Restorasyon için Kamu İhalelerinde Fiyat Dışı Unsurlar ve Neues Müzesi Örneği ile Bir Karşılaştırma

Bu çalışmanın amacı, kamu eliyle yapılan restorasyon ihalelerinde mevcut mevzuat kısıtları dâhilinde fiyat dışı unsurların (FDU) kullanım olanaklarını değerlendirmektir. Bu sayede kamu eliyle yapılan restorasyon ihalelerinde tekliflerin sadece fiyat temelli değerlendirilmesinin şart olmadığı açıklanacak ve farklı çözümler olduğu gösterilecektir. Bu amaca ulaşmak için karşılaştırma, vaka keşfi ve uzmanlara danışma yöntemleri kullanılmıştır. Yüklenici seçimi için mevzuatın imkânları araştırılmış ve ülkemizdeki mevzuat ile Avrupa Birliği mevzuatı karşılaştırılmıştır. Bu karşılaştırma neticesinde her iki mevzuatta da yer alan fiyat dışı unsurların ülkemizdeki restorasyon işleri ihalelerinde nasıl kullanılabileceği değerlendirilmiştir. İhale değerlendirmesinde kullanılabilecek fiyat dışı unsurlar, Berlin Neues Müzesi örneğinden yararlanılarak listelenmiştir. Listelenen bu unsurlar hiyerarşik olarak başlıklar ve alt başlıklar altında derlenerek üniversitelerin koruma ve restorasyon programlarında görev alan en az 10 yıllık akademik deneyime sahip 20 koruma uzmanıyla ikili karşılaştırmalardan oluşan bir anket çalışması yapılmıştır. Anket çalışmasının sonuçları analitik hiyerarşi süreci yöntemi kullanılarak ihale değerlendirmesi için fiyat dışı unsurların ağırlıkları belirlenmiştir. Aynı zamanda, en düşük fiyat uygulamasının artık yüklenici seçiminde ana kriter olmadığı görülmüştür. Yüklenici seçiminde çok kriterli karar verme yöntemleri ile koruma uygulamalarının kalitesinin artırılması gerektiği anlaşılmaktadır.

Non-Price Criteria in Public Tenders for Restoration and A Comparison with Neues Museum Case

Realizing a restoration project is different than new construction projects, however there is no difference between them in a public tender procedure. Contracts are awarded based only on the lowest price criteria in public tenders. Awarding a restoration contract based on lowest price criteria creates low quality. That’s why this paper is studying if there are any viable possibilities to involve non-price criteria in public tenders for restoration. The aim of this study is to evaluate the possibilities of using non-price contract award criteria within the scope of the current legislative restrictions in public restoration tenders. Also to seek ways of involving scientific methods for restoration contractor selection. To achieve these goals, comparison, case discovery and consultation methods were used. The possibilities of the legislation are investigated for contract awarding and the legislation in Turkey is compared with the legislation of EU. As a result of this comparison, how the non-price contract award criteria included in both regulations can be used in the restoration tenders in our country has been evaluated. Contract awarding criteria are listed using the Berlin Neues Museum example. The list is compiled hierarchically under the main and sub-criteria and a comparison survey study was done with twenty conservation specialists all with at least ten years of academic experience in the field. Results of the survey evaluated by using the AHP method to determine the weights of criteria. Within the scope of this study, the opinions of experts were taken on the determination of the weights of the contractor selection criteria using the AHP method. Further studies can be done with other stakeholders in a conservation project to see their perspective on contractor selection criteria. For example, employers, users and administrators of the subject can be evaluated using similar methods. Furthermore, mixed expert groups consisting of different stakeholders can be formed and studies can be conducted to determine what the contractor selection criteria can include and how the weights are distributed. The non-price criteria evaluated in this study are limited to those used in the Neues Museum. Since there is no limitation for non-price criteria in legislation, future studies with different criteria can be produced for the use of non-price criteria in heritage field and can be compared with the results here. In general, quantitative criteria are proposed for contractor selection. However, each heritage project is unique. For this reason, the selection criteria of the contractor in heritage projects should include qualitative characteristics compatible with the project. Past experience is not included in the contractor selection criteria in some previous studies. According to the results of our paper, past experience is seen as a very important criterion by experts. It will be appropriate to use past experience quality criterion in contractor selection. However, in the selection of the contractor, the bid price is required to be included among the criteria by the legislation. This paper shows selection criteria and weights of criteria may change according to the case. That’s why, rather than a model focused on quantitative criteria of contractor, a method can be developed in which the weight of qualitative criteria is sufficient to increase the quality. Awarding the contract at the lowest price for heritage projects is considered problematic. The quality of the past experiences, organization and team of contractor have no effect on the result of the tender. However, in order to increase the quality, it is possible to determine the contractor selection together with non-price criteria, as shown in this study, in provision of the current legislation. It is known that the selection of unqualified contractors in cultural heritage projects leads to failures, delays, arguments and irreversible damages. In order to prevent these negativities, it is possible to include experts in the process and to include non-price criteria in contractor selection process with AHP or similar multi-criteria decision making methods. This study shows that selection of contractor in restoration tenders can be made by using non-price criteria within the scope of the current legislation. It has been found that the lowest price application is not necessarily the main criterion for the selection of contractors anymore. It is realized that the quality of conservation practices should be increased by evaluating the non-price criteria to select the contractor. At the same time, we pointed out that there are scientific methods to select contractor in public tender process of a restoration project.

