Abstract

Public works contracts are commonly priced and awarded through a tender process. Each bidder joining the tender must underwrite a bid bond that guarantees their fitness as contractors in case of a win. The winning contractor also needs to underwrite a performance bond before entering the contract to protect the procuring entity against the performance risk arising during the execution phase. This study addresses the case when sureties refuse to issue the performance bond, despite having issued a bid bond to the same subject. A creditworthiness variation of the contractor during the tender or an excessive discount of the contract’s price may lead to this outcome. In that case, all the subjects involved are damaged. The surety who issued the bid bond has to indemnify the procuring entity. The contract award is nullified, which is financially harmful to both the contractor and the procuring entity. We show that sureties adopting a forward-looking risk appetite framework may prevent the demand for unsustainable performance bonds instead of addressing it by rejecting the bidders’ requests. The Solvency II regulatory framework, the Italian bidding law, and actual historical data available from the Italian construction sector are considered to specify a simplified model. The probability of unsustainable tender outcomes is numerically estimated by the model, together with the mitigating impact of a surety’s proper strategy.

Highlights

  • Sustainability is a complex and evolving concept that may include, inter alia, economic and financial considerations, environmental and social impacts, as well as political and legal aspects [1]

  • This study highlights the existence of an economic unsustainability risk for the tenders that award public works contracts

  • The Italian bidding law and the Solvency II regulatory framework are explicitly considered to model the behavior of the three subjects involved in the tender process: the procuring entities, the bidders, and the sureties

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Sustainability is a complex and evolving concept that may include, inter alia, economic and financial considerations, environmental and social impacts, as well as political and legal aspects [1]. The attention to risk management tools and techniques in public works and large private projects has considerably increased, leading to an intense research activity [9,10,11,12] In this context, surety bonds have been investigated mainly empirically, with particular reference to performance bonds and the benefits they produce in terms of risk mitigation. This work investigates the case that the tender process may lead to an unsustainable outcome (i.e., the performance bond is not issued, and the tender process has to be reopened) This is relevant since the inefficiency of the tender process implies costs for all the subjects involved: the bidders, the sureties, and the public entity.

Elements of Suretyship Insurance and the Italian Public Tenders
Sustainability of a Bid Bond
The Bidder’s Perspective
The Surety’s Perspective
Measuring and Managing the Unsustainability Scenarios in Public Tenders
Simulation of Tenders from a Surety’s Perspective
Center
Dynamics of the Capital Requirement without Taking Management Actions
Dynamics of the Capital Requirement Adopting a Backward-Looking RAF
Dynamics of the Capital Requirement Adopting a Forward-Looking RAF
The Role of the Procuring Entity
Conclusions
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call