IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/cesptp/halshs-02057712.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Political Contestability and Contract Rigidity: An Analysis of Procurement Contracts

Author

Listed:
  • Jean Beuve

    (CES - Centre d'économie de la Sorbonne - UP1 - Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • Marian Moszoro

    (George Mason University [Fairfax], Warsaw School of Economics - Warsaw School of Economics)

  • Stéphane Saussier

    (IAE Paris - Sorbonne Business School)

Abstract

Are public contracts less adaptable than private contracts? Using a comprehensive set of contracts for a standard product, we compare procurement contracts in which the procurer is either a public administration or a private corporation. We find that public-to-private contracts feature more rigidity clauses than private-to-private contracts and that the use of rigidity clauses in public contracts rises when political risks are more salient. We argue that a significant part of the increased rigidity of public contracts is a contractual adaptation to limit political hazards from political opponents and interested third parties.

Suggested Citation

  • Jean Beuve & Marian Moszoro & Stéphane Saussier, 2019. "Political Contestability and Contract Rigidity: An Analysis of Procurement Contracts," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-02057712, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:cesptp:halshs-02057712
    DOI: 10.1111/jems.12268
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Marian W. Moszoro & Pablo T. Spiller, 2018. "Implications of Third Parties for Contract Design," Economia e Politica Industriale: Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, Springer;Associazione Amici di Economia e Politica Industriale, vol. 45(1), pages 5-16, March.
    2. Marco Buso & Cesare Dosi & Michele Moretto, 2021. "Do exit options increase the value for money of public–private partnerships?," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(4), pages 721-742, November.
    3. Philippe Gagnepain & Marc Ivaldi, 2017. "Economic Efficiency and Political Capture in Public Service Contracts," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 65(1), pages 1-38, March.
    4. Dejan Makovšek & Adrian Bridge, 2021. "Procurement Choices and Infrastructure Costs," NBER Chapters, in: Economic Analysis and Infrastructure Investment, pages 277-327, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Jean Beuve & Stéphane Saussier, 2021. "Renegotiations and Renewals of Public Contracts," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 59(3), pages 461-482, November.
    6. Francesco Decarolis & Leonardo M Giuffrida & Elisabetta Iossa & Vincenzo Mollisi & Giancarlo Spagnolo, 2020. "Bureaucratic Competence and Procurement Outcomes [“Politics and Economics in Weak and Strong States]," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 36(3), pages 537-597.
    7. Joanna Piechucka, 2021. "Cost efficiency and endogenous regulatory choices: evidence from the transport industry in France," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 59(1), pages 25-46, February.
    8. Joanna Piechucka, 2020. "Cost Efficiency and Endogenous Regulatory Choices: Evidence from the Transport Industry in France," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1851, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.

    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:hal:cesptp:halshs-02057712. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.