IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/aoz/wpaper/334.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Corruption and Renegotiation in Procurement

Author

Listed:
  • Leandro Arozamena

    (UTDT-CONICET)

  • Juan José Ganuza

    (Universitat Pompeu Fabra)

  • Federico Weinschelbaum

    (UTDT-CONICET)

Abstract

A sponsor –e.g. a government agency– uses a procurement auction to select a supplier who will be in charge of the execution of a contract. That contract is incomplete: it may be renegotiated once the auction’s winner has been chosen. We examine a setting where one firm may bribe the agent in charge of monitoring contract execution so that the former is treated preferentially if renegotiation actually occurs. If a bribe is accepted, the corrupt firm will be more aggressive at the initial auction and thus win with a larger probability. We show that the equilibrium probability of corruption is larger when the initial contract is less complete, and when the corrupt firm’s cost is more likely to be similar to her rivals’. In addition, we examine how this influences the sponsor’s incentives when designing the initial contract.

Suggested Citation

  • Leandro Arozamena & Juan José Ganuza & Federico Weinschelbaum, 2024. "Corruption and Renegotiation in Procurement," Working Papers 334, Red Nacional de Investigadores en Economía (RedNIE).
    • Handle: RePEc:aoz:wpaper:334
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://rednie.eco.unc.edu.ar/files/DT/334.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Juan‐José Ganuza, 2007. "Competition And Cost Overruns In Procurement," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(4), pages 633-660, December.
    2. Erica Bosio & Simeon Djankov & Edward Glaeser & Andrei Shleifer, 2022. "Public Procurement in Law and Practice," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 112(4), pages 1091-1117, April.
    3. Bajari, Patrick & Tadelis, Steven, 2001. "Incentives versus Transaction Costs: A Theory of Procurement Contracts," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(3), pages 387-407, Autumn.
    4. Nicolás Campos & Eduardo Engel & Ronald D. Fischer & Alexander Galetovic, 2021. "The Ways of Corruption in Infrastructure: Lessons from the Odebrecht Case," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 35(2), pages 171-190, Spring.
    5. Marco Celentani & Juan-José Ganuza, 2002. "Organized vs. Competitive Corruption," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 109(1), pages 293-315, January.
    6. Laffont, Jean-Jacques & Tirole, Jean, 1991. "Auction design and favoritism," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 9-42, March.
    7. Bliss, Christopher & Di Tella, Rafael, 1997. "Does Competition Kill Corruption?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 105(5), pages 1001-1023, October.
    8. Patrick Bajari & Stephanie Houghton & Steven Tadelis, 2014. "Bidding for Incomplete Contracts: An Empirical Analysis of Adaptation Costs," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(4), pages 1288-1319, April.
    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. Leandro Arozamena & Federico Weinschelbaum & Juan-José Ganuza, 2021. "Renegotiation and Discrimination in Symmetric Procurement Auctions," Department of Economics Working Papers 2021_09, Universidad Torcuato Di Tella.
    2. Rodrigo Carril, 2021. "Rules Versus Discretion in Public Procurement," Working Papers 1232, Barcelona School of Economics.
    3. Arozamena, Leandro & Ganuza, Juan-José & Weinschelbaum, Federico, 2023. "Renegotiation, discrimination and favoritism in symmetric procurement auctions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    4. Chiappinelli, Olga, 2020. "Political corruption in the execution of public contracts," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 116-140.
    5. Celentani, Marco & Ganuza, Juan-Jose, 2002. "Corruption and competition in procurement," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(7), pages 1273-1303, July.
    6. Engel, Eduardo & Fischer, Ronald D. & Galetovic, Alexander, 2024. "The company you keep: Renegotiations and adverse selection in transportation infrastructure," Economics of Transportation, Elsevier, vol. 38(C).
    7. Fabian Herweg & Marco A. Schwarz, 2016. "Optimal Cost Overruns: Procurement Auctions and Renegotiation," CESifo Working Paper Series 5838, CESifo.
    8. David Martimort & Flavio Menezes & Myrna Wooders & ELISABETTA IOSSA & DAVID MARTIMORT, 2015. "The Simple Microeconomics of Public-Private Partnerships," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 17(1), pages 4-48, February.
    9. Nadia Fiorino & Emma Galli & Ilde Rizzo & Marco Valente, 2023. "Public procurement and reputation. An agent‐based model," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(4), pages 806-832, November.
    10. Dakshina G. De Silva & Timothy Dunne & Georgia Kosmopoulou & Carlos Lamarche, 2015. "Project modifications and bidding in highway procurement auctions," FRB Atlanta Working Paper 2015-14, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta.
    11. Yang, Ziyan, 2024. "Measuring transaction costs in China’s rural land rental market: Ex-ante bargaining associated with ex-post contract-violation uncertainty and location specificity," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 224(C), pages 688-716.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. Todd Kaplan, 2012. "Communication of preferences in contests for contracts," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 51(2), pages 487-503, October.
    15. Andres Gonzalez-Lira & Michael S. Walker & Rodrigo Carril, 2022. "Competition under Incomplete Contracts and the Design of Procurement Policies," Working Papers 1327, Barcelona School of Economics.
    16. Jongeneel, Roel & Polman, Nico, 2014. "Farmer groups as a device to ensure the provision of green services in the Netherlands: a political economy perspective," 2014 International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia 186674, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    17. Calogero Guccio & Giacomo Pignataro & Ilde Rizzo, 2014. "Evaluating the efficiency of public procurement contracts for cultural heritage conservation works in Italy," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 38(1), pages 43-70, February.
    18. Abhay Aneja & Marian Moszoro & Pablo T. Spiller, 2015. "Political Bonds: Political Hazards and the Choice of Municipal Financial Instruments," NBER Working Papers 21188, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Daniel Prudencio, 2023. "Productivity in Procurement Auctions of Pavement Contracts in Mexico," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 60(1), pages 63-85, August.
    20. Vitali Gretschko & Martin Pollrich, 2022. "Incomplete Contracts in Multi-period Procurement," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(7), pages 5146-5161, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Auctions; Cost overruns; Procurement; Renegotiation; Corruption;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Auctions
    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design

    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:aoz:wpaper:334. 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: Laura Inés D Amato (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/redniar.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.