ETHIX Transparency Report
Argentina, 2023-2024
Institutional Message
Commitment to transparency in the public sector

Ivan Gauna
CEO of Ethix

Ivan Addolorato
CTO of Ethix
Introduction
Analysis of transparency in Argentine public tenders
Transparency in public procurement is a fundamental aspect of public management and plays a crucial role in building citizen trust in institutions. A transparent procurement process ensures that public resources are used efficiently, that decisions are made according to clear criteria, and that any type of direction is avoided. This is essential, as procurement is the main mechanism through which the State acquires goods and services necessary for its functioning and that of society in general. Corruption continues to be one of the main concerns affecting governments and societies. The lack of transparency in public procurement is one of the main channels through which corruption takes place. In many countries, public procurement processes are opaque, allowing practices such as bribery, bid rigging, and collusion between companies and officials. These types of practices not only affect the efficiency of public spending but also discourage competition and favor corrupt actors who profit at the expense of the common good. In this sense, it is necessary to ensure that procurement processes are open, impartial, and based on clear rules. It represents a constant challenge for governments. Implementing policies that promote greater transparency and access to information is essential to prevent these phenomena. However, the effective implementation of these policies faces various obstacles, including resistance from actors with vested interests, the lack of adequate technological infrastructure, and the lack of political will to carry out significant reforms. In the case of Argentina, the lack of transparency in public procurement has generated enormous costs, both social and economic. Corruption in procurement has not only implied misuse of public resources but has also had negative effects on economic development and fair competition between companies. Companies seeking to do business with the State often face non-competitive barriers, such as bribes, favoritism, and a judicial system that sometimes does not respond adequately to corruption incidents. This phenomenon also has serious consequences for citizens' trust in government institutions. When procurement processes are not transparent, citizens feel that the State is at the service of private interests, which deteriorates the legitimacy of the government and fosters a generalized perception of inefficiency and distrust towards the institutions responsible for ensuring social welfare. This discontent can translate into greater political apathy, less citizen participation, and an increase in distrust towards public authorities. Despite efforts by various sectors, transparency in public procurement remains an important challenge in many Argentine provinces. The lack of adequate digital tools and the non-existence of clear regulatory frameworks in many jurisdictions perpetuate old practices of opacity in procurement processes. It is common to find that, in more than half of the provinces, manual procedures still exist, information is not published in real-time, and interested companies do not have direct clear access to selection criteria or contract conditions. Fortunately, some provinces in Argentina have begun to implement reforms that seek to improve this situation. The digitalization of procurement is one of the most effective strategies for improving transparency. The use of digital platforms allows for the publication of procurement processes in a public and accessible manner, which ensures that all interested actors can access the same information in real-time. Digitalization facilitates control and auditing of processes, as all information is recorded and easily audited by internal and external control bodies. Access to public information remains a key issue in the fight against corruption. Public information access laws are fundamental to ensuring that citizens can know the details of procurement, the use of public funds, and the criteria used to award contracts. Although many provinces have laws that regulate this access, the effective implementation of these remains uneven. In some provinces, citizens and companies continue to face bureaucratic barriers and lack of timely response to information requests. This report aims to evaluate transparency in public procurement at the provincial level in Argentina, with a particular focus on three key aspects: access to public information, the degree of digitalization of processes, and documented corruption cases that have affected each jurisdiction. The combination of these factors provides a comprehensive view of the degree of transparency and the areas that need improvement in each province. Access to public information is an essential starting point for evaluating transparency. The ability of citizens and companies to access key information about public procurement is a clear indicator of the provincial government's willingness to operate in an open and responsible manner. In addition, the digitalization of processes contributes to greater efficiency, speed, and transparency, allowing users to obtain relevant information quickly and easily. Finally, the evaluation of known corruption cases helps to measure the real impacts of transparency policies in procurement. Provinces that have experienced corruption scandals in their procurement processes should implement even stricter and faster reforms to prevent future irregularities. In summary, transparency in public procurement is not only an ethical value but an urgent necessity to ensure responsible government and a more competitive economy in Argentina.
