Enhancing transparency and accountability in public procurement: exploring blockchain technology to mitigate records fraud Free

Public procurement, constituting a substantial portion of a country's GDP, is vital to economic growth and social justice. However, corruption within the procurement process remains a persistent challenge, resulting in substantial financial losses. Corruption also contributes to the erosion of trust in governments, threatening the very foundations of democracy. Preserving accurate records free of tampering is paramount for economic development, sustaining democracy and restoring trust. Records are a foundational accountability pillar, providing transparent evidence of government actions. However, the rise in records fraud poses a significant threat to accountability, necessitating innovative solutions.

This paper underscores the significance of transparent and accountable procurement practices and proposes using blockchain technology to combat records fraud, a prevalent form of corruption. Analyzing international regulations from the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL), European Union (EU), World Bank (WB), and Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), this paper highlights their emphasis on proper records management for promoting transparency, accountability, and integrity. Moreover, the paper explores blockchain's untapped potential in ensuring public procurement records' authenticity and security. The research aims to contribute to a comprehensive understanding of the relationship between records management and procurement accountability while addressing blockchain technology's innovative use in mitigating records forgery and omission.

This paper was based on two research phases: 1) analyzing international regulations about public procurement, such as the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (2014), the Directive 2014 / 24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council, the World Bank Procurement Regulations for IFP Borrowers (2020), and the OECD Recommendation of the Council on Public Procurement, to demonstrate the relevance of records in public procurement procedures; and 2) verifying the current state of records fraud in the Brazilian context to analyze the extent and nature of records fraud in that government’s systems, identifying vulnerabilities and patterns that undermine trust in governance.

The analysis aims to demonstrate the explicit importance ascribed to proper records management by international regulations, serving as a cornerstone for procurement transparency, accountability, and integrity. It also proposes different uses of blockchain technology to decrease the records fraud opportunities. By leveraging emerging technologies to fortify the trustworthiness of records, this paper aims to contribute to public trust, thereby suggesting applications of blockchain to reduce the leakage of public funds that hamper economic growth and to promote transparent and accountable governance.

This research involves a comparative analysis of international regulations from UNCITRAL, EU, World Bank, and OECD, investigating their directives on the relevance of records in public procurement. This analysis regards the study of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (2014), the Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council, the World Bank Procurement Regulations for IFP Borrowers (2020), and the OECD Recommendation of the Council on Public Procurement (2019) focusing on their sayings about the relevance of proper documentation for public procurement procedures.

A survey of records fraud cases in the Brazilian context illustrates the significance of the problem. This survey was based on all the proceedings from the Brazilian Federal Court of Accounts (FCA) from 2010 to 2020 indicating public procurement fraud, using the terms in Portuguese “fraude ADJ em ADJ licitações” (fraud ADJ in ADJ public procurement) [¹]. The research returned 218 proceedings indicating public procurement fraud with one repeated proceeding, one confidential proceeding, 28 proceedings archived for lack of enough evidence or because the amount diverged was below the value determined by the Federal Court of Accounts regulations, two proceedings with decision for regular accounting and four proceedings with decision for regular accounting with recommendations. The research provided 182 proceedings for fraud analysis in this research. The study focused on the Federal Court of Accounts decisions and their description of the irregularities detected in public procurement involving federal funding in contracts or agreements between the diverse national government ministries and the Brazilian municipalities. The findings of this stage of this study provided the basis to understand how records are tampered with or omitted in the Brazilian public procurement context and how blockchain technology can be applied to decrease the opportunity for records fraud.

There are different resources used as guidelines for procurement regulation. Such resources consist of standards and regulations from different international organizations to guide implementation or improve procurement practices. The aim of such documents varies from regulating the procurement procedures in European Union member states, such as Directive 2014 / 24/EU of the European Parliament and the Council on public procurement, to establishing directions and best practices for regulations in different countries, such as the 2011 United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Model Law on Public Procurement. These documents serve as foundations for procurement practices, setting out procurement principles, methods, procedures, and standard records. This section presents the similarities and differences among those documents regarding the importance of records for the public procurement procedure.

