A unified information space for defence procurement: a documentary model of automated reporting
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26906/EiR.2026.3(102).4718Keywords:
defence procurement, unified information space, automated reporting, electronic report, digital audit trailAbstract
The article substantiates the formation of a unified information space for defence procurement as a protected digital environment for consolidating, exchanging, reconciling, storing and analysing procurement, contractual, budgetary, financial, accounting, logistics and control data. The study identifies weaknesses of the system: fragmented data, incompatible formats and identifiers, duplication, repeated manual entry, and the absence of links between financing, obligations, payments and procurement results. A model of automated reporting is proposed, based on two interconnected documents: the Defence Procurement Report and the Report on the Use of Funds for Defence Procurement. The first covers the defence need, procurement organisation, contract terms and amendments, delivery, acceptance and performance results. The second summarises financing sources, budget allocations, commitments, payments, expenditures, receivables, payables, refunds and remaining funds. The reports are linked through unified identifiers of procurement, contract, contracting authority, supplier, budget programme and performance stage. This enables automated comparison of contract price and commitments, advances and repayment, accepted supplies and payments, contract performance, liabilities and remaining financing. The reporting mechanism follows the principle of entering data once in the primary system and reusing them without repeated transfer. Imported, automatically calculated and event-driven indicators are distinguished, while responsible persons verify or correct data requiring professional judgement. Control relationships reveal discrepancies between contractual terms, budget flows and actual results; such discrepancies generate a signal for verification but do not prove a violation. The proposed model will reduce duplicate and manual data entry, improve reporting timeliness and reliability, ensure traceability and create a digital audit trail. It will also support continuous risk-oriented monitoring and strengthen the information basis for management decisions, analysis and public financial control.
References
1. Migone A., Howlett A. & Howlett M. Procurement and Politics. Strategies of Defence Acquisition in Canada and Australia. Defence and Peace Economics. Palgrave Macmillan. 2023. 160 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25689-9
2. Patil K., & Bhaduri S. ‘Zero‑error’ versus ‘good‑enough’: towards a ‘frugality’ narrative for defence procurement policy. Mind & Society. 2020. No. 19. Pp. 43-59. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11299-020-00223-7
3. Reykers Y. Strengthening parliamentary oversight of defence procurement: lessons from Belgium, European Security. 2021. No. 30(4). Pp. 505-525. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09662839.2021.1886087
4. Masson H., Martin K. The Directive 2009/81/EC on Defence and Security Procurement under Scrutiny. European Parliament, Directorate-General for External Policies. 2015. 52 p.
5. Školník M. Implementation of NATO Codification and Standardisation Activities in the armed forces of the Slovak Republic. Ekonomia Bezpieczeństwa i Logistyka. 2015. P. 70.
6. Lyra M., Damásio B., Pinheiro F., & Bacao F. Fraud, corruption, and collusion in public procurement activities, a systematic literature review on data‑driven methods. Applied Network Science. 2022. No. 7(83). Pp. 1-30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41109-022-00523-6
7. Decarolis F., & Giorgiantonio C. Corruption red flags in public procurement: new evidence from Italian calls for tenders. EPJ Data Science. 2022. No. 11(16). Pp. 1-38. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1140/epjds/s13688-022-00325-x
8. Gnaldi M., & Sarto S. Measuring Corruption Risk in Public Procurement over Emergency Periods. Social Indicators Research. 2024. No. 172. Pp. 859-877. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-024-03331-w
9. Yanuarisa Y., Irianto G., Djamhuri A., & Rusydi M. Exploring the internal audit of public procurement governance: a systematic literature. Cogent Business & Management. 2025. No. 12(1). Pp. 1-27. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2025.2485411
10. Матвіюк. М. Теоретико-правові аспекти закупівель товарів, робіт та послуг для потреб оборони. Вісник Хмельницького національного університету. Економічні науки. 2016. № 3(1). С. 185-188. URL: https://journals.khnu.km.ua/vestnik/pdf/ekon/pdfbase/2016/VKNU-ES-2016-N3-Volume1_236.pdf
11. Швидка Т. І. Особливості державного регулювання оборонних закупівель. Науковий вісник Ужгородського національного університету. Серія: Право. 2024. Вип. 81(1). С. 308-314. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24144/2307-3322.2024.81.1.49
12. Голота О. Аналіз міжнародного досвіду підходів до формування та управління системою державних закупівель для потреб оборони (На прикладі діяльності Міністерства оборони Великобританії). Social development & Security. 2019. Vol. 9, Is. 2. С. 80-100.