Provinces evaluated
Total provinces and CABA included in the study
Analysis period
Public tender data during this period
Tenders analyzed
Procedures analyzed throughout the territory
Methodology
Criteria used for the transparency evaluation
About our methodology
This analysis is based on the evaluation of several essential criteria to measure the transparency of public tenders in Argentine provinces. Given the growing interest in improving public procurement mechanisms, it is crucial to have a solid methodology that allows for objective classification of the level of transparency and efficiency of each jurisdiction. The following evaluation criteria were used to build the ranking of Argentine provinces, taking into account legal, technological, and management factors.
1Existence of public information access laws
The first evaluation criterion is the existence and effectiveness of public information access laws. Transparency in procurement cannot be achieved without a regulatory framework that ensures that all relevant information about contracting processes is accessible to citizens, companies, and the media. Provinces with robust legislation and clear procedures for requesting information and receiving responses within a reasonable timeframe score better on this criterion. The existence of laws that oblige provincial governments to publish tenders, contracts, and agreements in an open and accessible manner is indicative of their commitment to transparency. In Argentina today, 21 of the 24 provinces (including CABA) have a public information access law. Formosa, San Juan, and Tucuman still do not have the law that allows citizens to access public information. In 2016, Law 27.275 was enacted at the national level, guaranteeing the right of all citizens to access public information. This regulation requires the National Public Administration, both in its central structure and its decentralized agencies, to respond to information access requests they receive. After its approval, provinces were invited to adhere to the law. Some jurisdictions already had their own regulatory frameworks that needed updating, while others, without prior legislation on the subject, started from scratch. The last province to join was La Pampa, at the end of 2023. Provinces without current legislation Eight years after the enactment of the national law, there are still three provinces that do not have specific regulations guaranteeing access to public information: San Juan, Tucumán, and Formosa. Meanwhile, Santa Fe has had a decree in force since 2009 but continues to seek the enactment of a specific law on the subject. San Juan: advances and setbacks In 2017, a project was presented for the first time for the province of San Juan to adhere to the National Law on Access to Public Information. Over the years, former legislator Edgardo Sancassani repeatedly promoted the initiative, although it was never processed. Legislator Luis Rueda took up Sancassani's original project and again presented a proposal for adherence. In its rationale, the text maintains that "to achieve the sanitation of institutions, it is essential to strengthen mechanisms that increase the transparency of government acts, guarantee equitable access to information, and expand citizen participation in the decision-making processes of the administration". Tucumán: a pending commitment Tucumán is another province that still lacks an information access law. However, Governor Osvaldo Jaldo announced during the opening of ordinary sessions of the Legislature his intention to send a bill for debate and processing. "I have made the decision to send you shortly a project on access to public information. This directly responds to people's right to transparent information and constitutes one of the pillars of the democratic system. An informed citizen is a free and independent citizen," expressed Jaldo, who assumed the governorship in 2023. Formosa: the absence of progress Although Formosa's Constitution contemplates the right to access public information, the province does not have specific legislation on the matter. Like the rest of the jurisdictions, it was invited to adhere to the national regulations but never did so and has no representation in the Federal Council for Transparency. Currently, there is no record of any ongoing initiative for the presentation of a bill regulating access to public information in the province. Santa Fe: a legislative struggle of more than a decade In Santa Fe, access to public information is regulated by Decree 0692/2009, although there is no specific law. Over the years, nine bills on this issue have been presented in the provincial Legislature. On all occasions, the initiatives were approved by the Chamber of Deputies but were never processed in the Chamber of Senators. At the beginning of 2024, a bill on Access to Public Information was presented for the tenth time in the province. Once again, it obtained approval from the Chamber of Deputies and is awaiting processing in the Senate. This aspect is key because without adequate laws, provinces lack the legal obligation to disclose important details related to procurement. In some provinces, information access laws are recent or unclear, which hinders public participation and citizen oversight of the use of public funds. Therefore, assessing whether each province has current regulations on information access, and the effectiveness of such legislation, is a fundamental step to understanding the authorities' commitment to transparency.
