IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/qld/uq2004/672.html

A Secret Worth Keeping? Bid Cap Design in Budget-Constrained Procurement Auctions

Author

Listed:
  • Josephine Auer

    (Department of Economics, MIT, Cambridge)

  • Lana Friesen

    (School of Economics, University of Queensland)

  • Ian A. MacKenzie

    (School of Economics, University of Queensland)

Abstract

This article investigates the existence of bid caps in budget-constrained procurement auctions. We analyze the design and (non)disclosure of a bid cap and how this impacts aggregate market outcomes and strategic bidding behavior in a budget-constrained envi-ronment. We use a laboratory experiment to analyze two potential bid cap designs—a disclosed versus undisclosed bid cap—as well as comparing both to a baseline case without a bid cap. We find adoption of either a disclosed or non-disclosed cap significantly im-proves cost effectiveness. A non-disclosed cap, however, significantly increases the informa-tion rent to participants and, consequently, performs relatively worse than a disclosed cap. We consider two common but distinct auction formats (discriminatory ‘pay-your-bid’ and a uniform price) and show that a discriminatory auction improves cost effectiveness com-pared to a uniform-price auction when the cap is disclosed. Our findings have important policy implications that demonstrate the benefits of implementing bid caps for improving budgetary cost-effectiveness while highlighting potential tradeoffs between efficiency and worsening information rents.

