Collusive market-sharing and corruption in procurement
AbstractThis paper investigates links between corruption and collusion in procurement. A first-price multiple-object auction is administered by an agent who has legal discretion to allow for a readjustment of (all) submitted offers before the official opening. The agent may be corrupt, i.e. willing to "sell" his decision in exchange for a bribe. Our main result shows that the corrupt agent's incentives to extract rents are closely linked with that of a cartel of bidders. First, collusive bidding conveys value to the agent's decision power. Second, self-interested abuse of discretion to extract rents (corruption) provides a mechanism to enforce collusion. A second result is that package bidding can facilitate collusion. We also find that with corruption, collusion is more likely in auctions where firms are small relative to the market. Our main message to auction designers, competition authorities and criminal courts is that risks of collusion and of corruption must be addressed simultaneously. Some other policy implications for the design of tender procedures are discussed.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by HAL in its series PSE Working Papers with number halshs-00590773.
Date of creation: Aug 2005
Date of revision:
Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: http://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00590773
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/
auction ; corruption ; collusion;
Other versions of this item:
- Ariane Lambert-Mogiliansky & Konstantin Sonin, 2006. "Collusive Market Sharing and Corruption in Procurement," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(4), pages 883-908, December.
- D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure and Pricing - - - Auctions
- H57 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Procurement
- K42 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - Illegal Behavior and the Enforcement of Law
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- John O. Ledyard & David Porter & Antonio Rangel, 1997. "Experiments Testing Multiobject Allocation Mechanisms," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 6(3), pages 639-675, 09.
- Babaioff, Moshe & Feldman, Michal & Nisan, Noam & Winter, Eyal, 2012. "Combinatorial agency," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 147(3), pages 999-1034.
- repec:hal:cesptp:hal-00512813 is not listed on IDEAS
- Yasunori Okumura, 2011. "A dynamic analysis of collusive networks," Review of Economic Design, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 317-336, December.
- Balsevich, A. & Pivovarova, S. & Podkolzina, E., 2012. "The Role of Information Transparency in Public Procurement: the Example of Russian Regions," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, vol. 15(3), pages 82-112.
- Dietrich, Michael & McHardy, Jolian & Sharma, Abhijit, 2010.
"Firm corruption in the presence of an auditor,"
24784, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Michael Dietrich & Jolian McHardy & Abhijit Sharma, 2010. "Firm corruption in the presence of an auditor," Working Papers 2010016, The University of Sheffield, Department of Economics, revised Jul 2010.
- Michael Dietrich & Jolian McHardy & Abhijit Sharma, 2012. "Firm Corruption in the Presence of an Auditor," Working Paper Series 20_12, The Rimini Centre for Economic Analysis.
- Tina Søreide, 2006.
"Beaten by bribery: Why not blow the whistle?,"
CMI Working Papers
WP 2006: 5, CMI (Chr. Michelsen Institute), Bergen, Norway.
- Tina Søreide, 2008. "Beaten by Bribery: Why Not Blow the Whistle?," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 164(3), pages 407-428, September.
- Sonin Konstantin, 2004. "Private interest in public tenders: no revenue, no efficiency and no social benefits," EERC Working Paper Series 00-111e, EERC Research Network, Russia and CIS.
- repec:hal:wpaper:hal-00512813 is not listed on IDEAS
- repec:hal:wpaper:halshs-00590288 is not listed on IDEAS
- Ariane Lambert-Mogiliansky & Grigory Kosenok, 2009. "Fine-Tailored for the Cartel-Favoritism in Procurement," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 95-121, September.
- Arnold, Ulli & Neubauer, Joerg & Schoenherr, Tobias, 2012. "Explicating factors for companies’ inclination towards corruption in Operations and supply chain management: An exploratory study in Germany," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(1), pages 136-147.
- Leonardo Rezende, 2009. "Biased procurement auctions," Economic Theory, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 169-185, January.
- Amaral, Miguel & Saussier, Stéphane & Yvrande-Billon, Anne, 2009. "Auction procedures and competition in public services: The case of urban public transport in France and London," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 166-175, June.
- Ariane Lambert Mogiliansky & Grigory Kosenok, 2006.
"Public Markets Tailored for the Cartel- Favoritism in Procurement Auctions,"
w0074, Center for Economic and Financial Research (CEFIR).
- Ariane Lambert-Mogiliansky & Grigory Kosenok, 2006. "Public markets tailored for the cartel - Favoritism in procurement auctions -," PSE Working Papers halshs-00590288, HAL.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (CCSD).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.