IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hhs/umnees/0917.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Using spatial econometrics to test for collusive behavior in procurement auction data

Author

Listed:

Abstract

In this paper we evaluate whether spatial econometric techniques can be used to test for collusive bidder behavior in public procurement auctions, using the submitted bids and procurement characteristics. The proposed method is applied to the so-called Swedish asphalt cartel, which was discovered in 2001. As our dataset covers the period 1995-2009, we are able to test for conditional independence between complementary cartel bids before and after the detection. Our estimates show a significant positive correlation between complementary cartel bids during the cartel period, whereas a non-significant (and negative) correlation is shown during the later period. The parameter estimate of interest also differs in magnitude between periods. Hence, we argue that the method suggested can be used to verify or possibly screen for collusive bidding behavior. The main advantage of this method is its relatively small data requirements.

Suggested Citation

  • Bergman, Mats A. & Lundberg, Johan & Lundberg, Sofia & Stake, Johan Y., 2015. "Using spatial econometrics to test for collusive behavior in procurement auction data," Umeå Economic Studies 917, Umeå University, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:hhs:umnees:0917
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.usbe.umu.se/digitalAssets/172/172294_ues917.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pim Heijnen & Marco A. Haan & Adriaan R. Soetevent, 2015. "Screening for collusion: a spatial statistics approach," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 15(2), pages 417-448.
    2. van Damme, E.E.C. & Börgers, T., 2003. "Auction Theory for Auction Design," Other publications TiSEM b04d61c2-a33b-4df4-b39b-0, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    3. Srabana Gupta, 2001. "The Effect of Bid Rigging on Prices: A Study of the Highway Construction Industry," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 19(4), pages 451-465, December.
    4. Cramton Peter & Schwartz Jesse A, 2002. "Collusive Bidding in the FCC Spectrum Auctions," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 1(1), pages 1-20, December.
    5. Cramton, Peter & Schwartz, Jesse A, 2000. "Collusive Bidding: Lessons from the FCC Spectrum Auctions," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 229-252, May.
    6. Robert H. Porter & J. Douglas Zona, 1999. "Ohio School Milk Markets: An Analysis of Bidding," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 30(2), pages 263-288, Summer.
    7. Steven Tadelis, 2009. "Auctions Versus Negotiations in Procurement: An Empirical Analysis," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 25(2), pages 372-399, October.
    8. In Lee, 1999. "Non-cooperative Tacit Collusion, Complementary Bidding and Incumbency Premium," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 15(2), pages 115-134, September.
    9. Patrick Bajari & Lixin Ye, 2003. "Deciding Between Competition and Collusion," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 85(4), pages 971-989, November.
    10. Anders Lunander & Sofia Lundberg, 2013. "Bids And Costs In Combinatorial And Noncombinatorial Procurement Auctions—Evidence From Procurement Of Public Cleaning Contracts," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 31(4), pages 733-745, October.
    11. Porter, Robert H & Zona, J Douglas, 1993. "Detection of Bid Rigging in Procurement Auctions," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 101(3), pages 518-538, June.
    12. In Lee & Kyungdong Hahn, 2002. "Bid-Rigging in Auctions for Korean Public-Works Contracts and Potential Damage," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 21(1), pages 73-88, August.
    13. Froeb, Luke M. & Koyak, Robert A. & Werden, Gregory J., 1993. "What is the effect of bid-rigging on prices?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 42(4), pages 419-423.
    14. Martin Pesendorfer, 2000. "A Study of Collusion in First-Price Auctions," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 67(3), pages 381-411.
    15. Janssen,Maarten (ed.), 2004. "Auctioning Public Assets," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521537575.
    16. Janssen,Maarten (ed.), 2004. "Auctioning Public Assets," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521830591.
    17. Robert Porter, 2005. "Detecting Collusion," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 26(2), pages 147-167, December.
    18. Marc S. Robinson, 1985. "Collusion and the Choice of Auction," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 16(1), pages 141-145, Spring.
    19. Sofia Lundberg, 2005. "Restrictions on Competition in Municipal Competitive Procurement in Sweden," International Advances in Economic Research, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 11(3), pages 329-342, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Johan Lundberg, 2017. "On cartel detection and Moran’s I," Letters in Spatial and Resource Sciences, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 129-139, March.

