the European Union. Supply Chain Manag. 2014, 19, 351e366. [CrossRef]
29. Murray, J.G. Debate: UK public procurement 2014. Public Money Manag. 2014, 34, 244–246. [CrossRef]
30. Ladi, S.; Tsarouhas, D. International diffusion of regulatory governance: EU actorness in public procurement. Regul. Gov. 2017, 11,
388–403. [CrossRef]
31. Wang, X.; Liu, Y.; Yanbing Ju, Y. Sustainable public procurement policies on promoting scientific and technological innovation in
China: Comparisons with the U.S., the UK, Japan, Germany, France, and South Korea. Sustainability 2018, 10, 2134. [CrossRef]
32. Wen, Z.Y. Government purchase of services in China: Similar intentions, different policy designs. Public Adm. Dev. 2017, 37,
65–78. [CrossRef]
33. Song, H.; Zhang, S. China’s government procurement policy system construction and development for innovation product. Stud.
Sci. Sci. 2014, 32, 1639–1645.
34. Brammer, S.; Walker, H. Sustainable procurement in the public sector: An international comparative study. Int. J. Oper. Prod.
Manag. 2011, 31, 452–476. [CrossRef]
35. Prier, E.; Schwerin, E.; McCue, C.P. Implementation of sustainable public procurement practices and policies: A sorting framework.
J. Public Procure. 2016, 16, 312–346. [CrossRef]
36. Georghiou, L.; Edler, J.; Uyarra, E.; Yeow, J. Policy instruments for public procurement of innovation: Choice, design and
assessment. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2014, 86, 1–12. [CrossRef]
37. Preuss, L. Addressing sustainable development through public procurement: The case of local government. Supply Chain Manag.
2009, 14, 213–223. [CrossRef]
38. Witjes, S.; Lozano, R. Towards a more circular economy: Proposing a framework linking sustainable public procurement and
sustainable business models. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2016, 112, 37–44. [CrossRef]
39. Walker, H.; Brammer, S. Sustainable procurement in the United Kingdom public sector. Supply Chain Manag. Int. J. 2009, 14,
128–137. [CrossRef]
40. Testa, F.; Annunziata, A.; Iraldo, F.; Frey, M. Drawbacks and opportunities of green public procurement: An effective tool for
sustainable production. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 112, 1893–1900. [CrossRef]
41. Delmonico, D.; Jabbour, C.J.C.; Pereira, S.C.F.; de Sousa Jabbour, A.B.L.; Renwick, D.W.S.; Thomé, A.M.T. Unveiling barriers to
sustainable public procurement in emerging economies: Evidence from a leading sustainable supply chain initiative in Latin
America. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2018, 134, 70–79. [CrossRef]
42. Testa, F.; Iraldo, F.; Frey, M.; Daddi, T. What factors influence the uptake of green public procurement practices? New evidence
from an Italian survey. Ecol. Econ. 2012, 82, 88–96. [CrossRef]
43. Uttam, K.; Roos, C.L.L. Competitive dialogue procedure for sustainable public procurement. J. Clean. Prod. 2015, 86, 403–416.
[CrossRef]
44. Testa, F.; Grappio, P.; Gusmerotti, N.; Iraldo, F.; Frey, M. Examining green public procurement using content analysis: Existing
difficulties for procurers and useful recommendations. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2016, 18, 197–219. [CrossRef]
45. The European Commisson. Commission Staff Working Document: Buying Social: A Guide to Taking Account of Social Considerations in
Public Procurement; The European Commisson: Brussels, Belgium, 2010; p. 5.
46. Bernal, R.; San-Jose, L.; Retolaza, J.L. Improvement actions for a more social and sustainable public procurement: A delphi
analysis. Sustainability 2019, 11, 4069. [CrossRef]
47. Grandia, J. Finding the missing link: Examining the mediating role of sustainable public procurement behaviour. J. Clean. Prod.
2016, 124, 183–190. [CrossRef]
48. Mabillard, V.; Zumofen, R. Transparency and accountability—The case of public procurement practices in Switzerland. Public
Works Manag. Policy 2021, 26, 95–114. [CrossRef]
49. Broms, R.; Dahlström, C.; Fazekas, M. Political competition and public procurement outcomes. Comp. Polit. Stud. 2019, 52,
1259–1292. [CrossRef]
50. Sharma, A. Review mechanisms of the public procurement process. Indian J. Public Adm. 2020, 66, 585–591. [CrossRef]
51. McCue, C.P.; Prier, E.; Steinfeld, J.M. Establishing the foundational elements of a public procurement body of knowledge. J. Strat.
Contract. Negot. 2018, 4, 233–251. [CrossRef]