Sustainability Policy Objectives, Centralized Decision Making, and Efficiency in Public Procurement Processes in U.S. Local Governments
Open accessAbstract
Some U.S. local governments are leveraging public procurement to meet their sustainability goals. However, does the simultaneous pursuit of multiple sustainability objectives potentially slow down the speed of procurement processes? We suggest that the simultaneous pursuit of multiple sustainability objectives through procurement is related to decision making speed. Additionally, we argue that centralized decision-making structures might moderate this relationship. Drawing on a representative sample of more than 200 U.S. local governments, we demonstrate that for low-cost purchases, as the number of policy objectives increases, so too does the average length of time for approval. We also find evidence of an interactive relationship between decision-making structures and the number of existing sustainability policies pursued simultaneously. For routine low-cost and routine high-cost purchases, we find evidence that as the centralization of procurement decision making increases, the marginal effect of purchasing complexity on approval times decreases. These findings offer important evidence about how pursuing multiple sustainability objectives affect decision-making efficiency and how decision-making structures might facilitate U.S local governments’ integration of sustainability objectives into their existing internal processes.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Centralisation can be a possible barrier to GPP.
“Conversely, Stritch et al. (2020) highlighted centralisation as a possible barrier (see also Hsueh et al., 2020).”
From Green public procurement as an effective way for sustainable development: A systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis (2025) · cites this paper as Stritch et al. (2020)
Centralisation is a barrier to GPP.
“Centralisation Stritch et al. (2020); Hsueh et al. (2020)”
From Green public procurement as an effective way for sustainable development: A systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis (2025) · cites this paper as Stritch et al. (2020)
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 66 · Cited by 45
- Authors
- Stritch, J. M., Bretschneider, S., Darnall, N., Hsueh, L., & Chen, Y.
- Affiliations
- Arizona State University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Stritch, Justin M.
- Venue
- Sustainability
- Publisher
- MDPI AG
- Published
- 2020-08-26
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 17
- Pages
- 6934
- ISSN
- 2071-1050 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3081317421
- Cited by
- 45
- References
- 66
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 1
- FWCI
- 6.93
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Sustainability (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- V. Kann Rasmussen Foundation (0000)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Public Procurement and Policy
- Social Sciences › Public Administration › Public Policy and Administration Research
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Sustainable Supply Chain Management
- Keywords
- sustainability policy, public procurement, local government, centralized decision-making, decision-making efficiency
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review