The globally recognized standards for use in this analysis are the UNCITRAL Model Law on Public Procurement, The World Bank's (WB) Procurement Regulations for IPF Borrowers; the OECD's Recommendation of the Council on Public Procurement, and the European Union's (EU) Directive 2014 / 24/EU on public procurement. All these resources were analyzed to provide the core procurement principles and to examine similarities and differences between these standards and regulations and how procurement records impact the integrity of the public procurement procedure.

The UNCITRAL defines public procurement as “the acquisition of goods, construction or services by a procuring entity” (United Nations Commission on International Trade Law 2014, p. 5). On the other hand, the OECD defines public procurement as “the process of identifying what is needed; determining who the best person or organization is to supply this need; and ensuring what is needed is delivered to the right place, at the right time, for the best price and that all this is done in a fair and open manner” (Council on Public Procurement, 2019, p. 6). Although both definitions seem different in terms of details—the description provided by UNCITRAL is broad and generalized while the OECD's recommendation offers some of the core principles of public procurement procedures—both give the core concept of public procurement as the process of acquisition of goods or services by a procuring entity, usually a public body. The following subsection will discuss some of the principles already stated by the OECD's definition of public procurement and other principles established by the diverse public procurement guidelines.

Public procurement principles are the foundation for procurement regulations formulation and interpretation. The Guide to the Enactment of the UNCITRAL Model Law on public procurement states that “the effective implementation of the [procurement] objectives can only take effect through cohesive and coherent procedures based on the underlying principles” (UNICITRAL, 2014). The objectives established by the Model Law are similar to the principles outlined by the other international standards and guidelines: economy and efficiency, wide participation, competition, fairness, equality and equity, integrity, and transparency. Value for money is a principle intrinsic to efficiency and economy. Sustainability is another principle present in the Model Law “considered to include a long-term approach to procurement policy, reflected in the consideration of the full impact of procurement on society and the environment, for example through the promotion of life-cycle costing, disposal costs and environmental impact […] employment conditions, social inclusion, anti-discrimination; […] human rights, child labour, exploitation of labour; and environmental/green procurement” (UNICITRAL, 2014, pp. 4, 5).

The World Bank Procurement Framework proposes core principles: value for money, economy, integrity, fit-for-purpose, efficiency, transparency, and fairness. Value for money implies that there must be an effective, efficient and economical use of resources through evaluating costs and benefits, assessment of risks and nonprice attributes as appropriate. The principle of economy integrates sustainability and economic, environmental, and social considerations into the procurement process. Integrity refers to using funds, resources, assets, and authority according to the intended purposes of the procurement in a well-informed manner, aligned with the public interest and with broader principles of good governance with high standards of ethics. Fit-for-purpose refers to alignment between the procurement's intended outcomes and the procurement arrangements, determining the most appropriate approach to meet the development objectives and project outcomes, and considering the procurement's context and risk, value, and complexity. Efficiency refers to adopting the procurement process and approach according to the proportion of value and risk underlying project activities. The principle of transparency is related to the ability to review procurement activities through appropriate documentation and disclosure of information. Finally, fairness refers to equal opportunity and treatment for participants, equitable distribution of rights and obligations between borrowers and suppliers, bidders, consultants and contractors, and credible mechanisms for addressing complaints and providing recourse (The World Bank, 2020). The WB principles align with the objectives of the UNCITRAL Model Law since sustainability is under the principle of economy. In addition, the World Bank considers principles different from the UNCITRAL Model Law objectives, such as the fit-for-purpose principle and the public interest principle, the latter being part of the economy principle.

OECD adds e-procurement as a principle among its recommendations. The Recommendation of the Council on Public Procurement (Council on Public Procurement, 2019) is a document based on the foundational principles of the 2008 OECD Recommendation on Enhancing Integrity in Public Procurement. The principles are present in each recommendation highlighted as follows:

• II. RECOMMENDS that Adherents ensure an adequate degree of transparency of the public procurement system in all stages of the procurement cycle. […]

• III. RECOMMENDS that Adherents preserve the integrity of the public procurement system through general standards and procurement-specific safeguards. […]

• IV. RECOMMENDS that Adherents facilitate access to procurement opportunities for potential competitors of all sizes. […]

