2023年外文文獻(xiàn)及譯文moban

本科畢業(yè)設(shè)計(jì)外文文獻(xiàn)及譯文文獻(xiàn)、資料題目：TheＳｉgnifiｃanceoｆtheTenｄeriｎgＣontrａｃtｏntｈｅＯpｐoｒtuniｔieｓforＣｌiｅｎtｓtoＥncouｒａgeContｒaｃtor-lｅdInｎovatiｏn文獻(xiàn)、資料來源:國道數(shù)據(jù)庫文獻(xiàn)、資料發(fā)表（出版)日期:2023.１0.11院(部）:管理工程學(xué)院專業(yè)：工程造價(jià)班級:價(jià)本0504姓名：劉兆君學(xué)號:指導(dǎo)教師:黃偉典王大磊翻譯日期：20２3．6.1４外文文獻(xiàn)：TheＳｉgnificａncｅoftheＴenｄeriｎgContrａctｏnＴhｅＯpportuｎitieｓfｏrClieｎｔsｔoEｎｃｏuraｇｅＣoｎtractor－leｄIｎｎｏvatioｎA(yù)BSＴRACTDuｒingthｅtenderingpｒocｅsｓｆoｒmｏstmaｊorcoｎstｒucｔioｎcontracｔstherｅｉstheoｐporｔｕnityforｂｉddersｔｏsuggｅｓtalternativeinｎovatｉｖesolutｉｏnｓ.Clearlyclienｔsarekeｅntotａｋeadvanｔageoftheseopporｔuｎitieｓ,aｎdequaｌlyconｔｒactoｒｓwantｔousethｅirexpｅrtisetｏeｓtaｂlishcｏmpｅｔitiveadvａnｔage.Ｂothpartｉesｍａyvｅrywellbenｅfitfromtｈeeｎｃouragemｅntofsuｃｈinnoｖaｔiｏnanｄthｅavaｉｌaｂilitｙｏｆcheａpeｒｍethodsoｆconstructionthaｎhaｖebeｅｎcoｎtemplatedbythetｅndeｒｉnｇauthoritｙ．Howeverｒecenｔdｅｖeloｐmｅｎtsｉnｃｏmｍonlawhａveraisｅddoubtsabouttheaｂiｌityofoｗnerｓtoseekalteｒｎａｔiｖeｔｅndeｒswithoutplaciｎgtheｍselvesaｔriｓkofｌiｔｉｇatioｎ.Ｔhiscomｍonlawhａsｒecognｉｓeｄthｅe(cuò)ｘisteｎｃｅoｆthｅso-caｌled‘tendeｒingｃonｔｒaｃｔ’or‘procｅssｃｏntract’.Sincetheｔenｄerｉngprｏcessisiｎhｅrenｔｌypriｃｅcompｅｔiｔivｅ,theappｌicaｔiｏnoｆthetｅnｄerｉngcoｎtractcｏｎcｅｐｔiｓlikelytoｓｅvｅrelyinhiｂiｔtｈeoppoｒtunityforａlterｎatｉvetenders.Ｔhispapｅｒｉsｐrｉｍａｒilyｂaseｄｏnｔｈelitｅrａt(yī)ｕrerｅｖiｅw.Theａｉmofｔhisｐaperｉstｏhighlightｔｈｅproblemsｗithtｈecomｐｅｔitivetendｅｒingprocessiｎrelaｔionｔocoｎtractoｒ-ledinnovatioｎandｅxplorｅwaysinwhiｃhｏwnerscandｅｖeｌｏｐprocuｒementproceduresｔhatｗiｌlallｏwandencoｕraｇeinnoｖationfrｏｍｃonｔracｔｏrs.PROBLＥMＳWＩTHCＯMPETITIVETENDEＲINGＴhｅｔradiｔｉoｎaltenｄerｉngprｏcesswaｓdesｉｇnedtoｐｒoduｃｅｄｉrｅｃtpriｃecｏmpｅtiｔionforaspecifｉedproduｃt.Eｖaluatioｎoｆtenｄerｓcoｕldonｌybeｃonfineｄtopriceａloｎeｂycreａt(yī)iｎgaｓysteｍinwｈicｈpriｃeistheｏnｌycriteｒionthatcoulｄvarywhｉｌｅdesignａndtｅｃhｎicａlcontｅｎtarethesameｆorｅaｃｈｃoｍpeｔingtenｄer.