2Ease of information access
Once legislation is in place, the next step is to evaluate the ease of access to information. This criterion refers to the availability and accessibility of data related to procurement. Ease of access implies that information must be easily locatable, understandable, and updated. To this end, it is evaluated whether provinces have digital platforms that allow users to search for and download procurement details simply and quickly. In the current context, online platforms are crucial to guarantee transparency, as they allow any interested party to access information immediately. Provinces that do not have updated web portals or that limit access through bureaucratic processes or long response times will score lower on this criterion. Information access platforms must be designed to be intuitive and accessible to all users, including citizens, companies, and civil society organizations. Web Portal Evaluation Method To evaluate the quality of public information access portals for each province, the following criteria were considered: 1. Clarity of Information: It was analyzed whether the information is presented in a structured manner, with clear and accessible language for different user levels. It was also considered whether the data is organized logically and is easily interpretable. 2. Platform Functionality and Performance: The usability of the portal was examined, including loading speed, ease of navigation, and effectiveness of internal search engines. The availability of advanced functions, such as filters and data visualization tools, is also valued. 3. Access to Key Legislation for the Procurement Process: It was evaluated whether the portals allow direct access to key regulations that govern procurement processes in each province. This includes the publication of applicable laws, decrees, and regulations, as well as guides or explanations about their application.
3Process digitalization
The digitalization of procurement processes is another key criterion in our evaluation. As digital technologies have been incorporated into the public sphere, automation and digitalization have made procurement processes faster, more efficient, and more transparent. We evaluate the extent to which each province has adopted technological platforms to publish procurements, manage bids, and award contracts, ensuring that the entire process is auditable and transparent. Provinces that have implemented comprehensive digital systems covering the entire procurement cycle, from the publication of the call to the execution of the contract, achieve better results. Digitalization not only improves efficiency but also reduces the risk of manipulation or tampering with processes. Platforms must be accessible not only to government entities but also to bidding companies and control entities.
4Known corruption cases
The next criterion examines known corruption cases related to public procurement in each province. This category includes both recent scandals and documented irregularities that have had a significant impact on public procurement processes. Provinces with a history of corruption scandals in public procurement are considered higher risk, as these incidents indicate failures in control mechanisms, lack of transparency, and the presence of corrupt practices that continue to affect processes. It is important to mention that this criterion not only takes into account the frequency of scandals but also the level of institutional response to them. Provinces that have taken corrective measures, such as the implementation of external audits, the revision of procurement procedures, or the opening of investigations that have led to sanctions, receive a higher rating.
5Impact on transparency
Finally, the impact on transparency is evaluated based on how the measures adopted by each province have influenced the improvement of clarity and accountability in procurement processes. This criterion takes into account the historical progress of each province in terms of modernization and reform of the public procurement system. Provinces that have adopted innovative technologies, created effective access to information laws, and improved external control receive a positive rating. In addition, the impact of government policies on reducing corruption and public trust is evaluated. Provinces with a high level of transparency in their procurement, along with solid control mechanisms and citizen participation, contribute to more efficient public management and the sustainability of public resources.
6The Ethix Ranking
The final ranking of Argentine provinces is built from the combination of these factors. Each province obtains a total score that reflects its efficiency, its level of transparency, and the degree of commitment to the fight against corruption in procurement processes. This ranking offers a clear and understandable view of the current panorama, allowing those responsible for public policies to identify critical areas and promote reforms aimed at improving transparency and efficiency in procurement. The objective of this ranking is not only to classify the provinces but also to provide a reference tool for provincial governments, companies, and citizens seeking to strengthen transparency in the use of public funds. Through this classification, the aim is to foster an environment of healthy competition, in which provinces are motivated to adopt better practices and reforms that benefit both the public and private sectors.
