IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/soecon/v91y2025i3p915-968.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Discretion and political favoritism: Evidence from two reforms in public procurement

Author

Listed:
  • Marly Tatiana Celis Galvez
  • Vitezslav Titl
  • Fredo Schotanus

Abstract

The misuse of bureaucratic discretion in public procurement risks political favoritism and corruption. Discretionary thresholds regulate this, with lenient rules below and strict oversight above these thresholds. We examine the impact of changes in these thresholds in the Czech Republic in 2012 and 2016 on discretion misuse and market competition, using bunching estimators, regression discontinuity, and comprehensive data on construction contracts, political ties, and firm productivity. Our findings show a concentration of contracts just below thresholds, both pre and post‐reforms. Reforms reallocating contract values to new thresholds reveal that limiting discretion lowers final contract prices, indicating increased efficiency. However, when discretion increases, final prices are unaffected. Efficiency gains are not seen in contracts awarded to politically connected firms, suggesting that political favoritism hinders market outcome improvements from stricter regulations.

Suggested Citation

  • Marly Tatiana Celis Galvez & Vitezslav Titl & Fredo Schotanus, 2025. "Discretion and political favoritism: Evidence from two reforms in public procurement," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 91(3), pages 915-968, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:soecon:v:91:y:2025:i:3:p:915-968
    DOI: 10.1002/soej.12709
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/soej.12709
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/soej.12709?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
    ---><---

    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:wly:soecon:v:91:y:2025:i:3:p:915-968. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)2325-8012 .

    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.