My hope is that these initiatives will help improve the requirements development process, such that the correlation between increased competition and decreasing costs has a long-term lens. As Harlan stated, and to elaborate, cost SHOULD be the last and least determinant in a truly innovative competitive environment. However, that is not usually the case. Nonetheless, these initiatives focus on what is at the heart of these Acquisition 2.0 endeavors; innovation.
By being able to actively participate in the development of requirements, flushing out the objectives, and thus being able to increase competition, industry and the government can also actively participate in market research and communicate to ensure the government does not unnecessarily limit itself. Further, the hope is these techniques will lead to better solutions, better performance-based contracts, and ultimately better outcomes.
These solutions may cost more in the short-term, which further validates what is in the best interest of the government (e.g. best value), but in the long-term, these better, innovative solutions increase performance, and thus allow for increased efficiencies and lowered costs.