IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ude/wpaper/1703.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Marchas y contramarchas en la concesión de carreteras en Uruguay

Author

Listed:
  • Andrés Pereyra

    (Departmento de Economía, Facultad de Ciencias Sociales, Universidad de la República)

Abstract

Uruguay has allowed private sector participation in road construction, operation and maintenance at the end of the 20th century, specially though the form of concessions. The economic result of these concessions is difficult to be evaluated yet since they are still under execution. However, some difficulties were detected; some of them are related to the incentives generated by the design of the contract of the concession and others to the regulatory design. Concession contracts are incomplete and there must be determined previously the way conflicts are going to be handled. The institutional framework of Uruguay - were judiciary is not effective to resolve economic problems in an efficient manner -, make necessary the regulation of contract execution and to establish the way conflicts are going to be solved. Regulation should generate credibility among investors in a sector were investment is highly specific, and also should protect consumers and tax payers from the capture of the regulator by the concessionaire. In Uruguay concessions were not preceded by fundamental institutional changes, like the separation of the regulatory authority from the office that promotes the activity, making difficult to achieve the objectives of the regulation and making evident the regulatory weakness in the sector. Some key issues for concession contracts design are identified, based in practice and in economic literature. These issues are determinant in the possibility of the achievement of some basic objectives, like choosing the more efficient bidder, getting near economic efficiency, and appropriating the biggest part of the informational rent in auctions. Concessions in Uruguay illustrate the effect of mistakes in contract design. This paper stresses the effects of contract design on the incentive’s scheme, and the effects of these incentives on the strategic behaviour of concessionaires. It also points out that the dimension of the effect of errors in contract design have in the achievement of government objectives is sensitive on the institutional and regulatory design. Indeed, a weak institutional framework increases the negative effects introduced by errors in contracts.Four concessions are working at the present time. They have had some problems but they also have had some positive aspects like the use of variable term instruments despite of the lack of national and international experience in the field. In 2000 the government announced the end of the program of concession and the beginning of the so called Megaconcesión. This is an strategy to finance road maintenance when public budget is constrained due to economic crisis. The Megaconcesión contract introduces a moral hazard problem since the main variable to verify the fulfilment of the contract is unobservable by the regulator and it does not exist incentive to control costs by the concessionaire. This problem could be serious if the Megaconcesión is privatised. Since the regulatory design was not improved and this involves a huge project, the privatisation may introduce great regulatory risks (opportunistic expropriation and capture of the regulator).

Suggested Citation

  • Andrés Pereyra, 2003. "Marchas y contramarchas en la concesión de carreteras en Uruguay," Documentos de Trabajo (working papers) 1703, Department of Economics - dECON.
  • Handle: RePEc:ude:wpaper:1703
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12008/1991
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul Klemperer, 1999. "Auction Theory: A Guide to the Literature," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(3), pages 227-286, July.
    2. Jean Tirole, 1999. "Incomplete Contracts: Where Do We Stand?," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 67(4), pages 741-782, July.
    3. Estache, Antonio & Quesada, Lucia, 2001. "Concession contract renegotiations : some efficiency versus equity dilemmas," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2705, The World Bank.
    4. Nombela, Gustavo & de Rus, Gines, 2001. "Auctions for Infrastructure Concessions with Demand Uncertainty and Unknown Costs," MPRA Paper 12023, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. William M. Dugger, 1996. "The Mechanisms of Governance," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(4), pages 1212-1216, December.
    6. Klemperer, Paul, 1999. " Auction Theory: A Guide to the Literature," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(3), pages 227-86, July.
    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. Grigoriev, A. & Hiller, B. & Marban, S. & Vredeveld, T. & van der Zwaan, G.R.J., 2010. "Dynamic pricing problems with elastic demand," Research Memorandum 053, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    2. Philippe Février & William Roos & Michael Visser, 2005. "The Buyer's Option in Multi‐Unit Ascending Auctions: The Case of Wine Auctions at Drouot," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(4), pages 813-847, December.
    3. Zhang, Ning, 2009. "Market performance and bidders' bidding behavior in the New York Transmission Congestion Contract market," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 61-68, January.
    4. Marco A. Haan & Linda A. Toolsema, 2011. "License Auctions When Winning Bids Are Financed Through Debt," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(2), pages 254-281, June.
    5. Kellermann, Konrad & Balmann, Alfons, 2006. "How Smart Should Farms Be Modeled? Behavioral Foundation of Bidding Strategies in Agent-Based Land Market Models," 2006 Annual Meeting, August 12-18, 2006, Queensland, Australia 25446, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    6. Schamel, Guenter, 2006. "Auction Markets for Specialty Food Products with Geographical Indications," 2006 Annual Meeting, August 12-18, 2006, Queensland, Australia 25606, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    7. Derek Clark & Christian Riis, 2008. "Rational benevolence in small committees," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 134(3), pages 139-146, March.
    8. Daniel Lacker & Kavita Ramanan, 2019. "Rare Nash Equilibria and the Price of Anarchy in Large Static Games," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 44(2), pages 400-422, May.
    9. Maréchal, François & Morand, Pierre-Henri, 2011. "First-price sealed-bid auctions when bidders exhibit different attitudes toward risk," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 113(2), pages 108-111.
    10. Erik Eyster & Matthew Rabin, 2005. "Cursed Equilibrium," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 73(5), pages 1623-1672, September.
    11. Mezzetti, Claudio & Pekec, Aleksandar Sasa & Tsetlin, Ilia, 2008. "Sequential vs. single-round uniform-price auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 591-609, March.
    12. Wedad Elmaghraby, 2005. "The Effect of Asymmetric Bidder Size on an Auction's Performance: Are More Bidders Always Better?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(12), pages 1763-1776, December.
    13. Ranaldo, Angelo & Rossi, Enzo, 2016. "Uniform-price Auctions for Swiss Government Bonds: Origin and Evolution," Working Papers on Finance 1609, University of St. Gallen, School of Finance.
    14. Satterthwaite, Mark A. & Williams, Steven R. & Zachariadis, Konstantinos E., 2014. "Optimality versus practicality in market design: A comparison of two double auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 248-263.
    15. René Caldentey & Gustavo Vulcano, 2007. "Online Auction and List Price Revenue Management," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(5), pages 795-813, May.
    16. Stuart Kells, 2003. "Explaining The Breadth Of Expert Estimate Ranges In Auctions Of Rare Books," Department of Economics - Working Papers Series 873, The University of Melbourne.
    17. Jacob K. Goeree & Theo Offerman, 2003. "Competitive Bidding in Auctions with Private and Common Values," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 113(489), pages 598-613, July.
    18. Marco A. Haan & Lambert Schoonbeek, 2003. "Rent Seeking with Efforts and Bids," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 79(3), pages 215-235, July.
    19. Chonawee Supatgiat & John R. Birge & Rachel Q. Zhang, 2002. "Optimal Bidding Strategies in Non-Sealed Bid Online Auctions of Common Products with Quantity Uncertainty," Game Theory and Information 0211005, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 05 Mar 2003.
    20. Alexander Galetovic & Juan Ricardo Inostroza, 2004. "Transmisión eléctrica y la “ley corta”: por qué licitar es (mucho) mejor que regular (Electricity transmission and the short law: why offering for tender is [much] better than regulation)," Documentos de Trabajo 177, Centro de Economía Aplicada, Universidad de Chile.

    More about this item

    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:ude:wpaper:1703. 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: Andrea Doneschi or the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/derauuy.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.