• V. RECOMMENDS that Adherents recognize that any use of the public procurement system to pursue secondary policy objectives should be balanced against the primary procurement objective. […]

• VI. RECOMMENDS that Adherents foster transparent and effective stakeholder participation. […]

• VII. RECOMMENDS that Adherents develop processes to drive efficiency throughout the public procurement cycle in satisfying the needs of the government and its citizens. […]

• VIII. RECOMMENDS that Adherents improve the public procurement system by harnessing the use of digital technologies to support appropriate e-procurement innovation throughout the procurement cycle. […]

• IX. RECOMMENDS that Adherents develop a procurement workforce with the capacity to continually deliver value for money efficiently and effectively. […]

• X. RECOMMENDS that Adherents drive performance improvements through evaluation of the effectiveness of the public procurement system from individual procurements to the system as a whole, at all levels of government where feasible and appropriate. […]

• XI. RECOMMENDS that Adherents integrate risk management strategies for mapping, detection and mitigation throughout the public procurement cycle. […]

• XII. RECOMMENDS that Adherents apply oversight and control mechanisms to support accountability throughout the public procurement cycle, including appropriate complaint and sanctions processes. […]

• XIII. RECOMMENDS that Adherents support integration of public procurement into overall public finance management, budgeting and services delivery processes” (OECD, pp. 7-13).

The OECD is the regulation with a more significant number of principles, including exclusive ones such as the principle of integration, promoting the integration of procurement practices with related areas of government such as public budgeting and financial management; the principle of workforce development, contributing to the public procurement process integrity through ethical behavior of government procurement personnel; and the principle of accountability, emphasizing the responsibility of public agents and businesses over the integrity of procurement processes.

The EU principles (article 18) are “equal treatment, non-discrimination, proportionality and transparency;” (European Comission, 2018, p. 11). The regulation also mentions competition, compliance with environmental, social and labor laws (i.e. sustainability), and confidentiality as separate from the principles (European Parliament, 2014). All those principles were defined and described throughout the discussion of the different regulations.

The World Bank describes the procurement process as “[t]he process that starts with the identification of a need and continues through planning, preparation of specifications/requirements, budget considerations, selection, contract award, and contract management. It ends on the last day of the warranty period” (The World Bank, 2020, p. 5). The planning stage involves identifying the need and all the processes of determining the subject matter, its specification, the decision on the procuring method, the requirement for participation, and all the creation process of the solicitation documents.

The international regulations focus primarily on the selection process as a part of the procurement cycle. The World Bank mentions aspects of all three large stages (i.e. planning, selection and contract management); however, most of their Procurement Regulations for Investment Project Financing (IFP) Borrowers focus on explaining the different procurement methods and the specifics of each case. Although most do not prioritize the planning and contract management stages, it is essential to emphasize the relevance of both stages and their impact on the procurement procedure. UNCITRAL recognizes the importance of regulating those stages and highlights that states must also consider them a success factor in implementing the Model Law and any framework a state decides to adopt. Regarding the contract management stage, the Model Law states that “if poorly conducted, [the contract management stage] can undermine the integrity of the procurement process and compromise the objectives of the Model Law of fair, equal and equitable treatment, competition and avoidance of corruption” (United Nations Commission on International Trade Law 2014, p. 25). Figure 1 outlines the acquisition process inspired by the United Nations Procurement Manual (Department of Operational Support, 2020). Although the UN Procurement Manual was not a resource for the international regulations on public procurement, it provides a better workflow of the public procurement procedures to position the frauds discussed in this paper. The variations between the international guidelines in process design occur during the selection stage and the different procurement methods depending on the complexity of the acquisition and its circumstances.

The demand analysis is the stage in which the government will determine which requests for acquisitions of goods, services or constructions to prioritize. After that decision, two stages usually occur in parallel: acquisition planning and specifications design. During these two stages, a task force or designated committee establishes the necessary quantity of a product, determines the available budget, and formulates all the documents constituting the procurement general notice. Procurement action implies all the acts regarding the competition process, including proposal disclosure, judgment and selection of the best proposal. Finally, the delivery, receipt and inspection, and contract management can also develop in parallel.

