IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/qed/wpaper/1524.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Auctions vs Negotiations under Corruption: Evidence from Land Sales in China

Author

Listed:
  • Alper Arslan

    (Department of Economics at the University of Texas at San Antonio)

  • Robert Clark

    (Queen's University)

  • Qidi Hu

    (Queen's University)

Abstract

This study investigates whether corruption differentially affects contracting through auctions and negotiations. Using data on Chinese land-market transactions, where corruption is known to be present, we first show that, on average, it exerts similar effects on transactions carried out via auctions and negotiation. However, this finding masks important heterogeneity – auctionsfeaturing healthy competition are less affected by corruption, and significantly less so than negotiation. We then develop a simple model of bidding under the possibility of corruption that rationalizes our findings.

Suggested Citation

  • Alper Arslan & Robert Clark & Qidi Hu, 2025. "Auctions vs Negotiations under Corruption: Evidence from Land Sales in China," Working Paper 1524, Economics Department, Queen's University.
    • Handle: RePEc:qed:wpaper:1524
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econ.queensu.ca/sites/econ.queensu.ca/files/wpaper/qed_wp_1524.pdf
    File Function: First version 2025
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bulow, Jeremy & Klemperer, Paul, 1996. "Auctions versus Negotiations," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(1), pages 180-194, March.
    2. Alexeev, Michael & Song, Yunah, 2013. "Corruption and product market competition: An empirical investigation," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 154-166.
    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. Gentry, Matthew & Stroup, Caleb, 2019. "Entry and competition in takeover auctions," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(2), pages 298-324.
    5. Rose-Ackerman, Susan, 1975. "The economics of corruption," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 4(2), pages 187-203, February.
    6. Decio Coviello & Stefano Gagliarducci, 2017. "Tenure in Office and Public Procurement," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 9(3), pages 59-105, August.
    7. Hammond, Robert G., 2010. "Comparing revenue from auctions and posted prices," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 1-9, January.
    8. Ruqu Wang, 1998. "Auctions versus Posted-Price Selling: The Case of Correlated Private Valuations," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 31(2), pages 395-410, May.
    9. Kent D Daniel & David Hirshleifer, 2018. "A Theory of Costly Sequential Bidding [Strategic jump bidding in English auctions]," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 22(5), pages 1631-1665.
    10. Gentry, Matthew & Komarova, Tatiana & Schiraldi, Pasquale, 2023. "Preferences and performance in simultaneous first-price auctions: a structural analysis," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 115627, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    11. Armstrong, Mark & Porter, Robert, 2007. "Preface to the Handbook of Industrial Organization, Volume 3," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: Mark Armstrong & Robert Porter (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 0, pages 00, Elsevier.
    12. Riley, John G, 1979. "Informational Equilibrium," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(2), pages 331-359, March.
    13. Liran Einav & Chiara Farronato & Jonathan Levin & Neel Sundaresan, 2018. "Auctions versus Posted Prices in Online Markets," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 126(1), pages 178-215.
    14. Hessami, Zohal, 2014. "Political corruption, public procurement, and budget composition: Theory and evidence from OECD countries," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 372-389.
    15. Victor Manuel Bennett & Lamar Pierce & Jason A. Snyder & Michael W. Toffel, 2013. "Customer-Driven Misconduct: How Competition Corrupts Business Practices," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(8), pages 1725-1742, August.
    16. Celentani, Marco & Ganuza, Juan-Jose, 2002. "Corruption and competition in procurement," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(7), pages 1273-1303, July.
    17. Heckman, James, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
    18. Thomas R. Covert & Richard L. Sweeney, 2023. "Relinquishing Riches: Auctions versus Informal Negotiations in Texas Oil and Gas Leasing," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 113(3), pages 628-663, March.
    19. Mark Armstrong & Robert Porter (ed.), 2007. "Handbook of Industrial Organization," Handbook of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 3, number 1.
    20. Matthew Gentry & Tatiana Komarova & Pasquale Schiraldi, 2023. "Preferences and Performance in Simultaneous First-Price Auctions: A Structural Analysis," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 90(2), pages 852-878.
    21. Clarke, George R. G. & Xu, Lixin Colin, 2004. "Privatization, competition, and corruption: how characteristics of bribe takers and payers affect bribes to utilities," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(9-10), pages 2067-2097, August.
