IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hhs/umnees/0915.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Policy by Public Procurement: Opportunities and Pitfalls

Author

Listed:
  • Strömbäck, Elon

    (Department of Economics, Umeå School of Business and Economics, Umeå University)

Abstract

In Paper [I], we theoretically assess green public procurement (GPP) as an environmental policy instrument and its ability to lead to the achievement of environmental objectives. Central to our analysis is the extent to which polluting firms choose to adapt to the public sector’s environmental requirements and to invest in greener technologies. Our main finding is that the potential of GPP to function as an objective-effective instrument of environmental policy is limited and can actually be counterproductive. From an environmental policy point of view, it is crucial that GPP aims for environmental standards beyond just the technology of the polluting firms and that it is designed with reference to defined environmental objectives. In Paper [II], we use data on Swedish public procurement auctions for internal regular cleaning service contracts to provide novel empirical evidence regarding GPP and its effect on the potential suppliers’ decision to submit a bid and their probability of being qualified for supplier selection. We find only a weak effect on supplier behavior, and this suggests that GPP, as used in practice, does not live up to its political expectations. However, several environmental criteria appear to be associated with increased complexity, as indicated by the reduced probability of a bid being qualified in the postqualification process. As such, GPP appears to have limited or no potential to function as an environmental policy instrument. In Paper [III], I examine how GPP is organized in Sweden and how the potential suppliers respond to varying buyer market shares using data on Swedish public procurement auctions for internal regular cleaning service contracts. The level of GPP stringency is found to vary systematically across authority types, buyer market share, and political coalition in the relevant council or in Parliament. The results also indicate quite a substantial dispersion in GPP stringency, suggesting a low degree of coordination among contracting authorities when implementing the policy. After controlling for GPP stringency and other covariates, increased buyer market share is associated with a significant increase in the probability of potential suppliers submitting a bid. The European Commission encourages public authorities to split procurement contracts into multiple contracts in order to increase the competiveness of small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs). In Paper [IV], I use data from Swedish public procurement auctions for internal regular cleaning service contracts to study the effect of contract size and number of contracts on SME participation and probability of winning. The results indicate that SME participation is negatively related to both contract size and the number of contracts in the procurement. A possible interpretation is that reduced contract size in order to stimulate SME participation is counteracted by reduced incentives for them to enter into procurements with multiple contracts. Medium-sized firms are also more successful when bidding for smaller contracts relative to large firms. Nevertheless, the results indicate that the award rate for SMEs is positively correlated with the number of contracts in the procurement.

