[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/upf/upfgen/1790.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Renegotiation and discrimination in symmetric procurement auctions

Author

Listed:
Abstract
In order to make competition open, fair and transparent, procurement regulations often require equal treatment for all bidders. This paper shows how a favorite supplier can be treated preferentially (opening the door to home bias and corruption) even when explicit discrimination is not allowed. We analyze a procurement setting in which the optimal design of the project to be contracted is unknown. The sponsor has to invest in specifying the project. The larger the investment, the higher the probability that the initial design is optimal. When it is not, a bargaining process between the winning firm and the sponsor takes place. Profits from bargaining are larger for the favorite supplier than for its rivals. Given this comparative advantage, the favored firm bids more aggressively and then, it wins more often than standard firms. Finally, we show that the sponsor invests less in specifying the initial design, when favoritism is stronger. Underinvestment in design specification is a tool for providing a comparative advantage to the favored firm.

Suggested Citation

  • Leandro Arozamena & Juan José Ganuza & Federico Weinschelbaum, 2021. "Renegotiation and discrimination in symmetric procurement auctions," Economics Working Papers 1790, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    • Handle: RePEc:upf:upfgen:1790
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://econ-papers.upf.edu/papers/1790.pdf
    File Function: Whole Paper
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peter C. B. Phillips & Shuping Shi & Jun Yu, 2015. "Testing For Multiple Bubbles: Historical Episodes Of Exuberance And Collapse In The S&P 500," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 56(4), pages 1043-1078, November.
    2. McAfee, R. Preston & McMillan, John, 1989. "Government procurement and international trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(3-4), pages 291-308, May.
    3. Bajari, Patrick & Tadelis, Steven, 2001. "Incentives versus Transaction Costs: A Theory of Procurement Contracts," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(3), pages 387-407, Autumn.
    4. Luis C. Corchón & Marco A. Marini (ed.), 2018. "Handbook of Game Theory and Industrial Organization, Volume II," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 17978.
    5. Gregory Lewis & Patrick Bajari, 2011. "Procurement Contracting With Time Incentives: Theory and Evidence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 126(3), pages 1173-1211.
    6. Hooker, Mark A., 2000. "Misspecification versus bubbles in hyperinflation data: Monte Carlo and interwar European evidence," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 583-600, August.
    7. Leandro Arozamena & Nicholas Shunda & Federico Weinschelbaum, 2014. "Optimal nondiscriminatory auctions with favoritism," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 34(1), pages 252-262.
    8. Driffill, John & Sola, Martin, 1998. "Intrinsic bubbles and regime-switching," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 357-373, July.
    9. Bliss, Christopher & Di Tella, Rafael, 1997. "Does Competition Kill Corruption?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 105(5), pages 1001-1023, October.
    10. Naegelen, Florence & Mougeot, Michel, 1998. "Discriminatory public procurement policy and cost reduction incentives," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(3), pages 349-367, March.
    11. Peter C. B. Phillips & Shuping Shi & Jun Yu, 2015. "Testing For Multiple Bubbles: Historical Episodes Of Exuberance And Collapse In The S&P 500," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 56, pages 1043-1078, November.
    12. Arozamena, Leandro & Weinschelbaum, Federico, 2011. "On favoritism in auctions with entry," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 110(3), pages 265-267, March.
    13. Branco, Fernando, 1994. "Favoring domestic firms in procurement contracts," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(1-2), pages 65-80, August.
    14. Chiara Carboni & Elisabetta Iossa & Gianpiero Mattera, 2018. "Barriers towards foreign firms in international public procurement markets: a review," Economia e Politica Industriale: Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, Springer;Associazione Amici di Economia e Politica Industriale, vol. 45(1), pages 85-107, March.
    15. Laffont, Jean-Jacques & N'Guessan, Tchetche, 1999. "Competition and corruption in an agency relationship," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 271-295, December.
    16. Evans, George W, 1991. "Pitfalls in Testing for Explosive Bubbles in Asset Prices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(4), pages 922-930, September.
    17. Blackburn, Keith & Sola, Martin, 1996. "Market Fundamentals versus Speculative Bubbles: A New Test Applied to the German Hyperinflation," International Journal of Finance & Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 1(4), pages 303-317, October.
    18. Vagstad, Steinar, 1995. "Promoting fair competition in public procurement," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 283-307, October.
    19. Hall, Stephen G & Psaradakis, Zacharias & Sola, Martin, 1999. "Detecting Periodically Collapsing Bubbles: A Markov-Switching Unit Root Test," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(2), pages 143-154, March-Apr.
    20. Nicolás Campos & Eduardo Engel & Ronald D. Fischer & Alexander Galetovic, 2021. "The Ways of Corruption in Infrastructure: Lessons from the Odebrecht Case," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 35(2), pages 171-190, Spring.
