The contract audit is an instrument facilitating the evaluation of prices offered and costs incurred in non-competitive defence contracts. In this study we analyse the degree of harmonization of contract auditing models among four European countries by means of a comparative analysis of the characteristics of contract auditing in these countries. We identify similarities and differences among the contract auditing models applied in these countries, and conclude that they do not present a high degree of harmonization of defence contract cost evaluation.
Points for practitioners
This comparative study highlights the similarities and differences among the audit models for defence contracts in four European countries (the UK, France, Spain and Norway). The authors present the main characteristics of each model and systematize the features inherent to a possible common model that could be achieved by harmonizing audit practices and the rules applicable to the corresponding cost calculations. Finally, the authors recommend further progress be made in harmonizing the audit practices applied in NATO countries for defence contracts.
ASD (AeroSpace and Defence Industries Association of Europe) (2011) Facts and Figures 2010. Available at: http://www.asd-europe.org/FF2010.
2.
Courtney C, Cockcroft L and Murray D (2002) Corruption in the official arms trade. Transparency International (UK) Policy Research Paper 001, April. Available at: http://www.defenceagainstcorruption.org.
Fonfría A (2009) Efectos del gasto militar sobre la rentabilidad de la industria de defensa en España. Papeles de trabajo del Instituto de Estudios Fiscales 23. Available at: http://www.minhac.es/ief/principal.htm.
5.
FonfríaACorreaP (2010) Effects of military spending on the profitability of Spanish defence contractors. Defence and Peace Economics21(2): 177–192.
6.
GarrettG (2008) Cost Estimating and Contract Pricing: Tools, Techniques and Best Practices, Chicago, IL: Wolters Kluwer.
7.
KiratTBayonDBlancH (2003) Maîtriser les coûts des programmes d’armement en France, au Royaume-Uni et aux Etats-Unis, Paris: La Documentation Française.
8.
Linster B, Slate S and Waller R (2002) Consolidation of the US defense: Impact on research expenditures. Acquisition Review Quarterly Spring. Available at: http//www.dau.mil/pubbs/arq.
9.
McGowanASVendrzykVP (2002) The relation between cost shifting and segment profitability in the defense-contracting industry. Accounting Review77(4): 949–969.
10.
McGuireC (2007) Economics of defense in a globalized world. In: SandlerTHartleyK (eds) Handbook of Defense EconomicsVol. 2. 2nd edn. Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 623–648.
Ministry of Defence (2009a) Norwegian defence procurement: How to do business with the Norwegian armed forces: HQ Defence Command Norway Logistics Staff. Available at: http://www.odin.dep.no/fd/html.
13.
Ministry of Defence (2009b) Norwegian defence procurement: How to do business with the Norwegian armed forces: Regulations. Available at: http://www.odin.dep.no/fd/html.
MurphyE (2009) Guide to Contract Pricing: Cost and Price Analysis for Contractors, Subcontractors and Government Agencies, 5th edn. Vienna, VA: Management Concepts, Inc.
NATO Group on Acquisition Practices (AC/313) (1999) Guidelines for Mutual Provision of Contract Audits. January. AACP-2. 10. Available at: http://www.nato.int/structur/AC/313.
21.
OyerD (2005) Pricing and Cost Accounting: A Handbook for Government Contractors, 2nd edn. Vienna, VA: Management Concepts, Inc.
22.
PymanMWilsonRScottD (2009) The extent of single sourcing in defence procurement and its relevance as a corruption risk: A first look. Defence and Peace Economics20(3): 215–232.
23.
RaginCC (1987) The Comparative Method: Moving beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies, Berkeley: University of California Press.