There are different procurement methods, which are not the object of this paper. The critical aspect regarding procurement methods is that the acquisitions of goods and services can occur through competition or a direct contract. This difference will impact the records produced during the procedure and its vulnerability to harming the process. For example, in the case of direct contracting, where competition is absent, the manipulation of solicitation documents becomes more straightforward. This scenario raises concerns about directing such documents toward specific businesses potentially involved in corrupt practices. On the other hand, competitive processes are inherently more complex and challenging to manipulate or omit vital records. However, it's important to note that these processes often entail higher costs. Depending on the value of the goods and services to be acquired, there may be insufficient justification for the increased expenditure in the public procurement process. In summary, direct contracting processes are more susceptible to manipulation, while competitive processes provide a more secure environment for records but can be costlier, especially when the value of the acquisition is relatively low.

Records play an essential role in the public procurement lifecycle. It is through procurement records that the procuring entities register all the transactions related to the procuring procedure and make all the processes transparent, improving public trust. The World Bank defines procurement documents as a generic term that covers “all Procurement Documents issued by the Borrower. It includes: [General Procurement Notice] GPN, [Specific Procurement Notice] SPN, [Request for Expressions of Interest] REOI, prequalification document, initial selection document, request for bids document, request for proposal documents, forms of contracts and any addenda” (The World Bank, 2020, p. 8). According to the Directive 2014 / 24/EU “procurement document means any document produced or referred to by the contracting authority to describe or determine elements of the procurement or the procedure, including the contract notice, the prior information notice where it is used as a means of calling for competition, the technical specifications, the descriptive document, proposed conditions of contract, formats for the presentation of documents by candidates and tenderers, information on generally applicable obligations and any additional documents” (European Parliament, 2014, p. 10).

The OECD “Recommendation on Public Procurement” states that the delivery of clear, integrated and standardized tender documentation is a means to encourage broad participation and improve competition (Council on Public Procurement, 2019). Furthermore, the OECD recommendation highlights that procuring entities must produce records “providing clear guidance to inform buyers' expectations (including specifications and contract as well as payment terms) and binding information about evaluation and award criteria and their weights (whether they are focused specifically on price, include elements of price/quality ratio or support secondary policy objectives)” (Council on Public Procurement, 2019, p. 8).

The UNCITRAL Model Law exhaustively emphasizes the importance of procurement records to guarantee transparency and traceability of the decisions, including those related to adequate procurement methods and techniques to promote fair competition. The Model Law states that not only all the events in the procurement procedure must be recorded but also that those records must be accessible to serve as evidence of the procurement transactions as following “any document, notification, decision or other information generated in the course of a procurement and communicated as required by this Law, including in connection with challenge proceedings […] or in the course of a meeting, or forming part of the record of procurement proceedings […] shall be in a form that provides a record of the content of the information, and that is accessible so as to be usable for subsequent reference” (United Nations Commission on International Trade Law 2014, p. 8)

The international standards and guidelines regarding public procurement align concerning the importance given to procurement records' trustworthiness. The regulations establish the responsibilities over the accuracy and the authenticity of the records presented by suppliers when participating in a public procurement procedure, especially regarding the suppliers' qualification process. According to the UNICTRAL, “[t]he procuring entity shall disqualify a supplier or contractor if it finds at any time that the information submitted concerning the qualification of the supplier or contractor was false [presumably including submission of forged supporting documentation] or constituted a misrepresentation” or if it finds at any time that the information “was materially inaccurate or materially incomplete” (United Nations Commission on International Trade Law 2014, p. 11). Some of the UNCITRAL Model Law's requirements to preserve the integrity of the public procurement procedure are related to the correct recordkeeping practices over the records produced as evidence of the procedure, such as ensuring that confidential information is protected ensuring that the procurement process presents all decisions recorded in the form of procurement proceedings; and guaranteeing the disclosure of information from the record to participants and (ex post facto) to any person (United Nations Commission on International Trade Law 2014).