Ａｌｂeittｈecontrａctperｉodisstiｐuｌatedasconstant,ownersoｆtenencouraｇｅtendererstoｓubmitasecｏndtendeｒwhichoffersanaｌterｎativeprｉceforanalternatｉvｅtｉmｅｐｅrforｍaｎｃe.Tenderｅrswouldacｈieveｔｈiｓbｙrewｏrkingtheｉｒｔｅnderprｏｇraｍme,findinｇtheoｐtimumcontractperiod,andadｊustiｎgtheｔｅnderｐｒiceａccordｉｎgly.Eaｃhtｅnderｅｒwoulｄcompｅteｔofｉndｎovelwａysoforｇａｎｉsinｇthewoｒkｍetｈｏdｔhatｗouldallｏｗｎｏtonlytheminｉmuｍcｏnsｔructioncoｓtbuｔalsomaｘimumｐrofiｔmarginwiｔhｉnthepｒiceprｏposed．However,tｈisproｃessiｓalｗayscoｎfinedｂyｔhｅbｏundarｙoftｈeowner’sdeｓｉｇn.Inthｉsｗａy,theｓuccｅssfulteｎderｅr’sｓｃopetobeinｎｏvatｉvｅiｓvｅrｙｌimitｅｄ．Wｈeｎevalｕatiｎgaｌternativeｔenｄｅrs,theownerｉscｏnｆrontｅdｗiｔhtｈedutyofequaltｒｅatmentａｎdｆaiｒnesstｏalｌｔendereｒs.Ifｏneiｓtobeｐrｅferredｏnａｎalternatiｖetender，ｗｈｉcｈiｓｎｏtａｃoｎｆormingｔendｅrintermsoｆｔheoriginａlinvitatiｏn,hoｗcａnaｌltｅndｅrerｓbｅｔreaｔedequallyandfaｉｒｌy?Anｙindｉviduａlｉsmｅｘｈｉbitedoｎtｈepartｏfaｔendｅreｒoutsｉdetｈepeｒmｉttedｓcopｅofpｒｉceandtimeｍustdｉsquａlifythattｅndｅrfromthｅｏwｎeｒ’ｓcｏnsideratioｎbecａuｓeｉｔdoesｎotconfｏｒmtoｔｈeiｎvitａt(yī)ioｎ．Thereｆoｒｅ,theｔrａditｉoｎalｔenderｉngｐｒｏｃessｐrevents，rｅstrictsｏｒeｖendｉscoｕragescｏntractor-ｌedｉnnovaｔｉｏｎ.SongｅraｎdＩbbｓbｅｌiｅｖｅdtｈattheuseoｆｄｅｓign-anｄ-buiｌdproｃurｅmentｍetｈodwｏuldｅｎcouraｇeiｎnｏvａt(yī)iｏninthebuildinｇｐrocess.Thisprocuremenｔｍethｏｄimｐｏsessｉｎglepoinｔrespoｎsｉｂiliｔyonconｔracｔoｒforｔhｅcｏmｐletebuilｄingaｎｄitstenderiｎgprocｅsｓdｉfferｆｒｏmthatoｆｔhｅｔradｉtｉonalproｃuremeｎtmeｔhoｄinthａt(yī)itmusｔbｅｃａpableofevａluaｔiｎｇdesignａswｅllａsｐrｏｄuctiｏnｃapabilitｙ,tｉmeａｎdpｒiｃe，aｌlｏｎacｏmpetitiveｂasiｓ．Thisiｓnoteａｓy.Ｃｏmｐeｔitiｖedesignｉsnoteａsytoｅvaluateinthecｏntｅｘｔoｆｔｅndering.Theｏbjectivｉｔｙappearｓtｏberｅplaceｄbysubｊectiｖityinｐicｋingｔhewｉnｎｅｒ,anｄｔｈeapparentｉntｅgrityoｆtｈebiddｉｎgprｏｃessｉｓlｏst,unlｅssｖeｒyclearcriteriaaｒeeｓｔａｂlisｈedattheoｕtseｔfｏｒeｖaluaｔioｎoｆcｏmpetｉngｄesiｇｎs．Tｈisalｓomeanstoｓayｔｈａｔtheteｎderprocｅssｒulesmｕstbedesiｇnedａｓｓucｈthatitencｏurａgescontraｃtor-lｅdｉnnovatｉon,yetatthesametimeplacessｏｍelimitｏnthｅsｃoｐeforsｕｃｈinｎovation.Ｔｈelimitsmustbesuchthatthepｒojecｔdeliveredisstｉｌlｔhｅprojectforwｈichtenｄerswｅrｅinviteｄ．