-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
BT-06, BT-774, BT-775, BT-776: Green or sustainable procurement #95
Comments
eForms also has some modelling done for this. |
eForms has:
Each has a short codelist: BT-06:
BT-774:
BT-775:
BT-776:
An extension will be created in our updates to the OCDS for EU profile for eForms, once the Publications Office publishes a mapping from TED to eForms. That work is tracked here: https://github.com/open-contracting-extensions/european-union/issues |
MAPS glossary defines:
UNCITRAL glossary defines:
|
Moved the issue and re-opened it in an appropriate repository. |
Suggest that each of these BT's map to |
Did you consider using the sustainability extension (discussed in open-contracting/standard#1543)? |
@duncandewhurst thanks for pointing that out, I wasn't aware of that extension. I think it could be a good fit. Mapping tables will still need to be created to extend the sustainabilityGoal.csv codelist. @jpmckinney do you agree that We would need a new field (e.g. |
@jpmckinney Suggesting the following mapping tables: BT-06: strategic procurement
here I've stuck to BT-774: environmental impact
The 2 part codes are to fit with the sustainability extension pattern. Using BT-775: social objective
As for the environmental codelist I've used the 2 tier codes and BT-776: innovative acquisition
|
@yolile I think in the end we put innovation into 'economic', yes? (with 'economic.marketInnovationPromotion'). In that case, the EU's innovation subcodes would be subcodes of 'economic.marketInnovationPromotion'. Can you also review the new suggested codes? I don't know if social.disadvantagedEmploymentOpportunities is the same meaning as economic.formalEmploymentPromotion |
@yolile have you had a chance to look at this issue yet? |
Sorry, this was somehow lost in my inbox, thanks for the reminder!
Yes.
We could rename "humanRigths" to "humanRightsInSupplyChain", to make it less generic
I don't think so, as social.disadvantagedEmploymentOpportunities includes "disadvantaged and/or for persons with disabilities" however, informal employment or informal economy is defined differently https://www.ilo.org/employment/units/emp-invest/informal-economy/lang--en/index.htm. As I understand, this one is social and not economic-related because it is related to giving opportunities to persons with some disadvantage. The one that sounds similar to me is "social.fairWorkingConditions" (defined as "The social objective aims to provide just and equitable working conditions") with "social.laborRightsPromotion" as fair working conditions usually are part of labor rights. |
Great, thanks! Those changes to "humanRights" and "social.fairWorkingConditions" make sense. For "innovation" if it matches to "economic.marketInnovationPromotion" then are we saying that 3 tier codes are acceptable for thecodes in the 'innovation acquisition' table? Also there's a new business term in this BG, BT-805 Green Procurement Criteria, which takes codes from gpp-criteria. There are 4 codes:
These could be mapped as sub-codes of "environmental" but I'm not sure the semantics fit as they're stating the criteria the procurement meets rather than a sustainability goal that is being pursued? This BT might be better placed in |
I think we can match "mar-nov" with economic.marketInnovationPromotion, and then create a new one under economic for the other 3, eg processInnovation, productInnovation, etc
Hmm, the Sustainability extension also adds two other fields: the boolean |
The other option is just to add the top-level "innovation" code, now that we have a clear use for it |
For reference, the discussion about "innovation" starts from this comment and below open-contracting-extensions/ocds_sustainability_extension#2 (comment) |
Thanks @yollie, using
For 'innovation' there's also 'inn-pur' from BT-06. The codes in that table appear to act as high level codes with the codes for BT-774, BT-775 and BT-776 being essentially sub-codes. Which does argue for a top-level 'innovation' rather than just putting them all in 'economic' as we'd need 4 more innovation related codes as well as 'mar-nov', something for process, something for product, something for R&D AND something for generic "Innovative purchase". @jpmckinney This also still leaves the issue of where to map BT-777: Strategic Description. This is used to provide further description of the codes selected in BT-06. Multiple codes, and therefore multiple associated descriptions, are possible. We could just add a |
I agree that a top-level innovation code would be a better match for the EU's approach. However, "innovation" is so generic – it doesn't seem like good ontology design to put it at the top. Of course, it may very well be the case that the EU and other jurisdictions don't design ontologies well – or that legislators (or lobbyists, I don't know) get so excited about innovation that it waters down the purpose (sustainability). For now, we'll try to fit their terms into our ontology that at least tries to relate things back to sustainability. I don't know a good solution for BT-777. We can maybe have the concatenation be "code: description[newline]code: description[etc.]" so that it's easy to reconstruct the structure. |
OK, so for the innovation codes then we'll have the following: BT-06: strategic procurement
BT-776: innovative acquisition
@jpmckinney |
I see your edit. Yes, looks good! |
guidance.yaml for all BT's mentioned (BT-06, BT-774, BT-775, BT-776, BT-777 and BT-805) is now up-to-date according to the discussion in this issue and mapping tables have been created and uploaded. I'm closing this issue now. |
Potential resources on this topic:
EU green public procurement criteria: https://ec.europa.eu/environment/gpp/eu_gpp_criteria_en.htm
EU library of use cases: https://ec.europa.eu/environment/gpp/case_group_en.htm
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: