IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/iaecre/v11y2005i3p329-34210.1007-s11294-005-6661-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Restrictions on Competition in Municipal Competitive Procurement in Sweden

Author

Listed:
  • Sofia Lundberg

Abstract

The bidding process in public procurement in Sweden is a first-price sealed bid auction. Although there is a competitive effect on the bids in this type of auction, the contracting entity can, through the choice of procurement procedure, restrict the number of bidders. This paper studies this choice and imposes an implementation cost on the contracting entity to motivate such a restriction. The results, based on data for Swedish municipalities, suggest that contract specifications and municipality characteristics (that are assumed to influence the implementation cost) affect the volume of the procurement and the number of bidders but not necessarily the choice of procurement procedure. Copyright International Atlantic Economic Society 2005

Suggested Citation

  • Sofia Lundberg, 2005. "Restrictions on Competition in Municipal Competitive Procurement in Sweden," International Advances in Economic Research, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 11(3), pages 329-342, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:iaecre:v:11:y:2005:i:3:p:329-342:10.1007/s11294-005-6661-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s11294-005-6661-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11294-005-6661-y
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11294-005-6661-y?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gregory Vistnes, 1994. "An Empirical Investigation of Procurement Contract Structures," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 25(2), pages 215-241, Summer.
    2. Dimitri Mardas, 1999. "Tendering procedures and buy-national policies," International Advances in Economic Research, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 5(2), pages 189-203, May.
    3. Wang, Ruqu, 2000. "Bidding and renegotiation in procurement auctions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 44(8), pages 1577-1597, August.
    4. Laffont, Jean-Jacques, 1997. "Game theory and empirical economics: The case of auction data 1," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 1-35, January.
    5. Laffont, Jean-Jacques & Ossard, Herve & Vuong, Quang, 1995. "Econometrics of First-Price Auctions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(4), pages 953-980, July.
    6. 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.
    7. Jofre-Bonet, Mireia & Pesendorfer, Martin, 2000. "Bidding behavior in a repeated procurement auction: A summary," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 44(4-6), pages 1006-1020, May.
    8. Donald, Stephen G & Paarsch, Harry J, 1993. "Piecewise Pseudo-maximum Likelihood Estimation in Empirical Models of Auctions," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 34(1), pages 121-148, February.
    9. Taylor, Curtis R & Wiggins, Steven N, 1997. "Competition or Compensation: Supplier Incentives under the American and Japanese Subcontracting Systems," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 87(4), pages 598-618, September.
    10. Guofu Tan, 1996. "Optimal Procurement Mechanisms for an Informed Buyer," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 29(3), pages 699-716, August.
    11. C. Paul Hallwood, 1996. "A market in action: Fuzzy information and trade-offs between operating rules in the invited tender-bid procurement auction," Journal of Economic Studies, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 23(3), pages 34-43, September.
    12. Levin, Dan & Smith, James L, 1994. "Equilibrium in Auctions with Entry," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(3), pages 585-599, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. 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.
    2. Decio Coviello & Mario Mariniello, 2008. "Does Publicity Affect Competition? Evidence from Discontinuities in Public Procurement Auctions?," Economics Working Papers ECO2008/04, European University Institute.
    3. Mats A. Bergman & Johan Lundberg & Sofia Lundberg & Johan Y. Stake, 2020. "Interactions Across Firms and Bid Rigging," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 56(1), pages 107-130, February.
    4. Bergman, Mats A. & Lundberg, Johan & Lundberg, Sofia & Stake, Johan Y., 2015. "Using spatial econometrics to test for collusive behavior in procurement auction data," Umeå Economic Studies 917, Umeå University, Department of Economics.

    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. repec:kap:iaecre:v:11:y:2005:i:3:p:329-342 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Quang Vuong & Sandra Campo & Isabelle Perrigne, 2003. "Asymmetry in first-price auctions with affiliated private values," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(2), pages 179-207.
    3. Gerard J. van den Berg & Bas van der Klaauw, 2007. "If Winning isn't Everything, why do they keep Score? A Structural Empirical Analysis of Dutch Flower Auctions," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 07-041/3, Tinbergen Institute.
    4. Marleen Marra, 2024. "Estimating and Auction Platform Game with Two-Sided Entry," Working Papers hal-03393068, HAL.
    5. repec:spo:wpecon:info:hdl:2441/5kht5rc22p99sq5tol4efe4ssb is not listed on IDEAS
    6. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/5kht5rc22p99sq5tol4efe4ssb is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Li, Tong, 2009. "Simulation based selection of competing structural econometric models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 148(2), pages 114-123, February.
    8. Patrick Bajari & Ali Hortacsu, 2005. "Are Structural Estimates of Auction Models Reasonable? Evidence from Experimental Data," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 113(4), pages 703-741, August.
    9. Villas-Boas, Sofia B, 2006. "An Introduction to Auctions," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt4tk408vh, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    10. Villas-Boas Sofia B, 2006. "An Introduction to Auctions," Journal of Industrial Organization Education, De Gruyter, vol. 1(1), pages 1-22, December.
    11. 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.
    12. Paul Pezanis-Christou & Andres Romeu, 2002. "Structural Inferences from First-Price Auction Experiments," UFAE and IAE Working Papers 531.02, Unitat de Fonaments de l'Anàlisi Econòmica (UAB) and Institut d'Anàlisi Econòmica (CSIC).
    13. Tong Li, 2005. "Econometrics of first-price auctions with entry and binding reservation prices," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 126(1), pages 173-200, May.
    14. repec:hal:wpspec:info:hdl:2441/5kht5rc22p99sq5tol4efe4ssb is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Zheng, Xiaoyong, 2009. "Quantifying the cost of excess market thickness in timber sale auctions," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 553-566, September.
    16. Kevin Hasker & Robin Sickles, 2010. "eBay in the Economic Literature: Analysis of an Auction Marketplace," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 37(1), pages 3-42, August.
    17. Antonio Estache & Atsushi Iimi, 2012. "Quality or Price? Evidence from ODA-Financed Public Procurement," Public Finance Review, , vol. 40(4), pages 435-469, July.
    18. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/5kht5rc22p99sq5tol4efe4ssb is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Lorentziadis, Panos L., 2016. "Optimal bidding in auctions from a game theory perspective," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 248(2), pages 347-371.
    20. Nathalie Gimenes, 2014. "Econometrics of Ascending Auctions by Quantile Regression," Working Papers, Department of Economics 2014_25, University of São Paulo (FEA-USP).
    21. Nombela, Gustavo & de Rus, Gines, 2001. "Auctions for Infrastructure Concessions with Demand Uncertainty and Unknown Costs," MPRA Paper 12023, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    22. Yusuke Matsuki, 2016. "A Distribution-Free Test of Monotonicity with an Application to Auctions," Working Papers e110, Tokyo Center for Economic Research.
    23. Giovanni Compiani & Philip Haile & Marcelo Sant’Anna, 2020. "Common Values, Unobserved Heterogeneity, and Endogenous Entry in US Offshore Oil Lease Auctions," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 128(10), pages 3872-3912.
    24. Brendstrup, Bjarne & Paarsch, Harry J., 2007. "Semiparametric identification and estimation in multi-object, English auctions," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 141(1), pages 84-108, November.
    25. 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.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    D44; H57; K20;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Auctions
    • H57 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Procurement
    • K20 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - General

    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:kap:iaecre:v:11:y:2005:i:3:p:329-342:10.1007/s11294-005-6661-y. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.