    22. Ferenc Szucs, 2024. "Discretion and Favoritism in Public Procurement," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 22(1), pages 117-160.
    23. Kei Kawai & Jun Nakabayashi, 2022. "Detecting Large-Scale Collusion in Procurement Auctions," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 130(5), pages 1364-1411.
    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. Aaltio, Aapo & Buri, Riku & Jokelainen, Antto & Lundberg, Johan, 2025. "Complementary bidding and cartel detection: Evidence from Nordic asphalt markets," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    2. Syngjoo Choi & Lars Nesheim & Imran Rasul, 2016. "Reserve Price Effects In Auctions: Estimates From Multiple Regression-Discontinuity Designs," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 54(1), pages 294-314, January.
    3. TANG, Wei & WANG, Yuan & WU, Jiameng, 2025. "Local favoritism in China's public procurement: Information frictions or incentive distortion?," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    4. Palguta, Ján, 2019. "Political representation and public contracting: Evidence from municipal legislatures," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 411-431.
    5. Chiappinelli, Olga, 2020. "Political corruption in the execution of public contracts," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 116-140.
    6. Seung-Hyun Lee & Kyeungrae Oh & Lorraine Eden, 2010. "Why Do Firms Bribe?," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 50(6), pages 775-796, December.
    7. Alexander Maslov, 2023. "Auctions versus posted prices in the revenue management of limited inventory," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 44(3), pages 1476-1490, April.
    8. Gokalp, Omer N. & Lee, Seung-Hyun & Peng, Mike W., 2017. "Competition and corporate tax evasion: An institution-based view," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 258-269.
    9. Eugen Dimant & Guglielmo Tosato, 2018. "Causes And Effects Of Corruption: What Has Past Decade'S Empirical Research Taught Us? A Survey," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(2), pages 335-356, April.
    10. Gauthier, Bernard & Goyette, Jonathan & Kouamé, Wilfried A.K., 2021. "Why do firms pay bribes? Evidence on the demand and supply sides of corruption in developing countries," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 190(C), pages 463-479.
    11. Marina Cavalieri & Calogero Guccio & Domenico Lisi & Ilde Rizzo, 2020. "Does Institutional Quality Matter for Infrastructure Provision? A Non-parametric Analysis for Italian Municipalities," Italian Economic Journal: A Continuation of Rivista Italiana degli Economisti and Giornale degli Economisti, Springer;Società Italiana degli Economisti (Italian Economic Association), vol. 6(3), pages 521-562, November.
    12. Anirudh Shingal, 2015. "Econometric Analyses of Home Bias in Government Procurement," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(1), pages 188-219, February.
    13. Christopher Boyer & B. Brorsen & Tong Zhang, 2014. "Common-value auction versus posted-price selling: an agent-based model approach," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer;Society for Economic Science with Heterogeneous Interacting Agents, vol. 9(1), pages 129-149, April.
    14. Subhasish M. Chowdhury & Debabrata Datta & Souvik Dhar, 2019. "Auction Versus Posted Price Mechanisms in Online Sales: The Roles of Impatience and Dissuasion," Studies in Microeconomics, , vol. 7(1), pages 75-88, June.
    15. Yuen Leng Chow & Isa E. Hafalir & Abdullah Yavas, 2015. "Auction versus Negotiated Sale: Evidence from Real Estate Sales," Real Estate Economics, American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association, vol. 43(2), pages 432-470, June.
    16. Walter Beckert, 2004. "Dynamic Monopolies with Stochastic Demand," Birkbeck Working Papers in Economics and Finance 0404, Birkbeck, Department of Economics, Mathematics & Statistics.
    17. Ajay Bhaskarabhatla & Priyatam Anurag & Chirantan Chatterjee & Enrico Pennings, 2021. "How Does Regulation Impact Strategic Repositioning by Firms Across Submarkets? Evidence from the Indian Pharmaceutical Industry," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(3), pages 209-227, September.
    18. Weeds, Helen, 2012. "Advertising and the Distribution of Content," CEPR Discussion Papers 9079, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    19. Andres Gonzalez-Lira & Michael S. Walker & Rodrigo Carril, 2022. "Competition under Incomplete Contracts and the Design of Procurement Policies," Working Papers 1327, Barcelona School of Economics.
    20. Robert E. Hall, 2012. "The Cyclical Response of Advertising Refutes Counter-Cyclical Profit Margins in Favor of Product-Market Frictions," NBER Working Papers 18370, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    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:qed:wpaper:1524. 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: Mark Babcock (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/qedquca.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.