ＳongｅｒａｎdIｂbｓ,wｉtｈresｐeｃttothiｓaｓｐeｃt,ａｓｓertｅｄtｈａt(yī)oneｃｏｎcernofpｕblｉcaｇeｎciesishowtoａllｏwforｉnnoｖationwhilemａinｔaiｎinｇappｒoｐｒｉａt(yī)ecoｎtｒolｏfceｒｔaindｅsignaｓｐｅｃｔｓoｆtheｐroｊｅｃt.Detｅrmｉｎinganapprｏpｒiateｂaｌaｎceｏfinｎovatｉoｎandcoｎtｒoｌindesignanｄadequatelycommuｎｉcatingｔhｅｄｅsiredｂalancｅtｏpｏtentialdesign－and-buiｌdtｅndeｒerｓprovidesaｓiｇｎiｆicanｔchaｌｌengetopubｌicsecｔorａgencies．THE‘TＥNDERINGＣONTＲAＣＴ’Deｖeloｐmeｎｔsinthelawｒeｌatingtotenｄerstradｉtiｏnaｌｌytreａｔedan‘iｎvitationtoｔenｄer’oｒa‘ｒeqｕeｓｔｆortｅｎderｓ’aｓnoｍorethａnaninvｉtatioｎｔotreat,ａniｎdicationtｈaｔtheowｎeｒwasreadｙtodobusｉneｓs–soｍeｔｈingpｒioｒｔoandsｈortofanoffer.Inoｔherwｏrds,anｉnvitatｉontotreaｔｗasｎｏtａnoffertomakeacontｒaｃtwithanypｅrｓoｎwｈomightａctontheinviｔａt(yī)ioｎ,butmerｅlyafｉrsｔｓｔepｉnneｇotiationwhichmay,orｍaynｏt,lｅadtoacｏｎtrａct.Whｅneachtenderersuｂｍitｔeｄｉｔｓtｅndｅrinｔhｅprｅscriｂedform,itamouｎteｄtｏａnoｆferwhｉcｈcｏｕｌdｂerｅgａｒdedａsａnoｆｆertomaｋeacｏntｒacｔ.Iftｈｅofｆｅrmeｔwithunequｉvocalacｃeptaｎce，coｎtrａctｕａlobligaｔionarosｅbeｔweeｎtheｏｗnｅrandthｅｓｕccｅｓｓfultｅｎdｅrer.Receｎｔly,ｔhｅmodeｒｎviewtuｒnsthiｓtｈeoryuｐsidedown.Theｒeｅxistｓwhaｔiskｎoｗnasｔｈe‘twocｏntｒact’aｎａlｙsisiｎvolvｉｎｇtheemergenceoftｈe‘teｎｄｅringcoｎtｒact’.Theinvitatiｏntotｅndeｒｉsnowiｎsｏｍeｃｉrcuｍsｔaｎcｅｓｔobetreaｔedasanoffertｏmaｋeaｃｏｎtractwhiｃhａt(yī)enderｅracｃｅptswhenｉtsubｍｉtsacｏnｆｏｒmｉngtender.Theownｅrmakｅsanoffｅｒtoeａchteｎｄererｗhichmightbewoｒdedａｓfollows:“Iｆyouｓubmitatｅnｄeriｎrｅsponsetomｙinvitationａｎｄwhiｃhcｏmplieswithtｈesｔiｐulatｉonsmａde,Iwｉｌｌcoｎsidｅrthatｔｅndeｒ…”.Theｒｅisｎoｏbligatｉoｎatallatｔｈiｓpointontheｓideofthetｅndeｒerｓ，butifaconformiｎgtｅndeｒｉssubmitteｄ,acｏntractisformeｄbetweenｏwnｅrandtendereｒwhiｃhhaｓbeendescｒibｅdhereａsｔhe‘tendｅriｎgconｔrａｃt’ｏrｄeｓｃriｂedｅlsｅwhereasa‘prｅ-aｗardｃonｔract’or‘pｒoｃeｓsｃoｎtracｔ’．Thiscoｎtｒacｔisquiｔedistinctｆroｍthｅcontrａｃtevenｔualｌyｅnｔｅrｅｄintoｗｉｔhｔｈesuccｅssｆulｔenｄerer,ｃalledthemaincontｒact.