The Guide to Enactment of the UNCITRAL Model Law on Public Procurement positions records as instruments to assess the economy and efficiency in public procurement procedures. The records considered important bases for procurement economy and efficiency assessment constitute the entire dossier of each procurement process (named by the Model Law as a documentary record of procurement proceedings. The Model Law also highlights that “where the records are maintained electronically, evaluating the performance of the procurement system as a whole also becomes possible” (United Nations Commission on International Trade Law 2014, p. 37), improving transparency and promoting effective administrative and social control. According to the international guidelines analyzed in this section, standard records are required, created, or managed in a public procurement procedure. Table 1 demonstrates a nonexhaustive list of the common types of records in a public procurement procedure with a brief description and reference to the guidelines they apply.

UNCITRAL relates records with compliance and transparency, stating, “some specific transparency requirements, such as on the public opening of tenders, the publication of contract award notices and the exhaustive contents of the mandatory record of the procurement, allow compliance with the prescribed procedures to be assessed. In particular, the [Model Law's] provisions on the record of procurement proceedings promote traceability of the procuring entity's decisions, a key function. A divergence from the rules may be apparent from examining the records of meetings, further underscoring the benefits of electronic data maintenance in procurement” (United Nations Commission on International Trade Law 2014, p. 45). This statement from the Guide to Enactment of the UNCITRAL Model Law on Public Procurement reinforces this paper's affirmation that the documentation related to public procurement is a critical resource to detect or uncover fraudulent practices in public procurement.

The UNCITRAL Model Law also entails appropriate measures to secure information authenticity, integrity and confidentiality to enhance “the confidence of suppliers and contractors in the reliability of procurement proceedings, including about the treatment of commercial information” (United Nations Commission on International Trade Law 2014, p. 74). The referred confidence is based on appropriate information and communication security measures for preserving information authenticity and integrity, especially data transmission and information systems maintenance. In sum, the adequate public procurement procedure comprises several essential elements such as well-formulated and precise regulation, trained personnel, compliance with other laws, recognized sustainability practices, and information governance principles and guidelines.

This section's review provides evidence of the importance accorded to records as a basis for procurement efficiency and effectiveness (The World Bank, 2020) and transparency and accountability (UNCITRAL, n.d.). This evidence makes it possible to conclude that any procurement system with poor records and record keeping is likely to be flawed, as the next section's analysis of the Brazilian Federal Court of Accounts proceedings investigating frauds in public procurement reveals.

The importance of records for the public procurement procedure is also emphasized in the Brazilian context. According to the Brazilian Federal Court of Accounts decisions, Brazilian authorities are legally and constitutionally responsible for the proper and regular use of public resources they manage. Those authorities must show accountability through documentation that allows verifying that those resources were effectively used for the agreed-upon purpose, in compliance with laws, regulations and best practices (TCU, 2011).

Considering, therefore, that the burden of proving the complete regularity of the use of public funds lies in the person responsible for the funds' management through comprehensive documentation that demonstrates the expenses incurred and the causal link between those expenses and the funds disbursed, proper recordkeeping is essential to guarantee that the information regarding the public procurement procedure is available. Such records demonstrate the proper use of public funds and guarantee accountability through the procurement proceeding as evidence that the agents used the funds effectively for the common good.

The proceedings analyzed regarded the acquisition of goods and services to vulnerable populations in Brazil, such as using federal funds to acquire medication and medical devices to support the healthcare services for First Nations. Guaranteeing the funds are reaching their proper ends also guarantees that vulnerable populations can access essential services such as food, healthcare, education and security.

The analysis of the 182 proceedings of accounting judgment from the Federal Court of Accounts demonstrates that records are the primary source of evidence for the Controller Officers to analyze the accounts regularities in the Brazilian public procurement procedures. As a result of the content of 182 court decisions over accounts from mayors of several municipalities from all the Brazilian 27 states, it was possible to propose a taxonomy of frauds and relate each one to the detection of frauds through specific records. Table 2 provides the types of frauds surveyed in those proceedings, the types of records related to each one of those frauds, and the irregularities observed in each type of record.

Data interpretation of the proceedings analysis and the crimes described in the Brazilian most recent Public Procurement and Contract Law, Law # 14,133 / 2021, from article 178 (Brasil, 2021) provided the major types of fraud. Table 3 presents the explanation for each one of the frauds.

