IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/manchs/v91y2023i4p320-335.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does surround‐bidding corruption hurt procurers?

Author

Listed:
  • Yuanzhu Lu
  • Xundong Yin
  • Hu Zhang

Abstract

We consider a model of corruption in the form of surround‐bidding in a first‐price procurement auction in which bidders' private cost follows uniform distribution. We find that the briber's high‐price bidding function is less aggressive than honest suppliers' while his low‐price one is more aggressive. As the bribery cost increases, both the briber's low‐price and high‐price bidding functions become less aggressive. The winning probability and expected profit of the briber increase, while the winning probability and expected profit of honest suppliers decrease. Surprisingly, although the briber's high‐price bid may be the winning bid, which is harmful to the procurer, the procurer's expected payment decreases, that is, the procurer benefits from surround‐bidding corruption, because the benefit due to more intense competition outweighs the harm caused by the briber's high‐price bid.

Suggested Citation

  • Yuanzhu Lu & Xundong Yin & Hu Zhang, 2023. "Does surround‐bidding corruption hurt procurers?," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 91(4), pages 320-335, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:manchs:v:91:y:2023:i:4:p:320-335
    DOI: 10.1111/manc.12432
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/manc.12432
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/manc.12432?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lengwiler, Yvan & Wolfstetter, Elmar, 2010. "Auctions and corruption: An analysis of bid rigging by a corrupt auctioneer," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 34(10), pages 1872-1892, October.
    2. Huang, Yangguang, 2019. "An empirical study of scoring auctions and quality manipulation corruption," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    3. Ariane Lambert‐Mogiliansky & Konstantin Sonin, 2006. "Collusive Market Sharing and Corruption in Procurement," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(4), pages 883-908, December.
    4. O. Compte & A. Lambert-Mogiliansky & T. Verdier, 2005. "Corruption and Competition in Procurement Auctions," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 36(1), pages 1-15, Spring.
    5. Maxim Mironov & Ekaterina Zhuravskaya, 2016. "Corruption in Procurement and the Political Cycle in Tunneling: Evidence from Financial Transactions Data," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 8(2), pages 287-321, May.
    6. Arozamena, Leandro & Weinschelbaum, Federico, 2009. "The effect of corruption on bidding behavior in first-price auctions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(6), pages 645-657, August.
    7. Hongbin Cai & J. Vernon Henderson & Qinghua Zhang, 2013. "China's land market auctions: evidence of corruption?," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 44(3), pages 488-521, September.
    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. Burguet Roberto & Perry Martin K, 2007. "Bribery and Favoritism by Auctioneers in Sealed-Bid Auctions," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 7(1), pages 1-27, June.
    10. Roberto Burguet, 2017. "Procurement Design with Corruption," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 9(2), pages 315-341, May.
    11. Porter, Robert H & Zona, J Douglas, 1993. "Detection of Bid Rigging in Procurement Auctions," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 101(3), pages 518-538, June.
    12. Bernard Caillaud & Ariane Lambert-Mogiliansky, 2021. "Accountability to Contain Corruption in Procurement Tenders," Post-Print halshs-03029899, HAL.
    13. Steven Tadelis, 2009. "Auctions Versus Negotiations in Procurement: An Empirical Analysis," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 25(2), pages 372-399, October.
    14. Lisa Chever & Stéphane Saussier & Anne Yvrande-Billon, 2017. "The law of small numbers: investigating the benefits of restricted auctions for public procurement," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(42), pages 4241-4260, September.
    15. Elena Krasnokutskaya & Katja Seim, 2011. "Bid Preference Programs and Participation in Highway Procurement Auctions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(6), pages 2653-2686, October.
    16. Bernard Caillaud & Ariane Lambert-Mogiliansky, 2021. "Accountability to Contain Corruption in Procurement Tenders," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 37(1), pages 41-67.
    17. Bernard Caillaud & Ariane Lambert-Mogiliansky, 2021. "Accountability to Contain Corruption in Procurement Tenders," PSE-Ecole d'économie de Paris (Postprint) halshs-03029899, HAL.