Suggested Citation

  • Strömbäck, Elon, 2015. "Policy by Public Procurement: Opportunities and Pitfalls," Umeå Economic Studies 915, Umeå University, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:hhs:umnees:0915
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.usbe.umu.se/digitalAssets/166/166976_ues915.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mireia Jofre-Bonet & Martin Pesendorfer, 2003. "Estimation of a Dynamic Auction Game," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 71(5), pages 1443-1489, September.
    2. Testa, Francesco & Iraldo, Fabio & Frey, Marco & Daddi, Tiberio, 2012. "What factors influence the uptake of GPP (green public procurement) practices? New evidence from an Italian survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 88-96.
    3. Edler, Jakob & Georghiou, Luke, 2007. "Public procurement and innovation--Resurrecting the demand side," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(7), pages 949-963, September.
    4. Henrik Christoffersen & Martin Paldam & Allan Würtz, 2007. "Public versus private production and economies of scale," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 130(3), pages 311-328, March.
    5. Elena Krasnokutskaya & Katja Seim, 2011. "Bid Preference Programs and Participation in Highway Procurement Auctions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(6), pages 2653-2686, October.
    6. John Asker & Estelle Cantillon, 2010. "Procurement when price and quality matter," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(1), pages 1-34, March.
    7. John Asker & Estelle Cantillon, 2008. "Properties of scoring auctions," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(1), pages 69-85, March.
    8. Robert McGuire & Robert Ohsfeldt & T. Cott, 1987. "The determinants of the choice between public and private production of a publicly funded service," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 54(3), pages 211-230, August.
    9. Anthony Heyes, 2009. "Is environmental regulation bad for competition? A survey," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 1-28, August.
    10. De Silva, Dakshina G. & Dunne, Timothy & Kosmopoulou, Georgia & Lamarche, Carlos, 2012. "Disadvantaged business enterprise goals in government procurement contracting: An analysis of bidding behavior and costs," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 377-388.
    11. Tong Li & Xiaoyong Zheng, 2009. "Entry and Competition Effects in First-Price Auctions: Theory and Evidence from Procurement Auctions," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 76(4), pages 1397-1429.
    12. William Vickrey, 1961. "Counterspeculation, Auctions, And Competitive Sealed Tenders," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 16(1), pages 8-37, March.
    13. John C. Harsanyi, 1967. "Games with Incomplete Information Played by "Bayesian" Players, I-III Part I. The Basic Model," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(3), pages 159-182, November.
    14. Kagel, John H. & Levin, Dan, 1986. "The Winner's Curse and Public Information in Common Value Auctions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(5), pages 894-920, December.
    15. Zhixi Wan & Damian R. Beil, 2009. "RFQ Auctions with Supplier Qualification Screening," Post-Print hal-00471441, HAL.
    16. Tong Li & Isabelle Perrigne & Quang Vuong, 2002. "Structural Estimation of the Affliated Private Value Auction Model," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 33(2), pages 171-193, Summer.
    17. Jofre-Bonet, Mireia & Pesendorfer, Martin, 2000. "Bidding behavior in a repeated procurement auction: A summary," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 44(4-6), pages 1006-1020, May.
    18. Ari Hyytinen & Sofia Lundberg & Otto Toivanen, 2018. "Design of public procurement auctions: evidence from cleaning contracts," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 49(2), pages 398-426, June.
    19. Gian Luigi Albano & Marco Sparro, 2010. "Flexible Strategies for Centralized Public Procurement," Review of Economics and Institutions, Università di Perugia, vol. 1(2).
    20. Tarantini, Mario & Loprieno, Arianna Dominici & Porta, Pier Luigi, 2011. "A life cycle approach to Green Public Procurement of building materials and elements: A case study on windows," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 2473-2482.
    21. McAfee, R. Preston & McMillan, John, 1989. "Government procurement and international trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(3-4), pages 291-308, May.
    22. Samuelson, William F., 1985. "Competitive bidding with entry costs," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 17(1-2), pages 53-57.
    23. Lundberg, Sofia & Marklund, Per-Olov, 2012. "Green Public Procurement as an Environmental Policy Instrument:Cost Effectiveness," Umeå Economic Studies 847, Umeå University, Department of Economics.
    24. William J. Baumol & Wallace E. Oates, 1971. "The Use of Standards and Prices for Protection of the Environment," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Peter Bohm & Allen V. Kneese (ed.), The Economics of Environment, pages 53-65, Palgrave Macmillan.
    25. Dakshina De Silva & Thomas Jeitschko & Georgia Kosmopoulou, 2009. "Entry and Bidding in Common and Private Value Auctions with an Unknown Number of Rivals," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 35(1), pages 73-93, September.
    26. Menezes, Flavio M., 2008. "An Introduction to Auction Theory," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199275991.
    27. Zhixi Wan & Damian R. Beil, 2009. "RFQ Auctions with Supplier Qualification Screening," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 57(4), pages 934-949, August.
