{"title":"欧盟采购法是否允许平权行动?-中小企业应受到正面歧视?","authors":"Dorthe Kristensen Balshøj","doi":"10.54648/eulr2021034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Affirmative action is a widely acknowledged phenomenon in the US, and in the context of small businesses (US counterpart to European SMEs) within public procurement it is manifested in a 23% set-aside.\nThe purpose of affirmative action in the US is equal treatment – as is the overall purpose of EU law. However, in EU law affirmative action and equal treatment are considered somewhat opposites, for which reason there is no set-asides as such. That said, Article 67(2) of Directive 2014/24/EU provides for including social aspects in the contract award criteria, and therefore the main question of this article is whether it would be against the principle of equal treatment to use Article 67 as a basis for introducing affirmative action to promote SMEs in European public procurement? In this author’s opinion, the answer is no.\nEU public procurement, US government purchasing, small and medium-sized enterprises, SME, small businesses, affirmative action, sustainable procurement, principle of equal treatment, incomparable positions, Article 47","PeriodicalId":53431,"journal":{"name":"European Business Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Can Affirmative Action be Allowed in EU Procurement Law? – SMEs to be Positively Discriminated?\",\"authors\":\"Dorthe Kristensen Balshøj\",\"doi\":\"10.54648/eulr2021034\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Affirmative action is a widely acknowledged phenomenon in the US, and in the context of small businesses (US counterpart to European SMEs) within public procurement it is manifested in a 23% set-aside.\\nThe purpose of affirmative action in the US is equal treatment – as is the overall purpose of EU law. However, in EU law affirmative action and equal treatment are considered somewhat opposites, for which reason there is no set-asides as such. That said, Article 67(2) of Directive 2014/24/EU provides for including social aspects in the contract award criteria, and therefore the main question of this article is whether it would be against the principle of equal treatment to use Article 67 as a basis for introducing affirmative action to promote SMEs in European public procurement? In this author’s opinion, the answer is no.\\nEU public procurement, US government purchasing, small and medium-sized enterprises, SME, small businesses, affirmative action, sustainable procurement, principle of equal treatment, incomparable positions, Article 47\",\"PeriodicalId\":53431,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Business Law Review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Business Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.54648/eulr2021034\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Business Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/eulr2021034","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
Can Affirmative Action be Allowed in EU Procurement Law? – SMEs to be Positively Discriminated?
Affirmative action is a widely acknowledged phenomenon in the US, and in the context of small businesses (US counterpart to European SMEs) within public procurement it is manifested in a 23% set-aside.
The purpose of affirmative action in the US is equal treatment – as is the overall purpose of EU law. However, in EU law affirmative action and equal treatment are considered somewhat opposites, for which reason there is no set-asides as such. That said, Article 67(2) of Directive 2014/24/EU provides for including social aspects in the contract award criteria, and therefore the main question of this article is whether it would be against the principle of equal treatment to use Article 67 as a basis for introducing affirmative action to promote SMEs in European public procurement? In this author’s opinion, the answer is no.
EU public procurement, US government purchasing, small and medium-sized enterprises, SME, small businesses, affirmative action, sustainable procurement, principle of equal treatment, incomparable positions, Article 47
期刊介绍:
The mission of the European Business Law Review is to provide a forum for analysis and discussion of business law, including European Union law and the laws of the Member States and other European countries, as well as legal frameworks and issues in international and comparative contexts. The Review moves freely over the boundaries that divide the law, and covers business law, broadly defined, in public or private law, domestic, European or international law. Our topics of interest include commercial, financial, corporate, private and regulatory laws with a broadly business dimension. The Review offers current, authoritative scholarship on a wide range of issues and developments, featuring contributors providing an international as well as a European perspective. The Review is an invaluable source of current scholarship, information, practical analysis, and expert guidance for all practising lawyers, advisers, and scholars dealing with European business law on a regular basis. The Review has over 25 years established the highest scholarly standards. It distinguishes itself as open-minded, embracing interests that appeal to the scholarly, practitioner and policy-making spheres. It practices strict routines of peer review. The Review imposes no word limit on submissions, subject to the appropriateness of the word length to the subject under discussion.