IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pad/wpaper/0210.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Favouritism in scoring rule auctions

Author

Listed:
  • Riccardo Camboni Marchi Adani

    (University of Verona)

  • Paola Valbonesi

    (University of Padova)

Abstract

Scoring rule auctions (SRAs) can be a powerful mechanism to procure complex works or services, when quality matters. However, given the buyer?s discretion in the design of SRAs, favouritism - with its potential positive (i.e. repeated cost-saving interactions) or negative (i.e. corruption) effects on social welfare - can arise. In this paper we empirically document potential favouritism in an original dataset of 196 SRAs for the procurement of canteen services in Italy over the period 2009-2013. We then sketch a simple model highlighting how an SRA with multidimensional quality can be distorted to favour the incumbent bidder winning the competition. Finally, we design and run a new empirical test to verify our theoretical result. We fi?nd that SRAs can be distorted to favour the incumbent bidder, and that the victory of the incumbent is associated with less competition and higher prices; and no effect by quality weight in the scoring function on the winning rebate.

Suggested Citation

  • Riccardo Camboni Marchi Adani & Paola Valbonesi, 2016. "Favouritism in scoring rule auctions," "Marco Fanno" Working Papers 0210, Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche "Marco Fanno".
  • Handle: RePEc:pad:wpaper:0210
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://economia.unipd.it/sites/economia.unipd.it/files/20160210_rev1.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Emmanuel Guerre & Isabelle Perrigne & Quang Vuong, 2000. "Optimal Nonparametric Estimation of First-Price Auctions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(3), pages 525-574, May.
    2. 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.
    3. Marian W. Moszoro & Pablo T. Spiller, 2012. "Third-Party Opportunism and the Nature of Public Contracts," NBER Working Papers 18636, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Francesco Decarolis, 2009. "When the highest bidder loses the auction: theory and evidence from public procurement," Temi di discussione (Economic working papers) 717, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
    5. Yeon-Koo Che, 1993. "Design Competition through Multidimensional Auctions," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 24(4), pages 668-680, Winter.
    6. Gian Luigi Albano & Milo Bianchi & Giancarlo Spagnolo, 2006. "Bid Average Methods in Procurement," Rivista di Politica Economica, SIPI Spa, vol. 96(1), pages 41-62, January-F.
    7. John Asker & Estelle Cantillon, 2010. "Procurement when price and quality matter," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(1), pages 1-34, March.
    8. Stock, James H & Wright, Jonathan H & Yogo, Motohiro, 2002. "A Survey of Weak Instruments and Weak Identification in Generalized Method of Moments," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 20(4), pages 518-529, October.
    9. John Asker & Estelle Cantillon, 2008. "Properties of scoring auctions," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(1), pages 69-85, March.
    10. Luis Garicano & Ignacio Palacios-Huerta & Canice Prendergast, 2005. "Favoritism Under Social Pressure," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 87(2), pages 208-216, May.
    11. Fernando Branco, 1997. "The Design of Multidimensional Auctions," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 28(1), pages 63-81, Spring.
    12. Aryal, Gaurab & Gabrielli, Maria F., 2013. "Testing for collusion in asymmetric first-price auctions," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 26-35.
    13. 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.
    14. Timothy G. Conley & Francesco Decarolis, 2016. "Detecting Bidders Groups in Collusive Auctions," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 8(2), pages 1-38, May.
    15. Arthur Lewbel, 2012. "Using Heteroscedasticity to Identify and Estimate Mismeasured and Endogenous Regressor Models," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(1), pages 67-80.
    16. Pablo T. Spiller, 2009. "An Institutional Theory of Public Contracts: Regulatory Implications," Chapters, in: Claude Ménard & Michel Ghertman (ed.), Regulation, Deregulation, Reregulation, chapter 3, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    17. 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.
    18. Koning, Pierre & van de Meerendonk, Arthur, 2014. "The impact of scoring weights on price and quality outcomes: An application to the procurement of Welfare-to-Work contracts," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 1-14.
    19. Roberto Burguet & Yeon-Koo Che, 2004. "Competitive Procurement with Corruption," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 35(1), pages 50-68, Spring.
    20. Roberto Burguet, 2017. "Procurement Design with Corruption," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 9(2), pages 315-341, May.
    21. Lengwiler, Yvan & Wolfstetter, Elmar G., 2006. "Corruption in Procurement Auctions," Discussion Paper Series of SFB/TR 15 Governance and the Efficiency of Economic Systems 90, Free University of Berlin, Humboldt University of Berlin, University of Bonn, University of Mannheim, University of Munich.