Ｏblｉgaｔiｏnsｏfacｏntｒactuaｌnatureｔhｅreforearisebeｔwｅｅnｔheowneraｎdeachteｎdｅrerwhｏhaｓｓubmitｔedaｐrｏposal.Justasｔｈｅtenｄｅｒcontｒaｃtplaceｓoｂligationsontｈeowner，ｅachtendｅrａlsoimｐosesobｌigationsｏnthetendeｒｅr.Oncｅthｅｔendｅrhaｓbeｅｎsubmｉtｔeｄtotheｏｗｎeｒ,meaｎｉngｔheｔｅndｅrorfirsｔcoｎtracthａsbeenformeｄ，ｔhｅowｎerbecomesｏbligedtｏeacｈｔendｅrｅrｔopｅrfoｒmitｓｓidｅofｂargain,wｈｉchaｔthiｓｓtageｉsａnｏbｌigａｔｉｏｎtｏｃonsiｄｅraｌlｃonfｏrmingtendeｒs.Ｂｙｔhｅsａmetoken，tendeｒersbecomｅoｂｌigeｄｔonotsiｍplywitｈdｒaｗｔheirtender，thetenderｗｉlｌｒｅmainopeｎforaｓtipulateｄperiｏdｏfｔｉme.Unｄertｈｅ‘ｔwoｃoｎｔract’ｐriｎｃiｐle,ateｎｄererwhｏmakeｓamｉstaｋemayｆinｄtｈaｔthetｅｎderisａcｃeｐtedｗithnooｐｐｏｒtｕnitytoｅｓｃapeｅvｅnifｔhereiｓanerrorｉntenｄeｒcompｉlation．Ｆorｔhesakeofｃｌarity,iｔｍaybｅstateｄtｈatｔhesubmｉｓsionofaｃonforminｇtenderinｒeｓｐｏnsetｏaninvitaｔｉoｎcancrｅatecontrａctuａlobｌiｇａt(yī)ionsforbothpaｒtiｅｓ.Iｎthecａse：Onｔarioｖ.RonEngｉneering&ConstruｃtionＥaｓｔeｒｎＬtｄ,ｔheCourｔofCａnadaｈeｌｄthatａcｏntrａctwａsｂroughtiｎtoｂeiｎgaｕtｏmaticａllyｕｐｏｎtｈesuｂmiｓｓiｏnｏfarespｏｎsivetｅｎｄeｒbyeａchtｅnｄeｒeｒ.Hａｖiｎgesｔablisｈedｔhaｔa‘ｔenderｉngcontract’exｉｓts,ｉｔistｈｅnimpｏrtaｎtｔocｏnsｔｉtｕtewhatthetｅｒmsareofthatcontract.Tｈetｅrｍsareｄeｒivedfroｍthetenderconditｉoｎs,the‘tenｄerｃｏde’,andｏtherreｌｅvaｎtｍａt(yī)eｒialsuｃｈaslegｉslatｉoｎandcｏrｒespoｎdence．Alloｒsｏｍeofｔhepｒｏvｉsionsofｔhｅ‘tenderｃｏdｅ’maybｅinｃorporateｄinthｅ‘tendｅringcｏntracｔ’ｂｙrｅferｅnceand/orbyiｍｐlｉｃatｉon．Ａtermsmaybｅimplｉeｄtoｔｈeefｆecｔｔhａt(yī)theownermustcoｎsideraｌlcoｎfoｒmingｔendｅrｓ,ｍusttreａt(yī)ａｌlｔendereｒsｅqualｌyandfaｉrlｙ,ａnｄmuｓtawａrｄｏnlyacontractforｔhｅprｏjeｃｔtｅndereｄfor.GUIDＡNCＥONCONＴＲACTORSELＥCTIOＮTheSignificanｃeofProｂｉtyinTeｎdｅrinｇProbitｙｉsdeｆｉnedinｖarｉｏusｄｉｃtiｏｎａｒiesａs“moｒalexcellｅnce,integrｉty，ｕpｒiｇhｔness,coｎscientiousness,hoｎeｓty,ｓinｃeritｙ”.Iｎtheｔenｄeｒingｃｏｎｔext,ｉtgｅｎeralｌydepeｎｄｓuponｃonfiｄｅｎtialityofdoｃuｍentatioｎanddｅcisioｎmａｋｉnｇ，objｅcｔivｅａnｄcｏnsｉsｔentaｓｓesｓmｅntateachpｈａseofdｅｃisionmａkｉnganｄresolutionoｆanｙｐosｓiｂle,pｅｒceiｖedorａcｔuａlｃoｎflictsｏfintｅrｅst．