BESTEK - The Public Procurement Podcast

Host Dr Marta Andhov presents an aperitif episode of the Bestek public procurement podcast, featuring the first half of the “Contracts in the Defence and Security Sector” panel from the PurpLE Project’s Public Procurement & Contracts Conference in Copenhagen (22–23 June 2026), moderated by Associate Professor Michał Kania (University of Silesia in Katowice).

The discussion asks whether defence contracts should be allowed to skip the normal procurement rules through the Article 346 exemption in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), and whether the legal test meant to keep that exemption narrow is still holding up.

Host Dr Marta Andhov presents an aperitif episode of the Bestek public procurement podcast, featuring clips from “Remedial Systems in Public Contracts Law vs Non-Legislative Measures”, a panel she chaired at the Public Procurement & Contracts Conference in Copenhagen (PurpLE Project, 22–23 June 2026).

The episode asks what a bidder can do when a public authority breaks its own procurement rules. It compares Commonwealth countries such as Canada, Australia and New Zealand, whose rules follow the UK model from before the EU directives, with France and the francophone African countries that followed the French model.

Host Dr Marta Andhov presents an aperitif episode of the Bestek public procurement podcast, featuring excerpts from the “Sustainability in Performance of Public Contracts” panel, moderated by Dr Ezgi Uysal (PurpLE postdoctoral researcher, University of Copenhagen), at the Public Procurement & Contracts Conference hosted by the PurpLE Project in Copenhagen (22–23 June 2026).

The episode asks what happens after sustainability is written into a public contract, whether as environmental criteria, social clauses or ESG language: at the performance stage, does anyone enforce, audit or check it? Marta’s answer is “not yet”, but the panel sets out what checking would take.

Panellists Professor Sope Williams (Stellenbosch University; George Washington University), Professor Gustavo Piga (University of Rome Tor Vergata), Associate Professor Helen Yu (Swansea University), and Assistant Professor Désirée Klingler (University of St. Gallen) discuss why a sustainability clause binds once it is in the contract, whether voluntary or mandatory; South Africa’s Medupi and Kusile power stations and why vague “best efforts” wording cannot be enforced; the trade-offs behind Sardinia’s wind turbines; Swiss data showing how little changed after the law did; and the UK’s Procurement Act 2023 and new NHS value-based procurement guidance for medical technology, which sets a minimum weighting for social value in tender scoring.

Host Dr Marta Andhov presents an aperitif episode of the Bestek public procurement podcast, featuring the conversation that opened Day 2 of the Public Procurement & Contracts Conference (PurpLE Project, Copenhagen, 22–23 June 2026), chaired by Grith Skovgaard Ølykke (Partner, Poul Schmith/Kammeradvokaten). It is a first for the aperitif series: Bestek co-host Professor Willem Janssen (Utrecht University and University of Groningen) is on the panel.

The episode asks whether EU reform is making procurement better or simpler, or just adding more rules. Grith sums up the European Commission’s evaluation of the 2014 Public Procurement Directives: the framework “appears to be functioning, just not in the way one might have hoped”, and is only “partially equipped” to deliver.

Willem’s study for the Commission mapped 62 EU regulations and directives that now touch procurement, with 20 more in the pipeline. He argues for prioritisation, with sustainability first, and hopes the revision brings “more demanding rules, but also less rigid rules”: strict on green and social goals, flexible on procedure.

Professor Roberto Caranta (University of Turin), who also wrote a study for the Commission, says EU priorities need money the EU budget does not have, so procurement has become one stone aimed at 62 pigeons. He argues there is only so much simplification a complex subject allows, and that much of the rigidity comes from contracting authorities, not Brussels: many fear courts of auditors and oversight bodies.

The full session ranged more widely, with a lightning round of quick questions and answers. We invite listeners to continue the discussion with us on LinkedIn.

In this Bestek aperitif episode, Dr Marta Andhov continues a discussion from the PurpLE Project Conference panel “Arbitration in Public Contracts” (Copenhagen, June 2026) by focusing on whether arbitral awards in public contract disputes can actually be enforced against contracting authorities. She distinguishes between winning an arbitration and getting paid, and features panel insights from Cesar Pareira (President, Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, São Paulo), Roxana Vornicu (Senior Lecturer, King’s College London; Sîrbu and Vornicu Law, Romania), and Nicholas Jobidon (Professor of Public Law, Université du Québec).

