Generating and Evaluating Sustainable Procurement Criteria for the Swiss Public Sector using In-Context Prompting with Large Language Models
Organizations: University of Zurich Zurich, Switzerland · Bern University of Applied Sciences Bern, Switzerland · University of Bern Bern, Switzerland
Abstract
Public procurement refers to the process by which public sector institutions, such as governments, municipalities, and publicly funded bodies, acquire goods and services. Swiss law requires the integration of ecological, social, and economic sustainability requirements into tender evaluations in the format of criteria that have to be fulfilled by a bidder. However, translating high-level sustainability regulations into concrete, verifiable, and sector-specific procurement criteria (such as selection criteria, award criteria, and technical specifications) remains a labor-intensive and error-prone manual task, requiring substantial domain expertise in several groups of goods and services and considerable manual effort. This paper presents a configurable, LLM-assisted pipeline that is presented as a software supporting the systematic generation and evaluation of sustainability-oriented procurement criteria catalogs for Switzerland. The system integrates in-context prompting, interchangeable LLM backends, and automated output validation to enable auditable criteria generation across different procurement sectors. As a proof of concept, we instantiate the pipeline using official sustainability guidelines published by the Swiss government and the European Commission, which are ingested as structured reference documents. We evaluate the system through a combination of automated quality checks, including an LLM-based evaluation component, and expert comparison against a manually curated gold standard. Our results demonstrate that the proposed pipeline can substantially reduce manual drafting effort while producing criteria catalogs that are consistent with official guidelines. We further discuss system limitations, failure modes, and design trade-offs observed during deployment, highlighting key considerations for integrating generative AI into public sector software workflows.
Figures & tables
| AA | AA-ID | C-ID | CC | SPC | AL: Basis | AL: Good Practice | AL: Exemplary |
| Chemical management | AA-1 | C-01 | TS | The supplier must implement a chemical management system that minimizes the use of hazardous substances. Evidence must be provided through system descriptions and inspection reports. | Proof of a chemical management system. | Proof of a chemical management system with annual review and update. | Proof of a chemical management system with complete elimination of substances of very high concern (SVHC). |
| Wood origin and certification | AA-2 | C-02 | TS | The wood used must come from verifiably sustainable forestry. Certificates such as FSC or PEFC must be provided as proof. The traceability of the wood supply chain must be demonstrated through appropriate documentation. | At least 70% of the wood used is FSC or PEFC certified. | At least 90% of the wood used is FSC or PEFC certified; complete supply chain documentation. | 100% of the wood used is FSC or PEFC certified; additionally, proof of chain of custody for all suppliers. |
| Sector | EU-GPP | Toolbox | Expert | # Area | # Criteria |
| NT | ✓ | ✗ | ✓ | 15 | 79 |
| FN | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 26 | 60 |
| LM | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 52 | 101 |
| TS | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 69 | 106 |
| CS | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 48 | 144 |
| PS | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 36 | 60 |
| Sector | Model | AA (Area of Action) | SPC (Sustainable Procurement Criteria) | |||||
| Coverage | Quality | Harmonic | Coverage | Quality | Harmonic | |||
| NT | gpt-4.1 | 0.6329 | 0.2159 | 0.3220 | 0.6359 | 0.6540 | 0.6433 | |
| gpt-4o | 0.1519 | 0.7013 | 0.2497 | 0.1519 | 0.6648 | 0.2473 | ||
| o4-mini | 0.5063 | 0.2770 | 0.3581 | 0.5063 | 0.6465 | 0.5679 | ||
| FN | gpt-4.1 | 0.8333 | 0.3892 | 0.5305 | 0.8333 | 0.6619 | 0.7378 | |
| gpt-4o | 0.2500 | 0.8435 | 0.3857 | 0.2500 | 0.7514 | 0.3752 | ||
Language Model Generation Evaluation
Language model generation evaluation measures the quality, reliability, diversity, and task fit of outputs produced by language models.
See all 395 papers