evidoria

← Back to browse

Good practice Imported

DIGIWHIST and Opentender.eu — Corruption-Risk Indicators Across 35 European Procurement Systems

United Kingdom · Cambridge · See the United Kingdom profile · See the Cambridge profile

Top 22% 73/100 · Ask Evidence Copilot about this practice

DIGIWHIST's Opentender.eu opened 17.5 million public tenders from 35 European jurisdictions and scored them with corruption-risk indicators; peer-reviewed validation, but impact on actual corruption is unmeasured.

DIGIWHIST and Opentender.eu — Corruption-Risk Indicators Across 35 European Procurement Systems

Details

Promoter
University of Cambridge (DIGIWHIST consortium, with Hertie School ERCAS)
Period
2015-2018 (Opentender.eu launched Jan 2018)
Keywords
public procurement, anti-corruption, open data, risk indicators

Description

DIGIWHIST ("Digital Whistleblower") was an EU Horizon 2020 project led by the University of Cambridge with ERCAS (Hertie School), the Government Transparency Institute, Datlab, Open Knowledge Foundation Deutschland and Transcrime. In January 2018 it launched Opentender.eu, which the Hertie School reported covered 35 European jurisdictions (the 28 EU member states, Norway, Iceland, Switzerland, Serbia, Georgia, Armenia and the European Commission) and 17.5 million public tenders; a 2021 Cambridge impact summary cites over 19 million contracts.
The platform applies data-driven corruption-risk indicators (for example single-bidder tenders and contract modifications after award) to administrative procurement records so that agencies, journalists and civil society can compare buyers, suppliers and sectors. The method is statistical risk scoring on open data rather than machine learning in the narrow sense.
Evidence: Cambridge reports a composite red-flag score validated in micro-level tests on 2.8 million contracts in 28 European countries (2009-14); the European Court of Auditors recommended the Commission adopt the approach; the World Bank promotes it in lending and technical assistance (e.g. Mexico) and the OECD uses the indicators; Cambridge reports over 1,000 weekly users.
Limits: risk flags indicate where to look, not proof of corruption; data quality depends on national publication; the sources do not report measured reductions in corruption, and the current coverage and maintenance status after the grant period were not verified.

Read the full analysis: https://www.hertie-school.org/en/news/detail/content/hertie-school-researchers-launch-digital-platform-to-boost-transparency-of-public-tenders

Implementation

Implementation detail (cost, timeline, staffing, conditions for success) is not yet available for this practice.

Do you run this practice? Claim it — verified implementers get a public contact pathway and can propose corrections.

Data sources

Where this practice's information was retrieved from, and when.

Attachments

Similar practices you may find useful