According to the analysis of the FCA proceedings in this study, the most common frauds were irregular contract management, present in almost 92% of the proceedings, followed by bid rigging in almost 52%. Such high rates are due to the fact that the contract execution is the stage in which the funds are managed and where the public agents and business representatives have the opportunity to diverge those funds. Dossier manipulation is the third more present fraud in the FCA proceedings, reinforcing the argument for the relevance of the public procurement records. Manipulating procurement documentation is a means to commit fraudulent activities. Table 4 presents the ranking of common frauds in the Brazilian Federal Court of Accounts context.

This section provides an overview of the most common public procurement frauds in Brazil's Federal Court of Accounts proceedings related to irregular accounting investigations from 2010 to 2020. It also provides the basis to propose using blockchain to decrease records fraud opportunities in public procurement procedures. Given that the analysis of the typical frauds presented in the FCA documentation showed a high rate of irregular contract management frauds, the next section will highlight solutions to decrease documentation irregularities in that area.

A blockchain is “a distributed ledger with confirmed blocks organized in an append-only sequential chain using cryptographic links” (International Standards Organization, 2020, p. 22), with a distributed ledger being defined as a “ledger that is shared across a set of [distributed ledger technology (DLT)] nodes and synchronized between the DLT nodes using a consensus mechanism”(International Standards Organization, 2020, p. 22). Blockchain technology supports important features for public procurement procedures and their records.

One of the reasons why many authors consider blockchain to be a significant technological innovation is its “trustless” proof mechanism for recording transactions on the network. The public ledger, which is stored in all the nodes and available in most cases to all the participants of the network, works without the need for a centralized counterparty or a third-party intermediary, such as banks or government agencies (Swan, 2015). According to Wright and De Filippi (2015), “blockchain technology represents the next step in the peer-to-peer economy […] providing a way for people to agree on a particular state of affairs and record that agreement in a secure and verifiable manner” (p. 5). The verifiable manner mentioned by the authors is due to the blockchain's immutability and transparency, which “increases trust, saves time and significant costs, and provides better customer service” (A. Baset et al., 2019). Several blockchain platforms are based on a set of fundamental principles described by Werbach's (2018) book. These fundamental principles are intertwined and are related to trust. Among these principles are transparency, immutability, and distribution. The transparency in blockchain systems is not necessarily the indiscriminate disclosure of information registered on the chain. However, depending on the blockchain type, such transparency is primarily “the transparency of ledgers, allowing the reality of transactions to be verified. The objective is to be transparent on the running and existence of operations” (Quiniou, 2019, p. 9) between parties of the network. Transparency is a desired feature regarding public procurement information and registration because blockchain has made it possible for public bodies to make that information available to relevant parties participating in the network, including oversight and public accountability organizations.

Blockchain networks usually present a particular form of distributed architecture, “a peer-to-peer architecture […] in which all nodes theoretically have a copy of the registry and participate in consensus" (Quiniou, 2019, p. 10). Distribution is the property that takes absolute control out of the hands of malicious actors in the case of public procurement fraud. This feature has the potential to decrease the opportunities for fraud involving single points of failure and agents with concentrated power of decision. Distributing copies of the ledger contributes, in part, to another important property of blockchains: immutability, one of the properties that have given blockchain systems the popularity they have today. This property is related to the fact that a blockchain's integrity cannot be easily jeopardized by means of altering or deleting what has been recorded in the distributed ledger. It is relatively easy for a bad actor to alter a centralized data store, but when copies of the data are distributed across several different nodes of a distributed ledger, alterations can be easily detected, and the bad copies can be discarded. This preserves the integrity of the ledger as a whole.

Additionally, through cryptography, chaining together records written to a distributed ledger, even alterations to any single copy of the ledger are difficult to achieve. The “promise of providing such robust integrity is what eventually paved the way for the idea of sharing chains of data in untrusted peer-to-peer (P2P) networks” (Raj, 2019, p. 7). The fact that blockchains are difficult to alter – with any alterations being easy to detect - distributed and transparent makes them a potential technology to solve public trust problems, including frauds involving public bodies and agents. Indeed, it is the fact that blockchain is a novel form of technology aimed at maintaining records' trustworthiness that makes it interesting to study from an archival theoretic perspective, 2022) and as a possible means of addressing the manipulation of records so often associated with corrupt public procurement practices in Brazil.