Thus,oｎｅoｆtheprimaｒｙoｂjｅｃｔivｅsｏfｐrobityiｎtenｄeringisｔomainｔainthｅｉnteｇrｉtyoｆthebiddinｇpｒoｃｅss.TheCanadｉancouｒtintｈeＲoｎEngiｎｅｅｒingcasｅrｅfｅrreｄtoｔhisａstｈeobligatiｏｎofｏwnerstotｒeａt(yī)ａlｌtenｄererseｑuａlｌyａnｄfairly.Johnsｔonｅassertsthatｔｒanｓpareｎcyｉntheentirecontｒactingoutprocesｓiｓｅssｅntialsothaｔpoｔｅｎｔialｃｏnｔractoｒｓandmemｂｅrｓoｆthepｕbliccanhaｖeconfｉdencｅinｔheoｕtcoｍes.Iｆｉnｔegrｉｔyanｄimｐartialityarenotevｉdent，ｔｅｎdeｒerｓmaybereluctanttoｍａkｅabid,tｈｅfｏrmuｌaｔionｏfwhiｃhｒequｉresｓignificａntamountofｔimeandrｅsoｕrｃｅs.Iｎtｈatcase,ｃｏmpetiｔionisｌikelｙｔobeleｓｓenedandｔhｅｂestｖalｕefoｒmoｎeymａynotｂeａchiｅｖｅd.Inprinｃiplｅ，ｒecenｔdeveloｐｍｅｎtincommonｌａwaｔteｍｐｔｓtomaｉｎtainｓoｍeinｔegrｉtyｉｎthｅtenｄeｒiｎｇpｒｏｃeｓｓbyｒeｃognisｉngtheexisteｎceofthｅpａrｔｉes’obliｇatioｎstoｏneａｎoｔｈersotｈattheownerｃanｎotｓimplｙｒｅjectｏraccｅpttｅndersaｓiｔplｅaｓeｓ,orcanｎoｔｎeｇｏtiatewｉｔhoneｏrmｏretｅndeｒｅrｓtoproducesatisfactorydeaｌ．Ａｓmeｎｔionｅｄprｅｖiouｓｌy，ｔhｅconｔracｔｕaｌobligationbetweentｈeｐartｉesisreferrｅdtoａsthｅ‘tｅｎdｅrｉngcontｒact’.Ｂｒeachofｔhｅ‘tenderiｎgｃoｎtract’entｉｔlｅstheinjurｅdｐartytｏｔｈenｏrｍaｌrｅmeｄyｏfｄamages.Ｐroｂityiｎｔheteｎｄeringprocｅｓsensurｅｓthatfａirａndequaltreaｔｍenｔtｏaｌltｅnderｅrｓispｕtinｐlaceanｄmaintaｉnedsothatnotｅrｍｏfｔｈe‘teｎdｅｒingcontracｔ’ｉsｌｉkeｌytoｂebrｅａchｅｄ.AccorｄinｇtoJohnｓtonｅ，cｏmmonprobｉtyｏｂjeｃtiｖesａre:·toｅnsureallresｐoｎdeｎtsａrｅassesｓedobｊectivelyandconsistｅnｔly·tｏeｎsｕreｉntｅgritｙinallevaluationaｎdselectiｏnprocess·tｏｅnsuｒｅallｃoｎｆideｎtialinformaｔionisｓｅcｕｒｅd·toaddrｅssaｎｙpｏteｎｔiａｌ,oractuａlcｏnflictsoｆinteｒest·toprｏｍotｅｄefensibｉlｉｔｙofｐrｏcess．GuidｅｌinestoAvoidBreaｃhofｔhｅ‘TｅndeｒｉngＣoｎtract’inｔheCompetiｔiｖｅBｉddingＰｒoｃｅsｓOncoｎcluｓioｎ,Ｃraiｇsuｇgestｓsoｍeguidelｉnesｏnhowａlteｒnatｉveｔeｎdersaｎdｔendersinvolvingdesiｇnproｐosalｓmightbetakenｌegitiｍatｅlybytheｏwneｒｓｏａstoaｖｏidoｒmｉniｍiｓｅthelikelihｏodoftheclientsplacingthemseｌｖesatｒiskoflitigatiｏnｄueｔoaｂreachｏfｔhecoｎtraｃtuａlobｌigationｓａrisingoｕtofthｅ‘ｔendｅriｎgｃontrａct’.Ｔheyａreｓpｅciｆiedasfｏlｌows.·Underｔhe‘ｔenderiｎgcoｎtｒact’theowneｒisobliｇedtｏtｒeatalｌtｅndeｒｓeｑｕａllyaｎdfairｌy.Allconｆｏｒmｉｎｇtendersmｕsttheｒeforebｅｃoｎｓiｄerｅd.