IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/palcom/v9y2022i1d10.1057_s41599-022-01468-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Procurement challenges in public-sector agricultural development projects in Bangladesh

Author

Listed:
  • Md. Raquibuzzaman Khan

    (Bangladesh Agricultural University
    Ministry of Agriculture)

  • Nazia Tabassum

    (Bangladesh Agricultural University)

  • Niaz Ahmed Khan

    (University of Dhaka)

  • Mohammad Jahangir Alam

    (Bangladesh Agricultural University
    University of South Australia)

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to identify and evaluate the key challenges to project procurement in public-sector agricultural development projects in Bangladesh. Being exploratory in nature, the study applied the modified Delphi method, the best worst method (BWM), and the interpretive structural modelling (ISM) approach sequentially for the investigation. Ten key procurement challenges were identified and validated through the use of a literature review and two rounds of modified Delphi with the input of 15 experts in the field. Then the BWM was applied to assess the responses of eight industry experts to estimate the relative importance of the challenges. After that, a second panel of ten experts was interviewed using ISM to look at the contextual relationships between the challenges. This led to a four-layer interpretive structural model and MICMAC (cross-impact matrix multiplication applied to classification) analysis of the challenges. Among the 10 key challenges, ‘lack of competent procurement staff’ is found to be the most significant challenge; whereas, based on the inter-relationships among the challenges, ‘political influence’ is identified as the most influential challenge. As a result, it is recommended that relevant professionals and policymakers address these challenges in terms of their relevance, relative dependencies, and influences in a holistic manner. This study addresses a knowledge gap by offering a thorough investigation of the challenges associated with public-sector agricultural project procurement in a developing country’s context. This makes it useful for professionals in the field, academics, policymakers, and future researchers.

Suggested Citation

  • Md. Raquibuzzaman Khan & Nazia Tabassum & Niaz Ahmed Khan & Mohammad Jahangir Alam, 2022. "Procurement challenges in public-sector agricultural development projects in Bangladesh," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-13, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:9:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-022-01468-y
    DOI: 10.1057/s41599-022-01468-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41599-022-01468-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/s41599-022-01468-y?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ramon Bernal & Leire San-Jose & Jose Luis Retolaza, 2019. "Improvement Actions for a More Social and Sustainable Public Procurement: A Delphi Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-15, July.
    2. Raut, Rakesh D. & Narkhede, Balkrishna & Gardas, Bhaskar B., 2017. "To identify the critical success factors of sustainable supply chain management practices in the context of oil and gas industries: ISM approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 68(P1), pages 33-47.
    3. Liang, Fuqi & Brunelli, Matteo & Rezaei, Jafar, 2020. "Consistency issues in the best worst method: Measurements and thresholds," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    4. Bleda, Mercedes & Chicot, Julien, 2020. "The role of public procurement in the formation of markets for innovation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 186-196.
    5. R. Sivaprakasam & V. Selladurai & P. Sasikumar, 2015. "Implementation of interpretive structural modelling methodology as a strategic decision making tool in a Green Supply Chain Context," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 233(1), pages 423-448, October.
    6. Mangla, Sachin Kumar & Kumar, Pradeep & Barua, Mukesh Kumar, 2015. "Risk analysis in green supply chain using fuzzy AHP approach: A case study," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 104(PB), pages 375-390.
    7. Mi, Xiaomei & Tang, Ming & Liao, Huchang & Shen, Wenjing & Lev, Benjamin, 2019. "The state-of-the-art survey on integrations and applications of the best worst method in decision making: Why, what, what for and what's next?," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 205-225.
    8. A. Amarender Reddy & Mehjabeen, 2019. "Electronic National Agricultural Markets, Impacts, Problems and Way Forward," IIM Kozhikode Society & Management Review, , vol. 8(2), pages 143-155, July.
    9. Moktadir, Md Abdul & Ali, Syed Mithun & Jabbour, Charbel Jose Chiappetta & Paul, Ananna & Ahmed, Sobur & Sultana, Razia & Rahman, Towfique, 2019. "Key factors for energy-efficient supply chains: Implications for energy policy in emerging economies," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    10. Williams, Martin J., 2017. "The Political Economy of Unfinished Development Projects: Corruption, Clientelism, or Collective Choice?," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 111(4), pages 705-723, November.
    11. I-Chieh Hsu & Yi-Ju Shih & Fan-Yun Pai, 2020. "Applying the Modified Delphi Method and DANP to Determine the Critical Selection Criteria for Local Middle and Top Management in Multinational Enterprises," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-21, August.
    12. Mark Schwartz, 2009. "“Corporate Efforts to Tackle Corruption: An Impossible Task?” The Contribution of Thomas Dunfee," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 88(4), pages 823-832, October.
    13. Rezaei, Jafar, 2015. "Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 49-57.
    14. Wen-Hwa Ko & Min-Yen Lu, 2020. "Evaluation of the Professional Competence of Kitchen Staff to Avoid Food Waste Using the Modified Delphi Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-11, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Zsombor Szádoczki & Sándor Bozóki & Patrik Juhász & Sergii V. Kadenko & Vitaliy Tsyganok, 2023. "Incomplete pairwise comparison matrices based on graphs with average degree approximately 3," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 326(2), pages 783-807, July.
    2. Kheybari, Siamak & Javdanmehr, Mahsa & Rezaie, Fariba Mahdi & Rezaei, Jafar, 2021. "Corn cultivation location selection for bioethanol production: An application of BWM and extended PROMETHEE II," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 228(C).
    3. Gao, Fei & Wang, Weixiang & Bi, Chencan & Bi, Wenhao & Zhang, An, 2023. "Prioritization of used aircraft acquisition criteria: A fuzzy best–worst method (BWM)-based approach," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    4. Danish Farooq & Sarbast Moslem & Arshad Jamal & Farhan Muhammad Butt & Yahya Almarhabi & Rana Faisal Tufail & Meshal Almoshaogeh, 2021. "Assessment of Significant Factors Affecting Frequent Lane-Changing Related to Road Safety: An Integrated Approach of the AHP–BWM Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(20), pages 1-17, October.
    5. Moktadir, Md Abdul & Ali, Syed Mithun & Jabbour, Charbel Jose Chiappetta & Paul, Ananna & Ahmed, Sobur & Sultana, Razia & Rahman, Towfique, 2019. "Key factors for energy-efficient supply chains: Implications for energy policy in emerging economies," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    6. Aziz Naghizadeh Vardin & Ramin Ansari & Mohammad Khalilzadeh & Jurgita Antucheviciene & Romualdas Bausys, 2021. "An Integrated Decision Support Model Based on BWM and Fuzzy-VIKOR Techniques for Contractor Selection in Construction Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-28, June.
    7. Junnan Wu & Xin Liu & Dianqi Pan & Yichen Zhang & Jiquan Zhang & Kai Ke, 2023. "Research on Safety Evaluation of Municipal Sewage Treatment Plant Based on Improved Best-Worst Method and Fuzzy Comprehensive Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-15, May.
    8. Liang, Fuqi & Brunelli, Matteo & Rezaei, Jafar, 2020. "Consistency issues in the best worst method: Measurements and thresholds," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    9. Besharati Fard, Moein & Moradian, Parisa & Emarati, Mohammadreza & Ebadi, Mehdi & Gholamzadeh Chofreh, Abdoulmohammad & Klemeŝ, Jiří Jaromír, 2022. "Ground-mounted photovoltaic power station site selection and economic analysis based on a hybrid fuzzy best-worst method and geographic information system: A case study Guilan province," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    10. Xiao-Kang Wang & Wen-Hui Hou & Chao Song & Min-Hui Deng & Yong-Yi Li & Jian-Qiang Wang, 2021. "BW-MaxEnt: A Novel MCDM Method for Limited Knowledge," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(14), pages 1-17, July.
    11. Qigan Shao & Sung-Shun Weng & James J.H. Liou & Huai-Wei Lo & Hongbo Jiang, 2019. "Developing A Sustainable Urban-Environmental Quality Evaluation System in China Based on A Hybrid Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(8), pages 1-25, April.
    12. Chong Li & He Huang & Ya Luo, 2022. "An Integrated Two-Dimension Linguistic Intuitionistic Fuzzy Decision-Making Approach for Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Supplier Selection," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-24, September.
    13. Sarbast Moslem & Muhammet Gul & Danish Farooq & Erkan Celik & Omid Ghorbanzadeh & Thomas Blaschke, 2020. "An Integrated Approach of Best-Worst Method (BWM) and Triangular Fuzzy Sets for Evaluating Driver Behavior Factors Related to Road Safety," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-20, March.
    14. Madjid Tavana & Mehdi Soltanifar & Francisco J. Santos-Arteaga, 2023. "Analytical hierarchy process: revolution and evolution," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 326(2), pages 879-907, July.
    15. Noor Shakir Mahmood & Ahmed Ali Ajmi & Shamsul Bin Sarip & Hazilah Mad Kaidi & Khairur Rijal Jamaludin & Hayati Habibah Abdul Talib, 2022. "Modeling the Sustainable Integration of Quality and Energy Management in Power Plants," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-19, February.
    16. Máximo Méndez & Mariano Frutos & Fabio Miguel & Ricardo Aguasca-Colomo, 2020. "TOPSIS Decision on Approximate Pareto Fronts by Using Evolutionary Algorithms: Application to an Engineering Design Problem," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-27, November.
    17. Kusi-Sarpong, Simonov & Orji, Ifeyinwa Juliet & Gupta, Himanshu & Kunc, Martin, 2021. "Risks associated with the implementation of big data analytics in sustainable supply chains," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    18. Md. Abdul Moktadir & Ashish Dwivedi & Akib Rahman & Charbel Jose Chiappetta Jabbour & Sanjoy Kumar Paul & Razia Sultana & Jitender Madaan, 2020. "An investigation of key performance indicators for operational excellence towards sustainability in the leather products industry," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(8), pages 3331-3351, December.
    19. Gholamreza Haseli & Reza Sheikh & Jianqiang Wang & Hana Tomaskova & Erfan Babaee Tirkolaee, 2021. "A Novel Approach for Group Decision Making Based on the Best–Worst Method (G-BWM): Application to Supply Chain Management," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(16), pages 1-20, August.
    20. Murad, C.A. & Bellinello, M.M. & Silva, A.J. & Netto, A. Caminada & de Souza, G.F.M. & Nabeta, S.I., 2022. "A novel methodology employed for ranking and consolidating performance indicators in holding companies with multiple power plants based on multi-criteria decision-making method," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 9(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:9:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-022-01468-y. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.nature.com/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.