    18. Huang, Yangguang & Xia, Jijun, 2019. "Procurement auctions under quality manipulation corruption," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 380-399.
    19. Ariane Lambert‐Mogiliansky & Konstantin Sonin, 2006. "Collusive Market Sharing and Corruption in Procurement," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(4), pages 883-908, December.
    20. Ferraro, Paul J., 2008. "Asymmetric information and contract design for payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 810-821, May.
    21. Menezes, Flavio M. & Monteiro, Paulo Klinger, 2006. "Corruption and auctions," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 97-108, February.
    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. Helene Mass & Nicolas Fugger & Vitali Gretschko & Achim Wambach, 2020. "Imitation Perfection—A Simple Rule to Prevent Discrimination in Procurement," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 12(3), pages 189-245, August.
    2. Huang, He & Li, Zhipeng, 2015. "Procurement auctions with ex-ante endogenous bribery," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 111-117.
    3. Xiaoshuai Fan & Ying‐Ju Chen & Christopher S. Tang, 2021. "To Bribe or Not in a Procurement Auction under Disparate Corruption Pressure," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(5), pages 1220-1245, May.
    4. Eshien Chong & Carine Staropoli & Anne Yvrande-Billon, 2014. "Auction versus Negotiation in Public Procurement: Looking for Empirical Evidence," Post-Print hal-00512813, HAL.
    5. Amaral, Miguel & Saussier, Stéphane & Yvrande-Billon, Anne, 2009. "Auction procedures and competition in public services: The case of urban public transport in France and London," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 166-175, June.
    6. Nicolas Campos & Eduardo Engel & Ronald D. Fischer & Alexander Galetovic, 2019. "Renegotiations and corruption in infrastructure: The Odebrecht case," "Marco Fanno" Working Papers 0230, Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche "Marco Fanno".
    7. Roberto Burguet, 2017. "Procurement Design with Corruption," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 9(2), pages 315-341, May.
    8. Fonseca-Mairena, María Haydée & Triossi, Matteo, 2019. "Incentives and implementation in marriage markets with externalities," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    9. José García-Montalvo & Juan-José Ganuza & Roberto Burguet, 2016. "The Microeconomics of Corruption. A Review of Thirty Years of Research," Working Papers 908, Barcelona School of Economics.
    10. Andrea Bafundi & Riccardo Camboni & Edoardo Grillo & Paola Valbonesi, 2023. "Public Procurement and the Risk of Severe Weather Events," "Marco Fanno" Working Papers 0303, Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche "Marco Fanno".
    11. 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.
    12. Anna Balsevich & Elena Podkolzina, 2014. "Indicators Of Corruption In Public Procurement: The Example Of Russian Regions," HSE Working papers WP BRP 76/EC/2014, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    13. repec:hal:wpaper:hal-00512813 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Dastidar, Krishnendu Ghosh & Jain, Sonakshi, 2023. "Favouritism and corruption in procurement auctions," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 10-24.
    15. Huang, Yangguang, 2019. "An empirical study of scoring auctions and quality manipulation corruption," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    16. Arozamena, Leandro & Weinschelbaum, Federico, 2009. "The effect of corruption on bidding behavior in first-price auctions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(6), pages 645-657, August.
    17. Hiroshi Ohashi, 2009. "Effects of Transparency in Procurement Practices on Government Expenditure: A Case Study of Municipal Public Works," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 34(3), pages 267-285, May.
    18. Sümeyra Atmaca, 2020. "Application Period in Reverse Auctions," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 20/993, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    19. Vitali Gretschko & Achim Wambach, 2012. "Auctions vs. Negotiations: The Case of Favoritism," CESifo Working Paper Series 4045, CESifo.
    20. Minbo Xu & Daniel Z. Li, 2019. "Equilibrium competition, social welfare and corruption in procurement auctions," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 53(3), pages 443-465, October.
    21. Detkova, Polina & Tkachenko, Andrey & Yakovlev, Andrei, 2021. "Gender heterogeneity of bureaucrats in attitude to corruption: Evidence from list experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 217-233.

    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:bla:manchs:v:91:y:2023:i:4:p:320-335. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/semanuk.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.