·Aneffectiｖｅ‘privilegeｃlaｕse’ｗhichsaｙssoｍethingｌike“anｙtｅnderwｉllnotneｃessariｌybeａcｃepteｄ”wilｌnorｍａllyｐrｅventanoｗneｒbｅcｏmiｎgobliｇeｄｔｏaｃceptａnytenｄｅｒ.Alｌtｅndeｒsmaythereforebｅproperlyrｅjeｃted．Oｎtheotherhａnd，atermtothｅｅffecttｈatacontractwillbeａｗardｅdtothｅlｏwest,orｈiｇhesｔ,ｂｉdderisenforceablｅ.Thｉｓｉmpｌｉｅsｔｈatanownercanｎotuｓethｅ‘privilｅgeｃlaｕse’asａｎexcｕseｆｏrｄeviatingfromtheｃoｎtractevａｌuationandawａrdcriteriaｓｅtdowninthｅｔｅndｅrinvitatiｏnordocumｅnts.Oｒ,pｕtiｔanotheｒｗａy,the‘pｒivｉlegecｌause’doｅｓnotalloｗｔｈeowneｒto：(i)choosecoｍｐaｒatｉｖｅlyａmｏngthｅtｅnｄerersbasedoncriterｉaｔhaｔｈasnotbeenｄｉsｃloｓｅdtoｔｈｅｔendｅrers；or（ｉi)toawａrdｔoanotheｒｔenｄｅrerorａnotherpｅrsonｓomethｉｎｇotheｒtｈanthｅｍａiｎｃontｒact．·Ｉtwoｕldbeabｒeａchofthetenderingobligaｔioｎｏfeｑualanｄfａｉrｔreａt(yī)ｍentfortheownerｔｏnegotｉａt(yī)ewithｏｎetendeｒerｏnterｍｓwhicｈdonotappｌyｔootherteｎdeｒers.·Allteｎderersareeｎtitledtoｋnowｔｈebａｓiｓonwｈiｃhｔenderswillｂeevａluaｔedandonwｈiｃｈaｃonｔraｃｔ-aｗarｄｄeｃisionwｉllｂemade.·Ｉfinｎovaｔiｏnfｒomtｅnderｅrsｉsｒequｉｒeｄ，anownerｍusｔｅxpressｌycrｅatetherightforateｎdｅrertosubmiｔａnaｌteｒnatiｖetｅndｅr．Iftherｉghttheｎeｘｉstｓ,theｏwｎeｒｉsobligedtoconｓiderｓucｈproposals.Tenderｅrｓmｕstbｅinformedofcritｅrｉａfｏrevａlｕationofｓｕchalternaｔiveproｐosals.·Tｅndｅrconditioｎsmｕｓtdefiｎetｈｅｓｃｏpeｏfaｌtｅｒnativeｔｅｎdeｒs．Tｈａt(yī)scoｐｅmusｔｂeｎoｔtｏotightｓｏaｓtorestｒictｉnnoｖatioｎ,butnotｔoowidesｏastoｒeｓulｔinaｐroposaｌforaschemequitedifｆereｎttoｔheoｎｅｏｒigiｎａｌlｙteｎderedfｏｒ.·Tｅndeｒconditionｓforprｏjｅｃtｓｉnｖolvingdeｓｉｇnmuｓｔｉncluｄecriterｉaforｅvalｕａt(yī)ingｔhatdesign．Ｔhecriteriaｍｕstｂemadｅknoｗｎtoaｌlｔenderｅｒs．·Iｔisａbreachoｆtｈe‘tenｄerｉngｃｏnｔrａｃt’fortheoｗnerｔoaｗardacoｎtracttｏateｎdeｒerwhooｆｆeｒssomｅｔｈｉngdｉfｆereｎtｔoｗhａt(yī)ｗasａskedfoｒiｎtheinvｉtatiｏntｏｔenｄer.Furtheｒmｏre，Jｏｈnｓtoneａdｄｓ·Invitａt(yī)ｉondｏcｕmeｎtｓhouldbeaccessibletoａｌlpoｔｅｎtialbiｄdｅrs.Ｔheyshoｕldbeeｘpressｅｄinｒeaｄｉlyundersｔoodｔerms.·Ｉｔｉｓeasieｒtｏfoｒmuｌateａｐpｒｏpｒiateselectioncｒｉteriaｗhｅｎｔheｐｒojecｔspeciｆicａt(yī)ｉonsaｒedeｖｅlopedfirst．Ｃｌｅarsｐeciｆicatioｎsａndseｌｅctiｏncritｅriaaｓsiｓtpossｉbleｃｏntｒactorstoformulaｔeｂidｓapprｏpriatelｙ.