Some studies present blockchain-based tools to fight public procurement corruption. The bidding evaluation stage is the object of most of the studies relating blockchains or smart contracts to public procurement procedures, such as that by Hardwick et al. Hardwick et al. (2018), World Economic Forum (2020), Sánchez (2019), Baranwal (2020), and Balan et al. (2020). Elabdallaoui et al. (2021) propose a tool to conduct the bidding and evaluation process automatically in Morocco, allowing third parties to monitor and report risky activities. The proposal is innovative in terms of the qualification process since the solution envisions the records qualification analysis in an automated way. Deshpande et al. (2020) focus on both the bidding and contract-monitoring phases using a multiorganization blockchain network on a Hyperledger Fabric distributed ledger platform. The research so far focuses on different applications and frameworks that support the assumptions of this paper; however, none of the applications considers recordkeeping attributes and records features to produce and keep trustworthy records. This gap would raise concerns about the quality of public records being created and kept through such solutions or frameworks.

As discussed in the previous section, blockchain technology offers innovative and robust solutions to address the longstanding issue of records fraud in public procurement. Its inherent characteristics of transparency, immutability, and decentralization provide a secure and tamper-proof ledger for recording and verifying all transactions and interactions throughout the procurement process. For instance, in cases of contract mismanagement, blockchain can be employed to create a hash to check the integrity of contracts after the bidding or tender process is concluded. As seen in the public procurement fraud taxonomy, a common irregularity is the contract or binding record to be altered after the conclusion of the competition. This type of record fraud impacts the fairness and transparency of the procurement procedure. Guaranteeing the contract's integrity also guarantees the procurement process's integrity.

Furthermore, blockchain technology can play a pivotal role in diminishing the opportunity of creating and adding to the procurement dossiers different versions of the document of the award decision. Such record contains information about the decision by the procurement committee about the best proposal presented in a bidding process. The bidding process can occur electronically, through an e-procurement system, or in person, in a public session. Both scenarios imply the participation of diverse businesses competing with access to complete information about the judgment criteria, the results of the judgment process, and any disputes or challenging procedures they might propose. In the case of e-procurements, the document of award decision generated by the procurement system could also be hashed in a blockchain through the execution of a smart contract to guarantee the check of the authentic record in case of duplicates in the same dossier. This level of security could be a powerful deterrent to irregular public contract management, as public agents are aware that their actions are permanently checked and subject to scrutiny. In this way, blockchain technology is a potent tool for promoting fairness, accountability, and integrity in public procurement.

In conclusion, this paper underscores the critical importance of clean and transparent public procurement for fostering economic growth and upholding social justice. The persistent challenge of corruption within the procurement process has been a significant hindrance, resulting in substantial financial losses. By examining international regulations from organizations such as UNCITRAL, the EU, the World Bank, and the OECD, this research emphasizes the pivotal role of proper records management in ensuring transparency, accountability, and integrity within procurement practices. Furthermore, it explores the transformative potential of blockchain technology in safeguarding the authenticity and security of public procurement records. This study contributes to a more comprehensive understanding of the nexus between records management best practices and procurement accountability while highlighting the innovative use of blockchain in combating records fraud.

The findings illuminate the explicit emphasis placed by international regulations on the importance of robust records management, serving as a foundation for transparency and accountability in procurement. Additionally, this paper proposes a taxonomy for public procurement frauds and related records irregularities based on the Brazilian Federal Court of Accounts accounting investigation proceedings from 2010 to 2020. It also demonstrates how blockchain technology can serve as a powerful resource to reduce the opportunities for records fraud in public procurement, specifically regarding irregular contract management. This study's originality lies in its pioneering approach to addressing records forgery and omissions, offering valuable insights into enhancing accountability and reliability in public procurement practices. While this analysis focuses on the Brazilian context, its implications extend to broader discussions on transparent governance and the fight against corruption in public procurement processes.