Law, Rights, and Results: The Hidden Engine of Development Impact
We all procure every day—but we call it shopping. You compare prices, pick who you trust, pay your money, and expect the product to work. Development procurement is the same idea—just on a much bigger scale. The principles stay the same; only the stakes get much higher. We go to the market, compare prices, and decide on a product. Despite the term “procurement” sounding technical and legal, it is something we continuously do in our daily lives, just on a much smaller scale. We all like to shop—well, some of us more than others—but imagine spending billions every day on the systems that quietly support our lives: water, energy, communications, and infrastructure. These services are so embedded in modern society that we rarely stop to think about how they are delivered, or how dramatically that delivery model is vital to us. When we think of a “procurement project,” what often comes to mind is the construction of something tangible—anything from pens to stationery, to a dam, a spacecraft, a nuclear power plant, a drone, a highway, or a public building. It depends largely on one’s imagination. These projects may vary greatly in scale and complexity, yet they share a common purpose: to create measurable impact. Such initiatives are typically funded by states, international organizations, MDBs, PPPs or other donors via international development finance. In 2024 alone and despite foreign aid cuts, development finance (both philanthropic and concessions) for developing countries amounted to an estimated USD 255.4 billion [1] Once financing is obtained , a tender is launched, contracts are awarded, implementation begins—and eventually, a tangible output emerges. But this process is not automatic. It is the result of meticulous planning and, perhaps less visibly, a carefully designed legal framework. When we procure a product in our daily lives, we enter into a legal relationship—often without even realizing it. Consumer protection laws help govern these transactions and provide safeguards for buyers. The same principle applies, at a much larger scale, to development projects. At its core, procurement reflects simple human expectations: we do not want to be cheated, we do not want to lose money after the fact, we want to purchase something legally and transparently, and we want to ensure that our investment does not harm others. Cross-Border Complexities and Model Contracts When projects are financed through public funds—often collected through taxation—the importance of legal precision becomes even more critical. We are not merely discussing private commercial arrangements; we are discussing mechanisms that determine how public resources are allocated and safeguarded, and how projects will affect the well-being of future generations. Afterall, every public procurement project is designed to serve a public interest. These contracts must be grounded in public procurement legislation and regulatory systems in order to ensure order, accountability and transparency. Yet establishing this contractual foundation is rarely straightforward—particularly in cross-border projects. In international projects, parties often seek to structure contracts according to legal systems with which they are more familiar. This can create tension between domestic procurement rules and international expectations. Let’s consider the example of constructing an embassy. The employer, in this case the diplomatic service of a state, wishes to integrate its public procurement legislation requirements into the contract. The contractor, while eager to undertake a prestigious project, may hesitate to accept unfamiliar contractual terms. To address such challenges—especially in large-scale, long-term construction projects where mistakes are costly and delays can be devastating—standardized model contracts have been developed. Especially on construction projects, one of the most widely used frameworks is provided by International Federation of Consulting Engineers (FIDIC), whose model contracts aim to balance risk allocation, clarify responsibilities, and provide predictable mechanisms for managing claims and variations. At the same time, states must align procurement projects with their international obligations—whether under environmental treaties or human rights commitments. Procurement Is Not the Only Legal Framework That Matters While procurement legislation provides the procedural backbone of development projects, it is far from the only legal framework that shapes outcomes. Major infrastructure projects are simultaneously governed by: Environmental legislation Cultural heritage protection laws Expropriation and property law Human rights obligations Water and energy regulations International environmental and cultural conventions In other words, a procurement contract does not exist in isolation. It sits at the intersection of multiple legal regimes—each capable of reshaping, delaying, or even halting a project. Let’s us consider the example of a dam. From that single project, electricity is generated. With electricity, agricultural productivity improves. The reservoir supplies drinking and irrigation water to nearby cities. With reliable water and energy, local industry expands. Employment demand rises. As new populations move into the region, infrastructure projects multiply—roads, housing, schools, healthcare facilities. What began as one project becomes a chain reaction, gradually reshaping entire region. However, as mentioned above such projects must take international obligations into account as well. The Ilısu Dam in south-eastern Türkiye illustrates this multi perspective. The dam, part of the broader South-eastern Anatolia Project, was designed to generate hydroelectric power and support regional development. As mentioned above, from an economic and energy-security perspective, it represented a significant public interest objective. However, the creation of its reservoir would lead to the submergence of the ancient city of Hasankeyf—a site with thousands of years of history bridging Upper Mesopotamia and Anatolia. Domestic courts, international advocacy groups, and various stakeholders engaged in legal and political debates over whether sufficient protective measures had been taken, whether heritage obligations had been adequately assessed, and how the balance between economic development and cultural survival should be struck. Project, first envisaged in 1982, was halted in 2002 due to legal challenges. Ultimately, the dam was completed. In 2018, much of Hasankeyf’s historical site was submerged, although certain monuments were relocated prior to inundation. As of 2025, the dam has produced 12.2 billion kilowatt-hours of renewable energy. Türkiye now ranks 5th in Europe in terms of installed capacity of renewable energy, with more than half of its produced electricity generated from renewable sources. Nowadays, as a tourist you can take