PDF

___

Araujo, M. C. B., Alencar L. H. ve Mota, C. M. M. (2018). Decision Criteria for Contractor Selection in Construction Industry: A Literature Review. 2018 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management (s. 637- 640). Bangkok. https://doi.org/10.1109/IEEM43310.2018
Avrupa Komisyonu. (2003). Final Report, Task Group 4 : Life Cycle Costs in Construction. 29 October 2003 3rd Tripartite Meeting Group (MemberStates/Industry/Commission) on the Competitiveness of the Construction Industry. AB.
Bintoro, I., Malani, R. ve Rihartanto, C. (2017). Modelling of contractor selection using fuzzy-TOPSIS. 2017 5th International Conference on Electrical, Electronics and Information Engineering (pp. 140-145). Malang. https://doi.org/10.1109/ ICEEIE.2017.8328778
Bundesamt für Bauwesen und Raumordnung. (2005). Bewerbung zur Teilnahme am Verhandlungsverfahren nach VOF. (Neues Museum Restorasyon İşi Ön Yeterlik Şartnamesi, Ön Yeterlik Başvurusu). Berlin.
Bundesamt für Bauwesen und Raumordnung. (2006) Angebotsanforderung, Aufforderung zur Abgabe Eines Angebots. (Neues Museum Restorasyon İşi İhale Şartnamesi, Teklif Verme Formları). Berlin.
Directive 2004/18/EC of The European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the Coordination of Proceduresfor the Award of Public Works Contracts, Public Supply Contracts and Public Service Contracts. (2004, 30 Nisan). Official Journal of the European Union. (L 134).
Evren, R. ve Ülengin, F. (1992). Yönetimde Çok Amaçlı Karar Verme. İstanbul: İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi Yayınları, s. 1-19. Hajek, J., Vrbova, L. ve Kolis, K. (2017). Hierarchical structure of criteria used for contractor selection for construction works.
Empirical research from the Czech Republic. International Journal of Procurement Management, 10(4), (s. 444). https:// doi.org/10.1504/IJPM.2017.10005123
Henze, W. (2009). Restoration Work-Legal Grounding and the Tendering Process. The Neues Museum Berlin Conserving, Restoring, Rebuilding Within the World Heritage, s.134. Leipzig: E.A. Seemann.
ICOMOS. (2018). European Quality Principles For EU-Funded Interventions With Potential Impact Upon Cultural Heritage, France.
Kamu İhale Kanunu. (2002, 22 Ocak). Resmi Gazete (Sayı: 4734). Erişim adresi: https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2002/01/20020122.htm Kamu İhale Genel Tebliği. (2005, 25 Temmuz). Resmi Gazete (Sayı: 25886). Erişim adresi: https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/ eskiler/2005/07/20050725.htm
Koramaz, T. K. (2015). Analitik Hiyerarşi Süreci. E. Alkay (Der.), Şehir Planlamada Analiz ve Değerlendirme Teknikleri (s. 141- 149). İstanbul: Literatür Yayıncılık.
Krishna Rao, M.V., Kumar, V.S.S. ve Rathish Kumar, P. (2018). Optimal Contractor Selection in Construction Industry: The Fuzzy Way. J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. A 99 (s. 67–78). https://doi. org/10.1007/s40030-018-0271-1
Kültür Varlıkları İhale Yönetmeliği. (2013, 25 Temmuz). Resmi Gazete. (Sayı: 28718) Erişim adresi: https://www.resmigazete. gov.tr/eskiler/2013/07/20130725-15.htm Lin, N. (1976). Foundations of Social Research. USA:McGraw-Hill. (s. 197-204).
Morkunaite, Z., Bausys, R., Zavadskas E.K. (2019). Contractor selection for Sgraffito decoration of cultural heritage buildings using the WASPAS-SVNS method. Sustain (s. 1-25). https:// doi.org/10.3390/su11226444
Morkunaite, Z. ve Podvezko, V. (2019). Criteria Evaluation for Contractor Selection in Cultural Heritage Projects Using Multiple Criteria Approach. 17th International Colloquium Sustainable Decisions In Buılt Environment 15 May 2019, Vilnius, Lithuania e-ISBN 978-609-476-195-9 Vilnius Gediminas Technical University.
Morkunaite, Z., Podvezko, V. ve Kutut, V. (2017). Selection Criteria For Evaluating Contractors Of Cultural Heritage Objects. Procedia Engineering, 208 (s. 90-97). https://doi.org/10.1016/j. proeng.2017.11.025