    22. Coviello, Decio & Gagliarducci, Stefano, 2010. "Building Political Collusion: Evidence from Procurement Auctions," IZA Discussion Papers 4939, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    23. Marcelo Olivares & Gabriel Y. Weintraub & Rafael Epstein & Daniel Yung, 2012. "Combinatorial Auctions for Procurement: An Empirical Study of the Chilean School Meals Auction," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(8), pages 1458-1481, August.
    24. Goswami, Mridu Prabal & Wettstein, David, 2016. "Rational bidding in a procurement auction with subjective evaluations," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 60-67.
    25. Dimitri,Nicola & Piga,Gustavo & Spagnolo,Giancarlo (ed.), 2006. "Handbook of Procurement," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521870733.
    26. Francesco Decarolis & Giancarlo Spagnolo & Riccardo Pacini, 2016. "Past Performance and Procurement Outcomes," NBER Working Papers 22814, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    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. Riccardo Camboni Marchi Adani, 2018. "Procuring price and quality using scoring auctions: where do we stand?," Economia e Politica Industriale: Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, Springer;Associazione Amici di Economia e Politica Industriale, vol. 45(1), pages 17-36, 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. Huang, Yangguang, 2019. "An empirical study of scoring auctions and quality manipulation corruption," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    2. Riccardo Camboni Marchi Adani, 2018. "Procuring price and quality using scoring auctions: where do we stand?," Economia e Politica Industriale: Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, Springer;Associazione Amici di Economia e Politica Industriale, vol. 45(1), pages 17-36, March.
    3. Huang, Yangguang & Xia, Jijun, 2019. "Procurement auctions under quality manipulation corruption," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 380-399.
    4. Jorge González Chapela, 2019. "Weight Values, Scoring Rules and Abnormally Low Tenders Criteria in Multidimensional Procurement: Effects on Price," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 228(1), pages 55-81, March.
    5. Zhe Chen, 2021. "The bid orchestration and competitions in scoring procurement auctions," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(7), pages 1718-1729, October.
    6. Wang, Hong, 2020. "Quality manipulation and limit corruption in competitive procurement," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 283(3), pages 1124-1135.
    7. Bergman, Mats & Lundberg, Sofia, 2011. "Tender Evaluation and Award Methodologies in Public Procurement," Umeå Economic Studies 821, Umeå University, Department of Economics.
    8. Peng Hao & Jun-Peng Guo & Eoghan O’Neill & Yong-Heng Shi, 2023. "When Will First-Price Work Well? The Impact of Anti-Corruption Rules on Photovoltaic Power Generation Procurement Auctions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-24, February.
    9. Chandel, Shivangi & Sarkar, Shubhro, 2023. "Corruption in multidimensional procurement auctions under asymmetry," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    10. Jason Allen & Robert Clark & Brent Hickman & Eric Richert, 2019. "Resolving Failed Banks: Uncertainty, Multiple Bidding & Auction Design," Staff Working Papers 19-30, Bank of Canada.
    11. Goswami, Mridu Prabal & Wettstein, David, 2016. "Rational bidding in a procurement auction with subjective evaluations," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 60-67.
    12. Miller, Nathan H., 2014. "Modeling the effects of mergers in procurement," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 201-208.
    13. Hidenori Takahashi, 2018. "Strategic design under uncertain evaluations: structural analysis of design‐build auctions," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 49(3), pages 594-618, September.
    14. Daniel P. Miller, 2014. "Subcontracting and competitive bidding on incomplete procurement contracts," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 45(4), pages 705-746, December.
    15. Robert Clark & Decio Coviello & Jean-Fran�ois Gauthier & Art Shneyerov, 2018. "Bid Rigging and Entry Deterrence in Public Procurement: Evidence from an Investigation into Collusion and Corruption in Quebec," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 34(3), pages 301-363.
    16. Miguel Vazquez & Michelle Hallack, 2017. "Efficiency versus transaction costs in multidimensional auctions: the case of Brazilian oil and gas lease auctions," IEFE Working Papers 94, IEFE, Center for Research on Energy and Environmental Economics and Policy, Universita' Bocconi, Milano, Italy.
    17. 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.
    18. Patrick Bajari & Stephanie Houghton & Steve Tadelis, 2006. "Bidding for Incomplete Contracts: An Empirical Analysis," NBER Working Papers 12051, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Nakabayashi, Jun, 2013. "Small business set-asides in procurement auctions: An empirical analysis," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 28-44.
    20. Stoll, Sebastian & Zöttl, Gregor, 2012. "Information Disclosure in Open Non-Binding Procurement Auctions: an Empirical Study," Discussion Papers in Economics 13112, University of Munich, Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    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:pad:wpaper:0210. 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: Raffaele Dei Campielisi (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dspadit.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.