What is MEAT (Most Economically Advantageous Tender)?
MEAT stands for Most Economically Advantageous Tender (in Dutch: EMVI — Economisch Meest Voordelige Inschrijving) and is the standard procurement system in the EU, in which a contracting authority chooses the winner not on lowest price alone but on the best balance of price and quality. MEAT forces bidders to combine a sharp price with demonstrable added value on sustainability, programme, risk management and quality.
How does MEAT work?
In a MEAT tender:
- The contracting authority defines award criteria — e.g. sustainability, programme, disruption, environmental score
- Bidders submit a price and a quality plan
- An evaluation panel scores quality against published rubrics
- Fictitious price reduction translates quality points into euros
- The most economically advantageous tender wins
Example: bid A is €1,000,000, quality earns €100,000 fictitious discount → evaluated at €900,000. Compare bid B: €950,000 and €0 discount. A wins.
MEAT criteria
Common criteria include:
| Criterion | Topic |
|---|---|
| Sustainability | CO₂ output, LCA, materials |
| Programme | Construction time, phasing, disruption limits |
| Risk management | Identifying and mitigating risks |
| Past performance | Track record on reference projects |
| Innovation | Smart solutions, conceptual building |
| Environmental management | Safety, communication with neighbours |
Application
MEAT is mandatory for:
- European tenders above the threshold
- Public clients such as local authorities, government departments, infrastructure agencies
- Housing associations on larger projects
Exception: for standard works the lowest-price approach can be used if justified.
Sub-types
- Best Price–Quality Ratio (BPQR) — the statutory term, equivalent to MEAT
- Action plan / Method statement — typical components
- Past Performance scoring — explicit assessment of references
Pros and cons
Pros
– Encourages quality, sustainability and innovation
– Rewards the contractor’s added value
– Lower defect cost with a better plan
Cons
– Tender process more costly and time-consuming
– Subjective element in evaluation
– Risk of “showpiece” plans without real added value
Related terms
- Past performance
- Specification
- Tendering
- Construction team
- DBFM, DBFMO
- Design and construct
Looking for more DIY plans? Check out fredsdiyplans.com.