    28. Donald B. Marron, 1997. "Buying Green: Government Procurement as an Instrument of Environmental Policy," Public Finance Review, , vol. 25(3), pages 285-305, May.
    29. Milgrom,Paul, 2004. "Putting Auction Theory to Work," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521536721.
    30. 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.
    31. Parikka-Alhola, Katriina, 2008. "Promoting environmentally sound furniture by green public procurement," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1-2), pages 472-485, December.
    32. Tietenberg, T H, 1990. "Economic Instruments for Environmental Regulation," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 6(1), pages 17-33, Spring.
    33. Donald Marron, 2004. "Greener Public Purchasing as an Environmental Policy Instrument," OECD Journal on Budgeting, OECD Publishing, vol. 3(4), pages 71-105.
    34. Levin, Dan & Smith, James L, 1994. "Equilibrium in Auctions with Entry," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(3), pages 585-599, June.
    35. Thomas P. Lyon, 2006. "Does Dual Sourcing Lower Procurement Costs?," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(2), pages 223-252, June.
    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. Sofia Lundberg & Per-Olov Marklund & Elon Strömbäck & David Sundström, 2015. "Using public procurement to implement environmental policy: an empirical analysis," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 17(4), pages 487-520, October.
    2. Seres, G. & Pigon, Adam, 2019. "On the Competitive Effects of Screening in Procurement," Other publications TiSEM 3314c398-ea79-4f74-96f4-8, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    3. Nakabayashi, Jun, 2013. "Small business set-asides in procurement auctions: An empirical analysis," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 28-44.
    4. De Silva, Dakshina G. & Hubbard, Timothy P. & Kosmopoulou, Georgia, 2020. "An evaluation of a bidder training program," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    5. Sofia Lundberg & Per-Olov Marklund & Elon Strömbäck, 2016. "Is Environmental Policy by Public Procurement Effective?," Public Finance Review, , vol. 44(4), pages 478-499, July.
    6. Vivek Bhattacharya & James W. Roberts & Andrew Sweeting, 2014. "Regulating bidder participation in auctions," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 45(4), pages 675-704, December.
    7. Hickman Brent R. & Hubbard Timothy P. & Sağlam Yiğit, 2012. "Structural Econometric Methods in Auctions: A Guide to the Literature," Journal of Econometric Methods, De Gruyter, vol. 1(1), pages 67-106, August.
    8. Ari Hyytinen & Sofia Lundberg & Otto Toivanen, 2018. "Design of public procurement auctions: evidence from cleaning contracts," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 49(2), pages 398-426, June.
    9. Lorentziadis, Panos L., 2016. "Optimal bidding in auctions from a game theory perspective," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 248(2), pages 347-371.
    10. Jehiel, Philippe & Lamy, Laurent, 2014. "On discrimination in procurement auctions," CEPR Discussion Papers 9790, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    11. Matthew Gentry & Tong Li, 2014. "Identification in Auctions With Selective Entry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 82(1), pages 315-344, January.
    12. Deltas, George & Evenett, Simon, 2020. "Language as a barrier to entry: Foreign competition in Georgian public procurement," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    13. Jääskeläinen, Jan & Tukiainen, Janne, 2019. "Anatomy of public procurement," Working Papers 118, VATT Institute for Economic Research.
    14. Kotowski, Maciej H., 2018. "On asymmetric reserve prices," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 13(1), January.
    15. Haoran He & Yefeng Chen, 2021. "Auction mechanisms for allocating subsidies for carbon emissions reduction: an experimental investigation," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 57(2), pages 387-430, August.
    16. Rosa, Benjamin, 2016. "Subcontracting Requirements and the Cost of Government Procurement," MPRA Paper 77392, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Wenzheng Gao & Daiqiang Zhang & Naibao Zhao, 2021. "Uncertainty In Procurement Contracting With Time Incentives," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 62(3), pages 1153-1197, August.
    18. Benjamin V. Rosa, 2019. "Resident Bid Preference, Affiliation, and Procurement Competition: Evidence from New Mexico," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 67(2), pages 161-208, June.
    19. Marmer, Vadim & Shneyerov, Artyom & Xu, Pai, 2013. "What model for entry in first-price auctions? A nonparametric approach," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 176(1), pages 46-58.
    20. Sweeting, Andrew & Bhattacharya, Vivek, 2015. "Selective entry and auction design," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 189-207.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Public Procurement Auction; Environmental Policy; Regulation; Sustainability; Competition; Compliance Cost; Endogenous Entry; Supplier Incentives; Buyer Market Share; Split Award; Small and Medium Sized Enterprises;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Auctions
    • H57 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Procurement
    • O38 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Government Policy
    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy

    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:hhs:umnees:0915. 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: David Skog (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inumuse.html .

    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.