IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/ajagec/v98y2016i3p838-859..html

Simultaneous Allocation of Bundled Goods through Auctions: Assessing the Case for Joint Bidding

Author

Listed:
  • Daniel Rondeau
  • Pascal Courty
  • Maurice Doyon

Abstract

We study the costs and benefits of allowing joint bidding in multiple simultaneous first price sealed bid auctions for bundled goods with private values. Joint bidding raises the prospect of higher allocative efficiency but also reduces the number of bidders, resulting in an ambiguous net impact on seller revenue. The research was carried out using laboratory experiments in which groups of up to six buyers competed for eight bundles of two separable goods each. The main results show that in our experimental environment, allowing joint bidding increases efficiency by 11.3% and revenue by 9.4%. The research has immediate applications to the sale of public forest stands that arbor a mixture of species. For this reason, we explore how the results are affected by excess supply, the presence of dominant firms, and the removal of an allocation rule requiring multiple bidders under certain circumstances.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel Rondeau & Pascal Courty & Maurice Doyon, 2016. "Simultaneous Allocation of Bundled Goods through Auctions: Assessing the Case for Joint Bidding," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 98(3), pages 838-859.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:ajagec:v:98:y:2016:i:3:p:838-859.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/ajae/aav041
    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

    for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Jianfu Shen & Frederik Pretorius & Xin Li, 2019. "Does Joint Bidding Reduce Competition? Evidence from Hong Kong Land Auctions," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 58(1), pages 111-132, January.
    2. Zhaoyang Liu & Simanti Banerjee & Timothy N. Cason & Nick Hanley & Qi Liu & Jintao Xu & Andreas Kontoleon, 2024. "Spatially coordinated conservation auctions: A framed field experiment focusing on farmland wildlife conservation in China," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 106(4), pages 1354-1379, August.
    3. Rönnqvist, Mikael & D'Amours, Sophie & Carle, Marc-André & Azouzi, Riadh, 2018. "Timber selling policies using bundle-based auction: The case of public forests in Québec," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 9-18.
    4. Jens Abildtrup & Géraldine Bocquého & Kene Boun My & Anne Stenger & Tuyen Tiet, 2025. "The role of mandatory and voluntary joint bidding in promoting efficiency in conservation auction," Working Papers of BETA 2025-40, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    5. Simanti Banerjee & Timothy N. Cason & Frans P. de Vries & Nick Hanley, 2021. "Spatial Coordination and Joint Bidding in Conservation Auctions," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 8(5), pages 1013-1049.
    6. Beata GAVUROVA & David TUCEK & Andrea TKACOVA & Jakub DANKO, 2018. "Public Procurement Efficiency In Agriculture And Forestry In Slovakia," REVISTA ADMINISTRATIE SI MANAGEMENT PUBLIC, Faculty of Administration and Public Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 2018(30), pages 24-36, June.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • Q23 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Forestry
    • Q28 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Government Policy
    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Auctions
    • D47 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Market Design

    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:oup:ajagec:v:98:y:2016:i:3:p:838-859.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.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.