·Apolicyinreｌatｉｏntonon-conformingbｉdsshouldbｅforｍulatedaｎｄdｏcuｍenｔｅdinthｅinviｔatｉｏｎｄoｃumeｎｔation.·Ofｔｅnａｓsｅｓsmｅｎtoｆbidswillｉnｖolvｅanuｍberoｆaｓseｓsｍentpａnels.Iｎthissitｕatiｏｎ,tｈｅreshouｌｄbeasｅｐａrationｏfassessｍenｔpaneｌs.Ｆoreｘamｐle,apａｎelofexperｔsmayrｅｖiewfiｎaｎｃialvｉabilitywhｉｌstanｏtherwillloｏｋａt(yī)thosesamebｉｄsfromadｅsignperｓpｅctｉｖe.Asｓｅｓsmｅｎtｐanｅlswouldｃommoｎlｙｂeqｕarantinedthroughｔｈｅe(cuò)vａlｕaｔioｎperｉod.SUMMARYTｈispaperhｉghlightstheprｏｂlｅmsｗiｔhcompetｉtiｖeteｎderｉnｇinｒｅlatioｎtocontractｏr-ledinｎｏvatiｏn.Intｈetｒaｄitiｏnalmｅｔhｏd,ｃoｎtractoｒ-lediｎnoｖatｉoｎｍａybeencｏｕragｅdａt(yī)thetｅｎｄerｉｎｇsｔaｇe.However,ｔoｅnableａccepｔanceｂytｈｅowner,cｒiteｒiaｆorevａluａｔｉonoｆａndthｅscoｐeoｆalterｎａt(yī)ivｅtenｄersmuｓｔｂeclｅarｌｙdeｆinedｉnthetendｅrｄｏcument．Byｔｈｅsamｅtoｋｅn,ｔeｎdeｒcｏnditｉonｓforｐrojectsｉnvolvinｇｄesｉgnmｕsｔincludeｃriteｒiaforeｖaluａt(yī)ｉnｇtｈａt(yī)ｄｅsignt.Guidａnceｈasbeenoutｌiｎedoｆｈｏwｔoreｄucｅｔheｒｉskｏｆoｗnerfallingｉntｏａbreaｃhofthe‘tenderingcontｒaｃｔ’intheｃｏmpeｔitivｅtｅｎderingprｏcesswhenitiｎvolｖesａltｅｒnatiｖeteｎdｅｒｓｏrdeｓignproｐosalｓ．Ｏneoｆthealｔeｒnativｅｃontractorsｅｌectｉoｎmｅthodsｉdenｔifiedhａsbeenbｒieflydesｃribｅd.中文譯文：招標(biāo)協(xié)議中業(yè)主有機(jī)會鼓勵(lì)承包商主導(dǎo)的創(chuàng)新的意義摘要在建設(shè)工程協(xié)議招標(biāo)過程中,投標(biāo)人有機(jī)會建議替代性創(chuàng)新方案。聰明人會積極運(yùn)用這種機(jī)會,同樣,承包商會運(yùn)用他們的專業(yè)知識建立競爭優(yōu)勢。招投標(biāo)雙方都會極大的收益于這種方式。但是最近習(xí)慣法的發(fā)展對業(yè)主無訴訟風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的尋求替代性投標(biāo)方案的能力提出了質(zhì)疑。這種習(xí)慣法已結(jié)識到所謂“招標(biāo)協(xié)議”或“過程協(xié)議”的存在。由于招標(biāo)過程本質(zhì)上是一種價(jià)格競爭,招標(biāo)協(xié)議概念的應(yīng)用很也許嚴(yán)重克制替代投標(biāo)的機(jī)會。本文重要根據(jù)文獻(xiàn)編制而成,重要目的是突出競爭性投標(biāo)過程中承包商主導(dǎo)的創(chuàng)新及探索方式問題。通過這種方式,業(yè)主可以發(fā)展允許和鼓勵(lì)創(chuàng)新的采購程序。競爭性投標(biāo)問題傳統(tǒng)招標(biāo)過程目的是針對特定產(chǎn)品產(chǎn)生直接競爭價(jià)格。評標(biāo)也許只限于價(jià)格，僅建立一種制度。即價(jià)格是唯一的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。但是當(dāng)各競標(biāo)價(jià)和技術(shù)含量相同時(shí)就不同了。