Transparency Ranking in Argentine Provinces
Evaluation of the 24 jurisdictions based on transparency criteria
This ranking reflects the transparency situation in public tenders in each Argentine province and the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires. The jurisdictions are ordered from highest to lowest transparency according to the evaluation carried out.
# | Province | Transparency Level | |
---|---|---|---|
1 | Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires | ✅ High | |
2 | Mendoza | ✅ High | |
3 | Río Negro | ✅ High | |
4 | Buenos Aires | ⚠️ Medium | |
5 | Tierra del Fuego | ⚠️ Medium | |
6 | Chubut | ⚠️ Medium | |
7 | Santa Fe | ⚠️ Medium | |
8 | Neuquén | ⚠️ Medium | |
9 | San Juan | ⚠️ Medium | |
10 | Córdoba | ⚠️ Medium | |
11 | Entre Ríos | ⚠️ Medium | |
12 | La Pampa | ⚠️ Medium | |
13 | Santa Cruz | ⚠️ Medium | |
14 | Chaco | ❌ Low | |
15 | Salta | ❌ Low | |
16 | Misiones | ❌ Low | |
17 | Jujuy | ❌ Low | |
18 | Corrientes | ❌ Low | |
19 | Tucumán | ❌ Low | |
20 | Santiago del Estero | ❌ Low | |
21 | San Luis | ❌ Low | |
22 | Catamarca | ❌ Low | |
23 | La Rioja | ❌ Low | |
24 | Formosa | ❌ Low |
About Corruption
Recognized corruption cases across various Argentine provinces reflect how the lack of transparency and absence of control measures have allowed crimes within public procurement processes. In a context where trust in government institutions directly depends on the efficient management of public resources, corruption cases in procurement have a devastating impact on both the private sector and social welfare. In provinces where procurement transparency has been promoted through the implementation of robust information access laws and process digitalization, corruption scandals tend to be less frequent or, when they occur, are managed more effectively. For example, in the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires (CABA) and Mendoza, provincial authorities have adopted a series of measures aimed at strengthening citizen control and accountability. In these jurisdictions, procurement processes are more transparent due to the existence of updated, accessible, and operational digital platforms that allow for public auditing and active civil society participation. In these provinces, corruption cases that have emerged have been treated with seriousness and speed. Independent investigations, the creation of external auditing bodies, and the establishment of real-time monitoring systems have reduced the frequency of such crimes. Additionally, political will and commitment to transparency have generated an environment of trust and collaboration between the public and private sectors, which has facilitated the prevention of illicit acts in procurement. However, in other provinces such as Formosa and Chaco, systemic corruption remains a significant challenge. In these regions, the lack of adequate digital infrastructure for procurement and the absence of clear and effective information access laws have created a perfect breeding ground for the diversion of public funds and manipulation of contracting processes. In these places, the lack of internal control, the absence of external audits, and information secrecy allow procurement processes to be compromised by private and political interests, without civil society being able to intervene effectively. In these provinces with greater opacity, corruption scandals are much more difficult to manage. The lack of transparency in publishing procurement data and the absence of citizen participation mechanisms make it difficult to identify irregularities in time. This situation leads to corruption cases not only being ineffectively managed but also perpetuated over time, seriously affecting both the credibility of government institutions and regional economic development. What is observed in this context is that the more advanced and transparent the technological platforms and control systems in the provinces, the less space there will be for corruption. Conversely, in provinces with closed systems and lack of external controls, corruption tends to be much more difficult to eradicate. It is imperative, then, that provinces with high levels of systemic corruption work on improving both transparency and digitalization of processes to effectively curb this problem. Comparing these two realities, it becomes evident that transparency is not just a matter of access to information, but also of political will to implement profound reforms that transform public procurement processes. Provinces with better results have understood that the fight against corruption requires not only strict laws but also a cultural change towards public management that values ethics, transparency, and efficiency in the use of state resources. In summary, corruption cases in Argentine provinces show us the clear difference between those places that have taken important steps to improve transparency and those where corruption continues to be a significant obstacle. The challenge for provinces with high corruption rates is to adopt new technologies, strengthen control standards, and open procurement processes so that all actors have an active role in overseeing the proper administration of public funds. Transparency in procurement not only improves public sector efficiency but also creates a climate of trust that benefits society as a whole.
