IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fem/femwpa/2008.49.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Determinants of Suppliers’ Performance in E-Procurement: Evidence from the Italian Government’s E-Procurement Platform

Author

Listed:
  • Gian Luigi Albano

    (Italian Public Procurement Agency (Consip S.p.A.))

  • Federico Dini

    (Italian Public Procurement Agency (Consip S.p.A.))

  • Roberto Zampino

    (Italian Public Procurement Agency (Consip S.p.A.) and University of Bari)

  • Marta Fana

    (University of Rome “Tor Vergata”)

Abstract

Participation of small businesses in the market for public contracts is widely recognized as a key policy issue. It is also commonly held that the adoption of e-procurement solutions can be effective in pursuing such an objective. To this end, we analyze the transactions completed in the period 2004-2007 through the Italian Government’s e-procurement platform, that is, the marketplace managed by the Italian Public Procurement Agency (Consip S.p.A.). Although descriptive statistics indicate that micro suppliers are the most represented group of firms in the marketplace, our econometric treatment provides some evidence that the former are less successful than all other suppliers in getting public contracts. Degree of loyalty with buyers, location and the use of other MEPA negotiation tools, also emerge as relevant factors of success in the e-procurement market.

Suggested Citation

  • Gian Luigi Albano & Federico Dini & Roberto Zampino & Marta Fana, 2008. "The Determinants of Suppliers’ Performance in E-Procurement: Evidence from the Italian Government’s E-Procurement Platform," Working Papers 2008.49, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    • Handle: RePEc:fem:femwpa:2008.49
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://feem-media.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/NDL2008-049.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Freund, Deborah A. & Kniesner, Thomas J. & LoSasso, Anthony T., 1999. "Dealing with the common econometric problems of count data with excess zeros, endogenous treatment effects, and attrition bias," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 7-12, January.
    2. Patrick Bajari & Ali Hortaçsu, 2004. "Economic Insights from Internet Auctions," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(2), pages 457-486, June.
    3. Caillaud, Bernard & Jullien, Bruno, 2003. "Chicken & Egg: Competition among Intermediation Service Providers," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 34(2), pages 309-328, Summer.
    4. Freund, D.A. & Kniesner, T.J. & LoSasso, A.T., 1996. "How Managed Care Affects Medicaid Utilization : A Synthetic Difference-in-Difference Zero-Inflated Count Model," Other publications TiSEM 2ce3c221-d3bc-4f89-9174-c, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    5. Caillaud, Bernard & Jullien, Bruno, 2001. "Competing cybermediaries," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 45(4-6), pages 797-808, May.
    6. Jean-Charles Rochet & Jean Tirole, 2003. "Platform Competition in Two-Sided Markets," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 1(4), pages 990-1029, June.
    7. Bruno Jullien & Alexandre Gaudeul, 2001. "E-commerce. Quelques éléments d'économie industrielle," Revue Économique, Programme National Persée, vol. 52(1), pages 97-117.
    8. A. C. Cameron & P. K. Trivedi & Frank Milne & J. Piggott, 1988. "A Microeconometric Model of the Demand for Health Care and Health Insurance in Australia," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 55(1), pages 85-106.
    9. Cameron, A Colin & Windmeijer, Frank A G, 1996. "R-Squared Measures for Count Data Regression Models with Applications to Health-Care Utilization," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 14(2), pages 209-220, April.
    10. Blundell, Richard & Griffith, Rachel & Van Reenen, John, 1995. "Dynamic Count Data Models of Technological Innovation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 105(429), pages 333-344, March.
    11. Mark Armstrong, 2006. "Competition in two‐sided markets," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 37(3), pages 668-691, September.
    12. Bruno Jullien, 2005. "Two-sided Markets and Electronic Intermediaries," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo, vol. 51(2-3), pages 233-260.
    13. Davutyan, Nurhan, 1989. "Bank failures as Poisson variates," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 333-338.
    14. William H. Greene, 1994. "Accounting for Excess Zeros and Sample Selection in Poisson and Negative Binomial Regression Models," Working Papers 94-10, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business, Department of Economics.
    15. Chrysanthos Dellarocas, 2006. "How Often Should Reputation Mechanisms Update a Trader's Reputation Profile?," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 17(3), pages 271-285, September.
    16. Dimitri,Nicola & Piga,Gustavo & Spagnolo,Giancarlo (ed.), 2006. "Handbook of Procurement," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521870733.