The episode explains that arbitration’s authority stems from party agreement but its legal effect comes from state law (often like a court judgment); that courts remain essential for coercive enforcement; and that enforcement is generally recognised though subject to procedural challenges. It also highlights arbitration’s speed and international enforceability under the 1958 New York Convention, while warning arbitration can become a “trap” if governments lack political will to comply.

In this solo “aperitif” episode of Bestek, Marta Andhov shares highlights from the closing panel on arbitration in public contracts at the PurpLE Conference on Public Procurement and Contracts in Copenhagen, chaired by Peter Trepte (University of Nottingham), supported by the Dreyers Foundation and funded by the Carlsberg Foundation.

The episode focuses on the threshold question of whether public contract disputes should be allowed to go to arbitration, given its implications for cost, speed, expertise, and the tension between confidentiality and transparency.

Roxana Vornicu (King’s College London; Sîrbu and Vornicu Law, Romania) argues that arbitration fits internationalised construction supply chains and that confidentiality can align with protections already found in procurement law. Cesar Pareira (Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, São Paulo) emphasises efficiency and fairness, and later stresses that transparency in state contract arbitration is essential for public scrutiny and trust. Nicholas Jobidon (Université du Québec) warns against removing judicial review and notes that arbitration is useful but not for every case. Miguel Assis Raimundo (University of Lisbon) compares France, Spain, and Portugal and suggests that stronger institutional architecture can address many of the fears around arbitration.

Marta closes by drawing the threads together, concluding that the panel offers no flat yes or no, and that the answer comes down to conditions, not a verdict.

In this episode, Marta and Willem explore how artificial intelligence could support more sustainable public procurement practices— and the risks that come with it. The conversation builds on Marta’s co-authored recent open-access article, “Leveraging AI for Sustainable Public Procurement: Opportunities and Challenges.”

They begin by outlining the motivation and context for the research, before examining where AI could add value in procurement processes. This includes...

In this episode, Marta and Willem discuss the hot topic of the ongoing Irado case and the impacts it is set to have on the world of European Public Procurement Law. How to calculate the activities criterion in article 12 Directive 2014/24/EU? They begin the episode with a short chat about their recent conferences, before moving to a brief introduction to the case and the related unclarities in the Article 12 Directive 2014/24/EU on how the activities criterion is to be calculated. Namely, Willem explains how, from the text alone, it is unclear whether the activities criterion should be based on the entity you contract with, or the holding structure in which it provides its services and how this could have significant ramifications on the applicability of the exemption. They then proceed to talk about the opinion of Advocate General Rantos and express their own perspectives on the matter. They discuss whether the procurement practices in certain countries were legitimate interpretations or circumventions of the directive. Lastly, in the dessert, they switch gears and reflect on strategies that help them foster a good and productive community in the classroom.

In this episode, Marta and Willem invite a long-time listener and supporter of the Bestek podcast and a postdoctoral fellow at PurpLE, Ezgi Uysal, to discuss her research on the topic of sustainability contractual clauses (SCCs) in public procurement contracts. The podcast begins with Ezgi briefly explaining what the SCCs are and what makes them unique, before quickly diving into a discussion about the contractualization of sustainability in public procurement. The speakers then examine different types of SCCs as well as challenges concerning enforcement. They discuss the potential consequences of the failure of contracting authorities to enforce said obligations. Additionally, the speakers argue in favour of the need for improvements in contract management to deliver sustainable public procurement and communication between the contract-drafting and contract-managing teams and discuss whether these problems could be solved by a legislative intervention. For dessert, Ezgi reflects on her PhD experience and provides some heartfelt advice for the first-year PhD students and beyond.

In this episode, Associate Professor Marta Andhov and Professor Willem Janssen discuss a particularly exciting topic - the upcoming reform of the EU’s Public Procurement Directives. They begin by describing the reform’s timeline and discussing how it is being affected by the current geopolitical setting. In their discussion, they assess the focal points of the reform, as described by reports of Enrico Letta and Mario Draghi. The speakers then provide their personal opinions, perceptions, and concerns while discussing their key takes from the two reports. These include, among others: the calls for simplification, flexibilization, and a more strategic and inward-looking approach to the European public procurement, the concerns around the enduring low competition, and the lack of focus on green and social aspects of procurement. For dessert, the speakers once again discuss academics, focusing on alternative ways of examination. They evaluate their own experiences with the less typical ways of testing to provide their opinion of how and why they should be used.