Recommendations
The adoption of public information access laws is a fundamental step towards building a more transparent and fair procurement system. In provinces that have not yet implemented clear legislation on this topic, it is imperative to act urgently to ensure that all information related to procurement processes is available and accessible to citizens, companies, and civil society organizations. These laws not only promote transparency but also enable accountability of public officials and actors involved in procurement processes. Additionally, they establish a legal framework that facilitates citizen oversight and control, key elements for preventing corruption. Without robust legislation in this area, provinces remain exposed to opacity, which jeopardizes public spending efficiency and harms trust in government institutions. On the other hand, it is crucial to accelerate the digitalization of public procurement. Technology has become a key ally for improving efficiency, transparency, and accessibility in public contracting processes. As the world moves towards a more digital model, provinces must invest in technological platforms that allow citizens and companies to consult procurement documents, offers, and results quickly, easily, and transparently. Digitalization not only facilitates administrative management but also reduces opportunities for fund diversion and fraud. Digital platforms allow real-time monitoring of procurement processes, making data more accessible and auditable. Furthermore, they provide a channel for active civil society participation, who can monitor procurements and report irregularities more efficiently. An equally important aspect is the promotion of citizen participation. Transparency not only implies the publication of data but also the creation of effective mechanisms for citizens to intervene in procurement processes. Facilitating access to information and offering tools for civil society to actively participate in the supervision of procurement is essential. Citizens must have the ability to identify and report possible irregularities or corrupt practices. To this end, provinces should promote the creation of confidential reporting channels that allow citizens to report possible fraud or lack of transparency without fear of reprisals. Additionally, it must be ensured that complaints are investigated seriously and promptly to prevent corruption from persisting. It is equally fundamental to strengthen external audit systems that oversee procurement processes. While self-containment within government agencies is important, it is not sufficient to guarantee impeccable and corruption-free management. External audits, conducted by independent and professional entities, allow for an objective evaluation of whether procurement processes are carried out in accordance with established norms and criteria. Additionally, strengthening audit systems provides an additional control mechanism to ensure that public resources are used appropriately. Provinces need to implement control bodies with sufficient autonomy and training to detect irregularities before they become serious problems. Audits can also identify areas for improvement in procurement processes, allowing for their long-term optimization. Strengthening these control institutions also goes hand in hand with promoting social control mechanisms. External audits should not only be composed of government entities but also non-governmental organizations and academic entities committed to fighting corruption. These audits can serve as an independent compliance report, providing civil society with confidence in the correct execution of procurement and the use of public funds. The key is that all actors involved in the procurement process commit to compliance with current regulations and work together to eradicate corruption. In conclusion, to improve transparency in public procurement in Argentine provinces, it is essential to implement information access laws, accelerate process digitalization, promote citizen participation, and strengthen external audit systems. These are fundamental steps for procurement processes to be more effective, open, and respectful of the principles of ethics and public responsibility. If provinces do not adopt these changes, they risk continuing to be vulnerable to fraud and corruption, which will negatively affect society's trust in the public procurement system and, ultimately, in government institutions themselves.
Conclusion
Final reflections on the state of transparency in Argentina
"Transparency in public procurement is not just a technical requirement, but a cornerstone for building public trust and ensuring the efficient use of public resources for the benefit of society as a whole."
