IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Collusive Market Sharing and Corruption in Procurement


  • Ariane Lambert-Mogiliansky
  • Konstantin Sonin


"This 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, that is, 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." Copyright 2006, The Author(s) Journal Compilation (c) 2006 Blackwell Publishing.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:jemstr:v:15:y:2006:i:4:p:883-908

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    File Function: link to full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Babaioff, Moshe & Feldman, Michal & Nisan, Noam & Winter, Eyal, 2012. "Combinatorial agency," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 147(3), pages 999-1034.
    2. 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, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


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

    Cited by:

    1. Leonardo Rezende, 2009. "Biased procurement auctions," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 38(1), pages 169-185, January.
    2. repec:hal:wpaper:hal-00512813 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. repec:hal:journl:hal-00512813 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Ariane Lambert-Mogiliansky & Grigory Kosenok, 2009. "Fine-Tailored for the Cartel-Favoritism in Procurement," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 35(1), pages 95-121, September.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. Eshien Chong & Carine Staropoli & Anne Yvrande-Billon, 2014. "Auction versus Negotiation in Public Procurement: Looking for Empirical Evidence," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-00512813, HAL.
    8. Yasunori Okumura, 2011. "A dynamic analysis of collusive networks," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 15(4), pages 317-336, December.
    9. 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.
    10. repec:eee:ecosys:v:41:y:2017:i:1:p:52-67 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. repec:clh:resear:v:2:y:2009:i:5 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Gustavo Piga, 2011. "A Fighting Chance Against Corruption in Public Procurement?," Chapters,in: International Handbook on the Economics of Corruption, Volume Two, chapter 5 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. Anna Balsevich & Elena Podkolzina, 2014. "Indicators Of Corruption In Public Procurement: The Example Of Russian Regions," HSE Working papers WP BRP 76/EC/2014, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    16. 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.
    17. Ariane Lambert-Mogiliansky & Grigory Kosenok, 2006. "Public markets tailored for the cartel - Favoritism in procurement auctions -," PSE Working Papers halshs-00590288, HAL.
    18. Ariane Lambert-Mogiliansky, 2011. "Corruption and Collusion: Strategic Complements in Procurement," Chapters,in: International Handbook on the Economics of Corruption, Volume Two, chapter 4 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    19. Avdasheva, Svetlana & Kryuchkova, Polina, 2015. "The ‘reactive’ model of antitrust enforcement: When private interests dictate enforcement actions – The Russian case," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 200-208.
    20. Huang, He & Li, Zhipeng, 2015. "Procurement auctions with ex-ante endogenous bribery," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 111-117.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - 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


    Access and download statistics


    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:bla:jemstr:v:15:y:2006:i:4:p:883-908. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing) or (Christopher F. Baum). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.