雖然協(xié)議期像常數(shù)同樣是固定的，但業(yè)主往往鼓勵(lì)投標(biāo)者提交二次標(biāo)書。二次標(biāo)書中為某一不同的協(xié)議期提出替代報(bào)價(jià)。投標(biāo)者將通過改善投標(biāo)方案、尋找最佳合約期、調(diào)整投標(biāo)報(bào)價(jià)來達(dá)成業(yè)重規(guī)定。每個(gè)投標(biāo)者都會努力尋找新的組織方案,在建議的范圍內(nèi)達(dá)成建導(dǎo)致本最低、利潤最高。但是這一過程僅限于部分業(yè)主的設(shè)計(jì)。這樣一來創(chuàng)新性中標(biāo)者的范圍就非常有限了。評價(jià)替代性投標(biāo)時(shí)，業(yè)主面臨著公平、公正對待所有投標(biāo)者的義務(wù)。假如某個(gè)投標(biāo)被選為替代性投標(biāo)，那么在本來的招標(biāo)邀請中這是一個(gè)不符合條件的標(biāo)書,這樣所有的投標(biāo)者又怎么也許被公平、公正的對待呢?任何超過允許的價(jià)格、工期范圍的投標(biāo)都必須從業(yè)主考慮的范圍內(nèi)取消,由于他們不符合招標(biāo)邀請的規(guī)定。因此，傳統(tǒng)招標(biāo)限制、阻止甚至不允許承包商主導(dǎo)的創(chuàng)新。Soｎｇｇｅｒ和Ibbs認(rèn)為,建設(shè)過程中設(shè)計(jì)－建造采購方法的使用能鼓勵(lì)創(chuàng)新。這種采購方法在整個(gè)建造過程中給承包商施加了壓力。它不同于傳統(tǒng)方法。傳統(tǒng)方法必須可以在競爭的基礎(chǔ)上評估設(shè)計(jì)、生產(chǎn)能力、工期、價(jià)格。這是不容易的。在招標(biāo)環(huán)境中，競爭性設(shè)計(jì)是不易評估的。在競爭贏家時(shí),主觀性似乎取代了客觀性。投標(biāo)過程中明顯的完整性已丟失。除非競爭設(shè)計(jì)的評估一開始就建立了明確的準(zhǔn)則,這也意味著招標(biāo)程序準(zhǔn)則必須像鼓勵(lì)承包商主導(dǎo)的創(chuàng)新那樣設(shè)計(jì)。Sonｇｇｅr和Ibbs提到這一方面時(shí)斷言：公共機(jī)構(gòu)的一大焦急是如何在允許創(chuàng)新的同時(shí)保持對項(xiàng)目特定設(shè)計(jì)方面的控制。在設(shè)計(jì)方面擬定一種合適的創(chuàng)新與控制,讓潛在的設(shè)計(jì)-建造投標(biāo)者充足了解這種抱負(fù)的平衡,這給公共部門機(jī)構(gòu)提出了一個(gè)重大挑戰(zhàn)。招標(biāo)協(xié)議與傳統(tǒng)招標(biāo)相關(guān)的法律的發(fā)展把“招標(biāo)邀請”或“招標(biāo)規(guī)定”看作但是是一次邀請,只是業(yè)主準(zhǔn)備做一些優(yōu)先于要約的事情的一個(gè)暗示。換句話說，一次邀請并不是與任何被邀請的投標(biāo)人簽訂協(xié)議的建議,僅僅是協(xié)商的第一步。這種協(xié)商也許會導(dǎo)致協(xié)議的簽訂,也也許不會。當(dāng)各投標(biāo)人按規(guī)定格式提交了標(biāo)書,這相稱于一個(gè)可以被當(dāng)作協(xié)議的要約。假如這個(gè)要約得到明確的接受,那么在業(yè)主和中標(biāo)者之間就會產(chǎn)生合約性的義務(wù)。最近，現(xiàn)代觀點(diǎn)將這一理論推翻。這里存在有關(guān)招標(biāo)協(xié)議出現(xiàn)的所謂“雙方協(xié)議”的分析。招標(biāo)邀請現(xiàn)在在某些情況下被視為是提交合格標(biāo)書后簽訂協(xié)議的要約。業(yè)主向每個(gè)投標(biāo)者提供如下措辭:“假如你提交符合規(guī)定的投標(biāo)書回應(yīng)我的邀請，我會考慮是否中標(biāo)……”投標(biāo)者在這一點(diǎn)上沒有任何義務(wù)。但是假如提交了一份合格的標(biāo)書,那么業(yè)主和投標(biāo)者之間就形成了一份協(xié)議。這種協(xié)議被描述為“投標(biāo)協(xié)議”或“前期協(xié)議”或“過程協(xié)議”。這種協(xié)議完全不同于最終與中標(biāo)者簽訂的主協(xié)議。合約性的義