    21. Celentani, Marco & Ganuza, Juan-Jose, 2002. "Corruption and competition in procurement," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(7), pages 1273-1303, July.
    22. Laffont, Jean-Jacques & Tirole, Jean, 1991. "Auction design and favoritism," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 9-42, March.
    23. Shu-Ping Shi, 2013. "Specification sensitivities in the Markov-switching unit root test for bubbles," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 697-713, October.
    24. Hamilton, James D, 1986. "On Testing for Self-fulfilling Speculative Price Bubbles," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 27(3), pages 545-552, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Morita Rubens & Psaradakis Zacharias & Sola Martin & Yunis Patricio, 2024. "On testing for bubbles during hyperinflations," Studies in Nonlinear Dynamics & Econometrics, De Gruyter, vol. 28(1), pages 25-37, February.
    2. Leandro Arozamena & Nicholas Shunda & Federico Weinschelbaum, 2014. "Optimal nondiscriminatory auctions with favoritism," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 34(1), pages 252-262.
    3. Arozamena, Leandro & Weinschelbaum, Federico, 2009. "The effect of corruption on bidding behavior in first-price auctions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(6), pages 645-657, August.
    4. Constantino Hevia & Martin Gonzalez‐Rozada & Martin Sola & Fabio Spagnolo, 2015. "Estimating and Forecasting the Yield Curve Using A Markov Switching Dynamic Nelson and Siegel Model," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(6), pages 987-1009, September.
    5. Hanspach, Philip, 2023. "The home bias in procurement. Cross-border procurement of medical supplies during the Covid-19 pandemic," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    6. Maréchal, François & Morand, Pierre-Henri, 2022. "Are social and environmental clauses a tool for favoritism? Analysis of French public procurement contracts," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    7. Pierre-Henri Morand & François Maréchal, 2021. "Are social and environmental clauses a tool for favoritism? Analysis of French public procurement contracts ," Post-Print hal-03418572, HAL.
    8. Branco, Fernando, 2002. "Procurement favouritism and technology adoption," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 73-91, January.
    9. Chiara Carboni & Elisabetta Iossa & Gianpiero Mattera, 2018. "Barriers towards foreign firms in international public procurement markets: a review," Economia e Politica Industriale: Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, Springer;Associazione Amici di Economia e Politica Industriale, vol. 45(1), pages 85-107, March.
    10. Chiara Carboni & Elisabetta Iossa & Gianpiero Mattera, 2017. "Barriers to Public Procurement: A Review and Recent Patterns in the EU," IEFE Working Papers 92, IEFE, Center for Research on Energy and Environmental Economics and Policy, Universita' Bocconi, Milano, Italy.
    11. Arozamena, Leandro & Weinschelbaum, Federico, 2011. "On favoritism in auctions with entry," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 110(3), pages 265-267, March.
    12. Evenett, Simon J. & Hoekman, Bernard M., 2005. "Government procurement: market access, transparency, and multilateral trade rules," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 163-183, March.
    13. Hing Chan & Kai Woo, 2006. "Bubbles detection for inter-war European hyperinflation: A threshold cointegration approach," Journal of Economics and Finance, Springer;Academy of Economics and Finance, vol. 30(2), pages 169-185, June.
    14. Arozamena, Leandro & Ganuza, Juan-José & Weinschelbaum, Federico, 2023. "Renegotiation, discrimination and favoritism in symmetric procurement auctions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    15. Anirudh Shingal, 2015. "Econometric Analyses of Home Bias in Government Procurement," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(1), pages 188-219, February.
    16. Brulhart, Marius & Trionfetti, Federico, 2004. "Public expenditure, international specialisation and agglomeration," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 851-881, August.
    17. Chan, Joshua C.C. & Santi, Caterina, 2021. "Speculative bubbles in present-value models: A Bayesian Markov-switching state space approach," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    18. Xie, Zixiong & Chen, Shyh-Wei & Wu, An-Chi, 2019. "Asymmetric adjustment, non-linearity and housing price bubbles: New international evidence," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    19. Chen, Shyh-Wei & Xie, Zixiong, 2017. "Asymmetric adjustment and smooth breaks in dividend yields: Evidence from international stock markets," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 339-354.
    20. Marion, Justin, 2007. "Are bid preferences benign? The effect of small business subsidies in highway procurement auctions," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(7-8), pages 1591-1624, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    auctions; favoritism; auction design; renegotiation; corruption;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I12 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Health Behavior
    • J13 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Fertility; Family Planning; Child Care; Children; Youth
    • H31 - Public Economics - - Fiscal Policies and Behavior of Economic Agents - - - Household
    • H24 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Personal Income and Other Nonbusiness Taxes and Subsidies

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:upf:upfgen:1790. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.econ.upf.edu/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.