IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/aoz/wpaper/248.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Is Collusion-proof Procurement Expensive?

Author

Listed:
  • Gaurab Aryal

    (University of Chicago)

  • Maria Florencia Gabrielli

    (Universidad Nacional de Cuyo/CONICET)

Abstract

Collusion adversely affects procurement cost and efficiency. It is hard to quantify just how prevalent collusion is, but it’s safe to assume that there’s a lot of collusion going on. Detecting collusion from (just) bid data is hard so the extent of the damages can never be known. A natural response would have been to use collusion-proof procurement, yet, such auctions are hardly used. Why? Using California highway procurements data, we estimate the extra cost of implementing a collusion-proof auction to be anywhere between 1.6% to 5%. Even after we factor in the marginal excess burden of taxes needed to finance the expenses, the cost ranges between 2.08% and 6.5%, which is too small to be the answer. Since other than cost there is no obvious answer, this shows that there is a lacuna in the empirical auction literature.

Suggested Citation

  • Gaurab Aryal & Maria Florencia Gabrielli, 2023. "Is Collusion-proof Procurement Expensive?," Working Papers 248, Red Nacional de Investigadores en Economía (RedNIE).
    • Handle: RePEc:aoz:wpaper:248
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://rednie.eco.unc.edu.ar/files/DT/248.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. Feinstein, Jonathan S & Block, Michael K & Nold, Frederick C, 1985. "Asymmetric Information and Collusive Behavior in Auction Markets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(3), pages 441-460, June.
    3. 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.
    4. Gaurab Aryal & Maria F. Gabrielli & Quang Vuong, 2021. "Semiparametric Estimation of First-Price Auction Models," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(2), pages 373-385, March.
    5. Jerry Green & Jean-Jacques Laffont, 1979. "On Coalition Incentive Compatibility," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 46(2), pages 243-254.
    6. Alberto Abadie & Guido W. Imbens, 2006. "Large Sample Properties of Matching Estimators for Average Treatment Effects," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 74(1), pages 235-267, January.
    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. Gaurab Aryal & Maria F. Gabrielli, 2015. "Is Collusion-Proof Procurement Expensive?," Papers 1508.05353, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2020.
    2. Gabrielli, M. Florencia & Willington, Manuel, 2023. "Estimating damages from bidding rings in first-price auctions," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    3. Aryal, Gaurab & Gabrielli, Maria F., 2012. "Is Collusion Proof Auction Expensive? Estimates from Highway Procurements," MPRA Paper 57353, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 19 Feb 2014.
    4. Huang, Yangguang, 2019. "An empirical study of scoring auctions and quality manipulation corruption," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    5. 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.
    6. Huber, Martin & Imhof, David, 2019. "Machine learning with screens for detecting bid-rigging cartels," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 277-301.
    7. Nianqing Liu & Yao Luo, 2014. "A Nonparametric Test of Exogenous Participation in First-Price Auctions," Working Papers tecipa-519, University of Toronto, Department of Economics.
    8. Kaplan, Uma & Marmer, Vadim & Shneyerov, Artyom, 2016. "Identifying Collusion in English Auctions," Microeconomics.ca working papers vadim_marmer-2016-3, Vancouver School of Economics, revised 08 Jul 2017.
    9. David Imhof & Yavuz Karagök & SAMUEL RUTZ, 2017. "Screening for Bid-rigging. Does it Work?," Working Papers 2017-09, CRESE.
    10. 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.
    11. Susan Athey & Jonathan Levin & Enrique Seira, 2011. "Comparing open and Sealed Bid Auctions: Evidence from Timber Auctions," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 126(1), pages 207-257.
    12. Hannes Wallimann & David Imhof & Martin Huber, 2020. "A Machine Learning Approach for Flagging Incomplete Bid-rigging Cartels," Papers 2004.05629, arXiv.org.
    13. Jonathan Levin & Susan Athey & Enrique Seira, 2004. "Comparing Open and Sealed Bid Auctions: Theory and Evidence from Timber Auctions," Working Papers 2004.142, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    14. Riccardo Camboni Marchi Adani & Paola Valbonesi, 2016. "Favouritism in scoring rule auctions," "Marco Fanno" Working Papers 0210, Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche "Marco Fanno".
    15. Imhof, David, 2017. "Simple Statistical Screens to Detect Bid Rigging," FSES Working Papers 484, Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences, University of Freiburg/Fribourg Switzerland.
    16. Imhof, David, 2017. "Econometric tests to detect bid-rigging cartels: does it work?," FSES Working Papers 483, Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences, University of Freiburg/Fribourg Switzerland.
    17. Hannes Wallimann & David Imhof & Martin Huber, 2023. "A Machine Learning Approach for Flagging Incomplete Bid-Rigging Cartels," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 62(4), pages 1669-1720, December.
    18. Lucija Muehlenbachs & Elisheba Spiller & Christopher Timmins, 2015. "The Housing Market Impacts of Shale Gas Development," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(12), pages 3633-3659, December.
    19. van de Walle, Dominique & Mu, Ren, 2007. "Fungibility and the flypaper effect of project aid: Micro-evidence for Vietnam," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(2), pages 667-685, November.
    20. de Brauw, Alan & Gilligan, Daniel O. & Hoddinott, John & Roy, Shalini, 2014. "The Impact of Bolsa Família on Women’s Decision-Making Power," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 487-504.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Procurements; Collusion-Proof Auction; Local Polynomial Estimator;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C1 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General
    • C4 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics
    • C7 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory
    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Auctions
    • L4 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies

    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:aoz:wpaper:248. 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: Laura Inés D Amato (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/redniar.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.