    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. Mats A. Bergman & Johan Lundberg & Sofia Lundberg & Johan Y. Stake, 2020. "Interactions Across Firms and Bid Rigging," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 56(1), pages 107-130, February.
    2. Paul Klemperer, 2007. "Bidding Markets," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 3(1), pages 1-47.
    3. David Barrus & Frank Scott, 2020. "Single Bidders and Tacit Collusion in Highway Procurement Auctions," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 68(3), pages 483-522, September.
    4. Seoyun Hong & Chang Sik Kim & Hyunchul Kim, 2022. "Measuring the Effects of Bid-Rigging on Prices with Binary Misclassification," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 61(3), pages 319-339, November.
    5. Cerrone, Claudia & Hermstrüwer, Yoan & Robalo, Pedro, 2021. "Debarment and collusion in procurement auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 114-143.
    6. Joseph E. Harrington, Jr, 2005. "Detecting Cartels," Economics Working Paper Archive 526, The Johns Hopkins University,Department of Economics.
    7. Lamy, Laurent, 2012. "The econometrics of auctions with asymmetric anonymous bidders," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 167(1), pages 113-132.
    8. Clark, Robert & Coviello, Decio & de Leverano, Adriano, 2020. "Complementary bidding and the collusive arrangement: Evidence from an antitrust investigation," ZEW Discussion Papers 20-052, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    9. Loyola, Gino, 2008. "On bidding markets: the role of competition," UC3M Working papers. Economics we083318, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Economía.
    10. Hiroshi Ohashi, 2009. "Effects of Transparency in Procurement Practices on Government Expenditure: A Case Study of Municipal Public Works," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 34(3), pages 267-285, May.
    11. de Leverano, Adriano, 2019. "Collusion through market sharing agreements: Evidence from Quebec's road paving market," ZEW Discussion Papers 19-053, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    12. Hannes Wallimann & David Imhof & Martin Huber, 2020. "A Machine Learning Approach for Flagging Incomplete Bid-rigging Cartels," Papers 2004.05629, arXiv.org.
    13. Rieko Ishii, 2007. "Collusion in Repeated Procurement Auction: a Study of Paving Market in Japan," Discussion Papers in Economics and Business 07-16, Osaka University, Graduate School of Economics.
    14. Patrick Bajari & Garrett Summers, "undated". "Detecting Collusion in Procurement Auctions: A Selective Survey of Recent Research," Working Papers 01014, Stanford University, Department of Economics.
    15. Rieko Ishii, 2014. "Bid Roundness Under Collusion in Japanese Procurement Auctions," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 44(3), pages 241-254, May.
    16. Ilya Morozov & Elena Podkolzina, 2013. "Collusion detection in procurement auctions," HSE Working papers WP BRP 25/EC/2013, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    17. Biran, Omer, 2011. "Mécanismes d'échange en présence d'externalités," Economics Thesis from University Paris Dauphine, Paris Dauphine University, number 123456789/7238 edited by Forges, Françoise.
    18. Kang, Chao-Chung & Lee, Tsun-Siou & Huang, Szu-Chi, 2013. "Royalty bargaining in Public–Private Partnership projects: Insights from a theoretic three-stage game auction model," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 1-14.
    19. Jan Palguta, 2013. "Nonlinear Incentive Schemes and Corruption in Public Procurement: Evidence from the Czech Republic," CERGE-EI Working Papers wp483, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague.
    20. Wang, Hong, 2017. "Information acquisition versus information manipulation in multi-period procurement markets," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 48-59.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Antitrust; Auction; Cartel; Collusion; Complementary bidding; Public procurement; Spatial econometrics; Road re-pavement;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Auctions
    • H57 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Procurement
    • L10 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - General
    • L40 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - General

    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:0917. 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.