Suggested Citation

  • Josephine Auer & Lana Friesen & Ian A. MacKenzie, 2026. "A Secret Worth Keeping? Bid Cap Design in Budget-Constrained Procurement Auctions," Discussion Papers Series 672, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.
  • Handle: RePEc:qld:uq2004:672
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://economics.uq.edu.au/files/54597/672.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Steven Schilizzi & Uwe Latacz-Lohmann, 2007. "Assessing the Performance of Conservation Auctions: An Experimental Study," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 83(4), pages 497-515.
    2. Stephanie Rosenkranz & Patrick W. Schmitz, 2007. "Reserve Prices in Auctions as Reference Points," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 117(520), pages 637-653, April.
    3. Ben Greiner, 2015. "Subject pool recruitment procedures: organizing experiments with ORSEE," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 1(1), pages 114-125, July.
    4. Schilizzi, Steven & Latacz-Lohmann, Uwe, 2007. "Assessing the performance of conservation auctions: an experimental study," 2007 Conference (51st), February 13-16, 2007, Queenstown, New Zealand 10436, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    5. Marion, Justin, 2007. "Are bid preferences benign? The effect of small business subsidies in highway procurement auctions," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(7-8), pages 1591-1624, August.
    6. Claudio Rottner, 2025. "Auctioning Off Budgets in Procurement," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 56(4), pages 655-667, December.
    7. Sylvain Chassang & Kei Kawai & Jun Nakabayashi & Juan Ortner, 2022. "Robust Screens for Noncompetitive Bidding in Procurement Auctions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 90(1), pages 315-346, January.
    8. Ari Hyytinen & Sofia Lundberg & Otto Toivanen, 2018. "Design of public procurement auctions: evidence from cleaning contracts," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 49(2), pages 398-426, June.
    9. Hellerstein, Daniel & Higgins, Nathaniel, 2010. "The Effective Use of Limited Information: Do Bid Maximums Reduce Procurement Cost in Asymmetric Auctions?," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 39(2), pages 1-17, April.
    10. Tong Li & Xiaoyong Zheng, 2009. "Entry and Competition Effects in First-Price Auctions: Theory and Evidence from Procurement Auctions," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 76(4), pages 1397-1429.
    11. De Silva, Dakshina G. & Kosmopoulou, Georgia & Lamarche, Carlos, 2009. "The effect of information on the bidding and survival of entrants in procurement auctions," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(1-2), pages 56-72, February.
    12. Uwe Latacz-Lohmann & Carel Van der Hamsvoort, 1997. "Auctioning Conservation Contracts: A Theoretical Analysis and an Application," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(2), pages 407-418.
    13. Sylvain Chassang & Juan Ortner, 2019. "Collusion in Auctions with Constrained Bids: Theory and Evidence from Public Procurement," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 127(5), pages 2269-2300.
    14. Leandro Arozamena & Estelle Cantillon, 2004. "Investment Incentives in Procurement Auctions," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 71(1), pages 1-18.
    15. Catherine C. Eckel & Philip J. Grossman, 2008. "Forecasting Risk Attitudes: An Experimental Study Using Actual and Forecast Gamble Choices," Monash Economics Working Papers archive-01, Monash University, Department of Economics.
    16. Vincent Daniel R., 1995. "Bidding Off the Wall: Why Reserve Prices May Be Kept Secret," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 575-584, April.
    17. Balmford, Ben & Collins, Joseph & Day, Brett & Lindsay, Luke & Peacock, James, 2023. "Pricing rules for PES auctions: Evidence from a natural experiment," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    18. Friesen, Lana & Gangadharan, Lata & Khezr, Peyman & MacKenzie, Ian A., 2022. "Mind your Ps and Qs! Variable allowance supply in the US Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    19. Martin Andreasen, 2010. "How to Maximize the Likelihood Function for a DSGE Model," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 35(2), pages 127-154, February.
    20. Giuseppe Lopomo & Nicola Persico & Alessandro T. Villa, 2023. "Optimal Procurement with Quality Concerns," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 113(6), pages 1505-1529, June.
    21. Tolmasquim, Maurício T. & de Barros Correia, Tiago & Addas Porto, Natália & Kruger, Wikus, 2021. "Electricity market design and renewable energy auctions: The case of Brazil," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    22. repec:adr:anecst:y:1994:i:34:p:04 is not listed on IDEAS
    23. Regina Betz & Ben Greiner & Sascha Schweitzer & Stefan Seifert, 2017. "Auction Format and Auction Sequence in Multi‐item Multi‐unit Auctions: An Experimental Study," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 127(605), pages 351-371, October.
    24. Hellerstein, Daniel M., 2017. "The US Conservation Reserve Program: The evolution of an enrollment mechanism," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 601-610.
    25. Bernard Elyakime & Jean-Jacques Laffont & Patrice Loisel & Quang Vuong, 1994. "First-Price Sealed-Bid Auctions with Secret Reservation Prices," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 34, pages 71-114.
    26. Regina Betz & Ben Greiner & Sascha Schweitzer & Stefan Seifert, 2017. "Auction Format and Auction Sequence in Multi‐item Multi‐unit Auctions: An Experimental Study," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 127(605), pages 351-371, October.
    27. Arozamena, Leandro & Ganuza, Juan-José & Weinschelbaum, Federico, 2023. "Renegotiation, discrimination and favoritism in symmetric procurement auctions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    28. Dutra, Joisa & Menezes, Flavio, 2005. "Lessons from the Electricity Auctions in Brazil," The Electricity Journal, Elsevier, vol. 18(10), pages 11-21, December.
    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. Cramton, Peter & Hellerstein, Daniel & Higgins, Nathaniel & Iovanna, Richard & López-Vargas, Kristian & Wallander, Steven, 2021. "Improving the cost-effectiveness of the Conservation Reserve Program: A laboratory study," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    2. Messer, Kent D. & Duke, Joshua M. & Lynch, Lori & Li, Tongzhe, 2017. "When Does Public Information Undermine the Efficiency of Reverse Auctions for the Purchase of Ecosystem Services?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 212-226.
    3. Bruno Wichmann & Peter Boxall & Scott Wilson & Orsolya Perger, 2018. "Erratum to: Auctioning Risky Conservation Contracts," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 69(2), pages 441-441, February.
    4. Banerjee, Simanti & Conte, Marc N., "undated". "Balancing Complexity and Rent-Seeking in Multi-Attribute Conservation Procurement Auctions: Evidence from a Laboratory Experiment," 2018 Allied Social Sciences Association (ASSA) Annual Meeting, January 5-7, 2018, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 266293, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    5. Thilo W. Glebe, 2022. "The influence of contract length on the performance of sequential conservation auctions," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 104(2), pages 739-764, March.
    6. Boxall, Peter C. & Perger, Orsolya & Packman, Katherine & Weber, Marian, 2017. "An experimental examination of target based conservation auctions," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 592-600.
    7. Harriet Toto Olita & Md. Sayed Iftekhar & Steven G. M. Schilizzi, 2023. "Optimizing contract allocation for risky conservation tenders," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 25(1), pages 63-85, January.
    8. Adrien Coiffard & Raphaële Préget & Mabel Tidball, 2025. "Target versus budget reverse auctions: an online experiment using the strategy method," Post-Print hal-05251684, HAL.
    9. Paul, Laura A. & McGranaghan, Christina & Siders, A.R. & Dineva, Polina K. & Palm-Forster, Leah H. & Messer, Kent D., 2024. "Addressing coordination problems in residential buyouts: Experimental evidence for managed retreat in the face of climate change-related threats," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 226(C).
    10. Marc N. Conte & Robert Griffin, 2019. "Private Benefits of Conservation and Procurement Auction Performance," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 73(3), pages 759-790, July.
    11. 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.
    12. Frans P. Vries & Nick Hanley, 2016. "Incentive-Based Policy Design for Pollution Control and Biodiversity Conservation: A Review," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 63(4), pages 687-702, April.
    13. Onur A. Koska & Frank Stähler, 2017. "When should bidders learn reserve prices?," ERC Working Papers 1712, ERC - Economic Research Center, Middle East Technical University, revised Oct 2017.
    14. Steven Schilizzi & Uwe Latacz-Lohmann, 2012. "Evaluating Conservation Auctions with Unknown Bidder Costs: The Scottish Fishing Vessel Decommissioning Program," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 88(4), pages 658-673.
    15. Jehiel, Philippe & Lamy, Laurent, 2014. "On discrimination in procurement auctions," CEPR Discussion Papers 9790, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    16. Cho, Seong-Hoon & Soh, Moonwon & English, Burton C. & Yu, T. Edward & Boyer, Christopher N., 2019. "Targeting payments for forest carbon sequestration given ecological and economic objectives," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 214-226.
    17. Kotowski, Maciej H., 2018. "On asymmetric reserve prices," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 13(1), January.
    18. Latacz-Lohmann, U. & Schilizzi, S. & Breustedt, G., . "Auctioning outcome-based conservation contracts," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 47.
    19. Schilizzi, Steven & Latacz-Lohmann, Uwe, 2009. "Predicting the performance of conservation tenders when information on bidders's costs is limited," 2009 Conference (53rd), February 11-13, 2009, Cairns, Australia 48171, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    20. Rosar, Frank, 2014. "Secret reserve prices in first-price auctions," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 65-74.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • C92 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Group Behavior
    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Auctions
    • H57 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Procurement

    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:qld:uq2004:672. 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: SOE IT (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/decuqau.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.