COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF TRADITIONAL AND SUSTAINABLE PROCUREMENT METHODS FOR INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS IN ABIA STATE PUBLIC SECTOR, NIGERIA

This study compared the performance outcomes of infrastructure projects procured through traditional and sustainable procurement methods across road, building, and bridge projects in the Abia State public sector, Nigeria, with a view to generating evidence-based insights for more effective and sustainable procurement practice. A mixed research design was adopted, combining a qualitative profile of respondents with a quantitative comparison of procurement performance. Structured questionnaires were administered to 48 procurement, project-management, and engineering personnel drawn from eight Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs), yielding a balanced 2 (procurement method) × 3 (project type) design. Data were analysed using two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) without interaction, followed by Least Significant Difference (LSD) post-hoc comparisons. Assumption checks confirmed that the data were normally distributed (Anderson-Darling statistic = 0.739, p = 0.057) and that observations were independent. Descriptive results showed a substantially higher mean procurement-performance score for sustainable procurement (66.55%) than for traditional procurement (33.45%) across all three project types. Two-way ANOVA showed a statistically significant effect of procurement method on project cost performance (F = 285.941, p < 0.001), but no significant effect of project type (F = 0.00, p = 1.000). The LSD post-hoc test confirmed a significant difference between sustainable and traditional procurement (p < 0.001), while pairwise comparisons among road, building, and bridge projects were all non-significant (p = 0.999). The study concludes that sustainable procurement delivers significantly better cost performance than traditional procurement, largely independent of infrastructure project type, and recommends its progressive adoption across Abia State MDAs, supported by capacity building and stronger regulatory enforcement.