Means of meeting state (municipal) needs: on the issue of the effectiveness of legislation

Abstract

The article examines the means of meeting state (municipal) needs, among which the author includes public procurement, nationalization, requisition, legal forms of public-private partnership (concession agreements, PPP agreements, special investment contracts, production sharing agreements, etc.), the return of state property (assets) from abroad, donations (including crowdfunding), etc. The author has compiled the table in which the means of satisfying state (municipal) needs are arranged depending on the degree of imperative of their legal regime and on the "level of publicity" of the entity using this tool (state, private entity or they are jointly). The article separately examines institutions related to the means of meeting state (municipal) needs (confiscation, "self-sufficiency") or institutions whose attribution to these means is debatable (privatization, "public-public partnership", etc.). The author comes to the conclusion that the Russian public procurement system is the core (central link) of the system for meeting state (municipal) needs, and all other means are its secondary elements. The task of the legislator is to create the common system of means to meet state (municipal) needs by analogy with the contract system in the field of procurement and the corresponding legal framework.

References

1. Bukhvald, E.M. and Bakhtizin, A.R. (2016). Effectiveness of legislation — the essence and methodology of measurement. In Y. A., Tikhomirov and V.P., Emelyantsev (Eds.) Effectiveness of legislation: issues of theory and practice (pp. 23–36). Moscow (in Russ.).
2. Vinnitskiy, A.V., and Solovyov, M.S. (2021). Public procurement and public-private partnership as ways to meet public needs: competition issues. Russian Law Journal, 6, pp. 140–156 (in Russ.).
3. Vinnitskiy, A.V. and Solovyov, M.S. (2022). Public procurement and seizure of property as ways to meet public needs: competition issues. Russian Law Journal, 6, pp. 102–116 (in Russ.).
4. Gabov, A.V. and Khavanova, I.A. (2020). Crowdfunding: legislative design of the web-based financing model in the context of legal doctrine and foreign experience. Bulletin of Perm University. Legal sciences, 1, pp. 28–44 (in Russ.).
5. Gruzdev, V.V. (2021). Requisition and nationalization as grounds for obligations, Law and Economics, 11, pp. 30–36 (in Russ.).
6. Gubin, E.P. et al. (2020). Problems of improving legal regulation of relations in the field of management and use of state and municipal property. Perm Law Almanac, 3, pp. 71–87 (in Russ.).
7. Kikavets, V.V. (2020). Public interest in procurement, Bulletin of the Peoples' Friendship University of Russia. Series: Legal Sciences, Vol. 24, 4, pp. 1039–1062 (in Russ.).
8. Rozhkov, E.V. (2019). Institutional theory and changes in property rights in Russia (on the example of nationalization, deprivation and reprivatization). Actual problems of economics and management, 4(24), pp. 115–124 (in Russ.).
9. Tikhomirov, Y.A. (2016). Law: how to evaluate its effect. In Y. A., Tikhomirov and V.P., Emelyantsev (Eds.) Effectiveness of legislation: issues of theory and practice (pp. 17–23). Moscow (in Russ.).
10. Bovis, C. (2019). Risk in Public Contracts — The Treatment and the Regulation. European Procurement & Public Private Partnership Law Review, Vol. 14, 1, pp. 1–6.
11. Cravero, C. (2019). Rethinking the Role of Civil Society in Public Procurement. European Procurement & Public Private Partnership Law Review, Vol. 14, 1, pp. 30–42.
12. Nowicki, H. (2022). Public-Law Nature of Public Procurement Law. Studia Iuridica Lublinensia, Vol. 31, 4, pp. 205–220.
13. Pardi, L. (2017). The New Italian Public Procurement and Concessions Code. European Procurement & Public Private Partnership Law Review, Vol. 12, 1, pp. 57–59.
14. Säcker, F.J. (2019). Public contracts between entities within the public sector. In E. P., Gubin (Ed.). Public procurement law around the world. Collection of articles (pp. 273–289). Moscow.