— Iván Gauna, CEO of Ethix
Improving transparency in public procurement is a complex process that involves both government institutions and civil society. While it is not a change that can be achieved quickly or easily, it is vital for strengthening democratic institutions and ensuring that the use of public resources is adequate, efficient, and responsible. Transparency not only implies the openness of procurement processes, but also commitment to fundamental principles such as equity, integrity, and accountability. In this context, public procurement represents a key area where the lack of control and supervision can give rise to corrupt practices that undermine citizen trust in the government. Provinces that have advanced in the process of improving transparency are those that have significantly digitalized procurement processes and implemented clear laws on public information access. These changes not only facilitate access to information about contracts and procurements but also allow citizens and companies to constantly monitor how contracts and state resources are allocated. Digitalization, in particular, has been an important catalyst for ensuring that processes are more open, impartial, and easily auditable. In provinces with robust digital systems, government actors, companies, and citizens can easily consult documents related to procurements, which reduces opportunities for manipulation and fraud. Additionally, the use of digital platforms allows for greater accessibility and transparency in the process, as procurements and results are easily searchable in real time, contributing to more effective supervision. For example, provinces such as the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires and Mendoza have significantly advanced in the digitalization of procurement processes, which has allowed for greater public auditing and better supervision by external entities. These technological advances allow citizens and civil organizations to have an active role in monitoring procurement processes, making it more difficult for corruption acts to go undetected. Furthermore, these provinces have approved public information access laws that, together with digitalization, offer a transparent and accessible system, strengthening trust in the government and its actions. However, provinces that have not yet managed to advance in the adoption of digital technologies and the enactment of clear information access laws remain highly vulnerable to corruption. In these places, procurement processes are more opaque, which generates a trust gap and allows for the manipulation of procurements and diversion of funds to continue undetected or unsanctioned. The lack of digitalization in processes creates an environment in which relevant documents and information are difficult to access or are dispersed in physical or outdated formats, complicating the task of conducting external audits or inquiries by citizens. Additionally, the absence of laws regulating information access in these places means that public procurements are not sufficiently transparent or subject to adequate public supervision. In many cases, this deficit of regulation and technological tools creates a situation where opacity prevails, leaving the way free for corrupt practices that harm the proper use of public funds. The lack of digitalization and clear laws on information access also has a direct impact on competition and the efficiency of procurement processes. In provinces with manual and non-digitalized processes, companies wishing to participate in procurements may face administrative barriers that prevent fair and transparent competition. This can lead to favors for certain companies or groups, reducing the options available to governments and, ultimately, affecting the quality of contracted products or services. Without digital platforms, processes become slow, bureaucratic, and prone to manipulation. Furthermore, the lack of digital tools and legal frameworks to ensure transparency reinforces generalized distrust towards public institutions. In provinces with these deficiencies, the risk of systemic corruption remains high, as procurement circuits remain isolated from public scrutiny and beyond the reach of independent audits. Without adequate means for citizens to actively participate and report irregularities, procurement processes remain vulnerable to abuses. Therefore, to achieve a true strengthening of democratic institutions and public trust, it is essential that provinces that have not yet implemented digital technologies and information access laws do so urgently. It is not just a matter of administrative modernization, but of ensuring that public processes are open and that citizens can trust that state resources are allocated fairly and equitably. Provinces that have already advanced in this regard are demonstrating that transparency in public procurement is not only possible but also an essential tool for preventing corruption and promoting efficiency in the public sector. Therefore, the example of provinces leading the way should serve as a model for those still facing challenges in terms of information access and digitalization. The adoption of these advances is a priority to ensure that public procurement is, ultimately, transparent, fair, and free from corruption.
Ethix's Commitment
At Ethix, we will continue working to promote transparency in public procurement through our technology platform, research, and collaboration with public institutions and civil society organizations. This report is one more step in our commitment to building a more efficient, transparent, and equitable public procurement system for Argentina.
© 2025 Ethix. All rights reserved