Morkunaite, Z., Podvezko, V., Zavadskas, E.K., Bausys, R. (2019). Contractor selection for renovation of cultural heritage buildings by PROMETHEE method. Arch. Civ. Mech. Eng., 19 (s. 1056-1071). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acme.2019.05.008
Özçakar, N. ve Yurdakul, H. (2014). Türk Kamu İhale Kanununda Fiyat İle Birlikte Fiyat Dışı Unsurların da Dikkate Alındığı İhale ve Kazanan Teklif. İstanbul Üniversitesi İşletme Fakültesi İşletme İktisadı Enstitüsü Yönetim Dergisi, 25 (76), 55-69.
Özkaya, G.C. ve Gelişen G. (2020). Kamu İhale Kanunu’na Göre Yapım İşleri İçin Yüklenici Seçimi, Karşılaşılan Zorluklar ve İhale Yönetimi, Teknik Bilimler Dergisi, 10 (1), 31-44.
Özyürek, İ. (2018). Kamu Yapım İhalelerinde Yüklenici Seçimi İçin Alternatif Bir Yöntem Önerisi. (Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi).
Gazi Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara. (s. 66-67) Polat, G. (2015). Subcontractor selection using the integration of the AHP and PROMETHEE methods. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, 22 (8), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.3846/ 13923730.2014.948910
Saaty, T. L. (1980). The Analytic Hierarchy Process, McGrawHill, New York.
Saaty, T. L. (1987). Rank Generation, Preservation, and Reversal in the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Decision Sciences Volume 18 (2), 157-77. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1987. tb01514.x
Saaty, T. L. (1990a). The Analytic Hierarchy Process, RWS Publications, Pittsburgh, s. 1-10.
Saaty, T. L. (1990b). How to Structure a Decision Problem: an Analytic Hierarchy Process Perspective. The Analytic Hierarchy Process-Addenda. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh, RWS Publications (s. A31-A49).
Saaty, T. L. ve Tran, L. T. (2007). On the Invalidity of Fuzzifying Numerical Judgments in the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 46 (7), 962-75. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.mcm.2007.03.022
Shang, J., Vargas, L. (ed.) (2012). New Concepts and Applications of AHP in the Internet Era, Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 19, 1-2. https://doi.org/10.1002/mcda.1469
Topçu, İ.Y. (2004). A decision model proposal for construction contractor selection in Turkey. Building and Environment, 39, 469-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2003.09.009
Vakıf KültürVarlıkları İhale Yönetmeliğinin Yürürlükten Kaldırılmasına ve Vakıf Kültür Varlıklarının Onarımları Ve Restorasyonları İle Çevre Düzenlemesine İlişkin Mal Ve Hizmet Alımlarına Dair Usul Ve Esasların Yürürlüğe Konulması Hakkında Karar. (2018, 31 Ekim). Resmi Gazete. (Sayı: 30581). Erişim adresi: https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2018/10/20181031. htm
Wong, C. H., Holt, G. D. ve Cooper, P. A. (2000). Lowest price or value? Investigation of UK construction clients’ tender selection process. Construction Management and Economics, 18 (7), 767-74. https://doi.org/10.1080/014461900433050
Zhou, P. Ang, B. W. ve Poh, K. L. (2006). Decision Analysis in Energy and Environmental Modeling: An Update. Elsevier Science Direct, 31 (14), 2604-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. energy.2005.10.023
İnternet Kaynakları Alman İhale Sitesi (2020, 11 Haziran). Sözlük. Erişim adresi: https://www.deutsches-ausschreibungsblatt.de/da/service/ glossar/
ICOMOS Türkiye. (2020, 4 Şubat). Türkiye Mimari Mirası Koruma Bildirgesi. Erişim Adresi: http://www.icomos.org.tr/Dosyalar/ ICOMOSTR_tr0784192001542192602.pdf
Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı. (2019, 17 Ağustos) T.C.Kültür Ve Turizm Bakanlığı Kültür Varlıkları Ve Müzeler Genel Müdürlüğünden Proje Ve Uygulama İşleri İçin Ön Yeterlik İlanı Erişim adresi: https://kvmgm.ktb.gov.tr/Eklenti/62835,2019-yiliproje-ve-uygulama-isleri-icin-on-yeterlik-ila-.pdf?0