13. Голота О., Титковський О. Механізм застосування критеріїв і показників оцінювання функціонування системи закупівель Міністерства оборони та Збройних Сил України в умовах воєнного стану. Інвестиції: практика та досвід. 2024. № 2. С. 193-199. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32702/2306-6814.2024.2.193
1. Migone A., Howlett A., Howlett M. (2023) Procurement and Politics: Strategies of Defence Acquisition in Canada and Australia. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25689-9
2. Patil K., Bhaduri S. (2020) ‘Zero-error’ versus ‘good-enough’: towards a ‘frugality’ narrative for defence procurement policy. Mind & Society, vol. 19, pp. 43-59. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11299-020-00223-7
3. Reykers Y. (2021) Strengthening parliamentary oversight of defence procurement: lessons from Belgium. European Security, vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 505-525. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09662839.2021.1886087
4. Masson H., Martin K. (2015) The Directive 2009/81/EC on Defence and Security Procurement under Scrutiny. Paris: Fondation pour la Recherche Stratégique. Recherches & Documents, no. 03/2015. Available at: https://surl.li/ngpysd (accessed July 31, 2026).
5. Školník M. (2016) Global supply chain standards and solutions in the context of legislative and structural tools of the Ministry of Defence of the Slovak Republic in alliance cooperation. Zeszyty Naukowe AON, no. 1(102), pp. 69-74. Available at: https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/119696.pdf (accessed July 31, 2026).
6. Lyra M., Damásio B., Pinheiro F. L., Bacao F. (2022) Fraud, corruption, and collusion in public procurement activities: a systematic literature review on data-driven methods. Applied Network Science, vol. 7, article 83. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41109-022-00523-6
7. Decarolis F., Giorgiantonio C. (2022) Corruption red flags in public procurement: new evidence from Italian calls for tenders. EPJ Data Science, vol. 11, article 16. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1140/epjds/s13688-022-00325-x
8. Gnaldi M., Del Sarto S. (2024) Measuring corruption risk in public procurement over emergency periods. Social Indicators Research, vol. 172, pp. 859-877. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-024-03331-w
9. Yanuarisa Y., Irianto G., Djamhuri A., Rusydi M. K. (2025) Exploring the internal audit of public procurement governance: a systematic literature review. Cogent Business & Management, vol. 12, no. 1, article 2485411. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2025.2485411
10. Matviiuk M. (2016) Teoretyko-pravovi aspekty zakupivel tovariv, robit ta posluh dlia potreb oborony [Theoretical and legal aspects of goods, works and services purchases for state defence needs]. Visnyk Khmelnytskoho natsionalnoho universytetu. Ekonomichni nauky – Herald of Khmelnytskyi National University. Economic Sciences, no. 3(1), pp. 185-188. Available at: https://journals.khnu.km.ua/vestnik/pdf/ekon/pdfbase/2016/VKNU-ES-2016-N3-Volume1_236.pdf (accessed July 31, 2026). (in Ukrainian)
11. Shvydka T. I. (2024) Osoblyvosti derzhavnoho rehuliuvannia oboronnykh zakupivel [Features of state regulation of defence procurement]. Naukovyi visnyk Uzhhorodskoho natsionalnoho universytetu. Seriia: Pravo – Uzhhorod National University Herald. Series: Law, vol. 81(1), pp. 308-314. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24144/2307-3322.2024.81.1.49. (in Ukrainian)
12. Holota O. (2019) Analiz mizhnarodnoho dosvidu pidkhodiv do formuvannia ta upravlinnia systemoiu derzhavnykh zakupivel dlia potreb oborony (na prykladi diialnosti Ministerstva oborony Velykobrytanii) [Analysis of international experience of approaches to set and manage the defence procurement system: the example of the UK Ministry of Defence]. Social Development & Security, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 80-100. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33445/sds.2019.9.2.7 (in Ukrainian)
13. Holota O., Tytkovskyi O. (2024) Mekhanizm zastosuvannia kryteriiv i pokaznykiv otsiniuvannia funktsionuvannia systemy zakupivel Ministerstva oborony ta Zbroinykh Syl Ukrainy v umovakh voiennoho stanu [Mechanism for applying criteria and indicators for assessing the functioning of the procurement system of the Ministry of Defence and the Armed Forces of Ukraine under martial law]. Investytsii: praktyka ta dosvid – Investments: Practice and Experience, no. 2, pp. 193-199. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32702/2306-6814.2024.2.193 (in Ukrainian)
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Наталія Здирко
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