    17. Mark Armstrong Author-Email: mark.armstrong@ucl.ac.uk Author-Workplace-Name: University College of London, 2006. "Competition in Two-Sided Markets," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 37(3), pages 668-691, Autumn.
    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. Albano, Gian Luigi & Dini, Federico & Zampino, Roberto & Fana, Marta, 2008. "The Determinants of Suppliers’ Performance in E-Procurement: Evidence from the Italian Government’s E-Procurement Platform," Privatisation Regulation Corporate Governance Working Papers 37672, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    2. Claude Crampes & Carole Haritchabalet & Bruno Jullien, 2009. "Advertising, Competition And Entry In Media Industries," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(1), pages 7-31, March.
    3. Jonathan Levin, 2011. "The Economics of Internet Markets," Discussion Papers 10-018, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
    4. Henseler, Marco, 2006. "Horizontal versus Vertical Electronic Business-to-Business Marketplaces," MPRA Paper 40853, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Martin Peitz, 2006. "Marktplätze und indirekte Netzwerkeffekte," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 7(3), pages 317-333, August.
    6. Jullien, Bruno, 2004. "Two-Sided Markets and Electronic Intermediation," IDEI Working Papers 295, Institut d'Économie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse.
    7. Jørgen Veisdal, 2020. "The dynamics of entry for digital platforms in two-sided markets: a multi-case study," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 30(3), pages 539-556, September.
    8. Galeotti, Andrea & Moraga-González, José Luis, 2009. "Platform intermediation in a market for differentiated products," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(4), pages 417-428, May.
    9. Charles Angelucci & Julia Cage & Michael Sinkinson, 2020. "Media Competition and News Diets," Sciences Po publications 2020-03, Sciences Po.
    10. Jeon, Doh-Shin & Jullien, Bruno & Klimenko, Mikhail, 2021. "Language, internet and platform competition," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    11. Reisinger, Markus, 2012. "Platform competition for advertisers and users in media markets," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 243-252.
    12. Doh-Shin Jeon & Nikrooz Nasr, 2016. "News Aggregators and Competition among Newspapers on the Internet," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 91-114, November.
    13. Jullien, Bruno, 2010. "Two-Sided B2B Platforms," TSE Working Papers 11-223, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE), revised Mar 2011.
    14. Calvano, Emilio & Polo, Michele, 2021. "Market power, competition and innovation in digital markets: A survey," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    15. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/4ec86lkes59hv9tfv77ld1p5fr is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Renato Gomes & Alessandro Pavan, 2013. "Cross-Subsidization and Matching Design," Discussion Papers 1559, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    17. Marc Ivaldi & Catherine Muller-Vibes, 2018. "The differentiated effect of advertising on readership: evidence from a two-sided market approach," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 29(3), pages 363-376, September.
    18. David S. Evans & Richard Schmalensee, 2005. "The economics of interchange fees and their regulation : an overview," Proceedings – Payments System Research Conferences, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, issue May, pages 73-120.
    19. De Fraja, Gianni & Sákovics, József, 2012. "Exclusive nightclubs and lonely hearts columns: Non-monotone participation in optional intermediation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 84(2), pages 618-632.
    20. Marco Antonielli & Lapo Filistrucchi, 2011. "Collusion and the political differentiation of newspapers," Working Papers 11-26, NET Institute, revised Nov 2011.
    21. Bruno Jullien & Alessandro Pavan, 2013. "Platform Competition under Dispersed Information," Discussion Papers 1568, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    E-Procurement; Small Suppliers; Request For Quotations; Performance; Public Contracts; Count Data;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Auctions
    • H57 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Procurement
    • C16 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Econometric and Statistical Methods; Specific Distributions
    • C25 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Discrete Regression and Qualitative Choice Models; Discrete Regressors; Proportions; Probabilities
    • L25 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Firm Performance

    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:fem:femwpa:2008.49. 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: Alberto Prina Cerai (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/feemmit.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.