The Italian Electronic Public Administration Market Place: Small Firm Participation and Satisfaction



The paper reconstructs the path taken by the reform of public procurement in Italy which has gradually evolved from a and centralized market to an open and accessible one. Despite the development of the Electronic Public Administration Market Place (MEPA), information regarding its performance is scant. There are no available collected data on firm satisfaction. The paper discusses the role Consip, a public company owned by the Ministry of Economy and Finance, has played (and continues to play) to guide the decentralization of public e-procurement. At the same time it shows the results of a sample investigation aimed at analysing the level of satisfaction of small/medium enterprises (SMEs) participating in the MEPA.


Public Procurement Public Body Government Procurement Compounded Index Virtual Market 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Hirschleim R.A. (1992). Information systems epistemology: an historical perspective. In Galliers R. (ed.) Information Systems Research: Issues, Methods and Practical Guidelines. London: Blackweel Scientific Publications. pp.28-60.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Henderson L.C. e Lee S. (1992), Managing I/S Design Teams: A Control Theories Perspective, in «Management Science», 38, pp. 757–777.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cox A., Lonsdale C., Watson G. e Farmery R. (2004), Collaboration and Competition: The Economics of Selecting Appropriate Governance Structures for Buyer-Supplier Relationships, in C. Scott e W.E. Thurston (Eds.), Collaboration in Context, University of Calgary, 2003/4Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pettigrew, A.M., and Fenton, M. (Eds.) (2000) The Innovating Organization, London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cheema G.S., Rondinelli D A (eds.) (1983) Decentralization and Development: Policy Implementation in Developing Countries. Beverly Hills: SageGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bovaird T. (2006) Developing new forms of partnership with the ≪market≫ in the procurement of public services, in ≪ Public Administration≫, 84(1), pp. 81–102Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Marra M. (2004) Innovation in e-procurement: the Italian experience, The IBM center for the business of government, Washington, USA.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Marra M. (2008) Centralizzazione e innovazione tecnologica nella riforma degli acquisti della Pa: un bilancio, in Mercato concorrenza regole / a. IX, n.3, dec 2007, pp.487–516Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ragin C. C. (1987) The Comparative Method. Moving Beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategy. Berkley: University of California PressGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ministry of Economy and Finance (2004) Programma di Razionalizzazione degli acquisti di beni e servizi per le Pubbliche Amministrazioni, 2003. Report to Parliament., RomeGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Consip (2009) Annual Report. Rome, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Broggi D. (2006) Un prontuario per i “policy makers” in Impresa e Stato, n.7, Milan.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Martini A. Sisti M. (2009) Valutare il successo delle politiche pubbliche, Il Mulino, BolognaGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ghose S. and Dou W. (1998) Interactive functions and their impacts on the appeal of Internet presence sites. Journal of Advertising Research, March/April, 38(2), 29–43Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wilhite R. (2003). When was your website's last performance appraisal? Management Quarterly, 44(2), 2–15Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Business StudiesUniversity of SalernoSalernoItaly
  2. 2.Department of Business StudiesUniversity of SalernoSalernoItaly
  3. 3.Italy’s National Research CouncilInstitute for the Study of Mediterranean SocietiesNaplesItaly

Personalised recommendations