Author
Listed:
- Fuguo Cao
(School of Public Finance and Taxation, Central University of Finance and Economics, Beijing 102206, China
Chinese Academy of PPP Governance, Central University of Finance and Economics, Beijing 102206, China
School of Law, Central University of Finance and Economics, Beijing 102206, China)
- Yusen Yang
(School of Public Finance and Taxation, Central University of Finance and Economics, Beijing 102206, China
Chinese Academy of PPP Governance, Central University of Finance and Economics, Beijing 102206, China)
- Shaobo Guo
(School of Public Finance and Taxation, Central University of Finance and Economics, Beijing 102206, China
Chinese Academy of PPP Governance, Central University of Finance and Economics, Beijing 102206, China)
Abstract
Green public procurement (GPP) is a key policy instrument for promoting sustainable production and consumption, yet its implementation performance as a multidimensional public-sector decision process remains insufficiently assessed. Existing studies often focus on selected dimensions or limited cases, lacking both a framework that captures GPP’s multiple core components and large-scale evidence from procurement texts. Without such an assessment, GPP may remain at the level of policy rhetoric. To address this gap, this study develops a six-dimensional evaluation framework covering environmental friendliness, green labels, circular economy, green innovation, green supply chains, and life cycle costing (LCC), and applies automated text-mining methods to 80,494 central-level and 407,955 local-level public tender documents in China from 2015 to 2022. The results show that GPP has entered procurement practice at scale: 55.1% of documents contain at least one green requirement. However, implementation is highly uneven. Among documents containing at least one GPP requirement, environmental friendliness (95.7%) and green labels (58.9%) form the core of current practice, green innovation occupies an intermediate position (35.1%), while green supply chains (16.4%) and LCC (16.3%) remain much less developed. A clear central–local gap is also observed, with implementation rates of 75.2% and 51.1%, respectively. Further analysis shows that green requirements appear in multiple combinations and vary across time, award methods, and contract types. More importantly, although green supply chains and LCC are not yet fully specified in national institutions, they have already entered some tender documents. These findings confirm the importance of assessing the implementation outcomes of GPP’s multiple core components and provide new evidence on implementation gaps and practice-led policy boundary expansion under multilevel governance. The text-mining framework offers a transferable tool for evaluating sustainable public procurement in other emerging economies.
Suggested Citation
Download full text from publisher
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:gam:jsusta:v:18:y:2026:i:13:p:6661-:d:1980494. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: MDPI Indexing Manager The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask MDPI Indexing Manager to update the entry or send us the correct address
(email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.