Are bid preferences benign? The effect of small business subsidies in highway procurement auctions

被引:78
作者
Marion, Justin [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Calif Santa Cruz, Dept Econ, Santa Cruz, CA 95064 USA
关键词
auction; procurement; discrimination; affirmative action;
D O I
10.1016/j.jpubeco.2006.12.005
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
Bid preferences in procurement auctions allow firms from an identifiable group an advantage in bidding against unfavored firms. While economic efficiency is expected to fall as a result of bid preferences, government procurement costs may either increase or decrease depending on the competitive response of favored and unfavored firms. This paper uses data from California auctions for road construction contracts, where small businesses receive a 5-percent bid preference in auctions for projects using only state funds and no preferential treatment on projects using federal aid. I show that while firms' bidding behavior matches theoretical predictions, procurement costs are 3.8 percent higher on auctions using preferences. The higher procurement cost in preference auctions is attributed to reduced participation by lower cost large firms. Structural estimates of latent firm costs are then used to evaluate how efficiency and the division of surplus between firms and the government are impacted by bid preferences. Firm profits are 3.1 percent lower under bid preferences, however this is overwhelmed by the efficiency loss due to reduced large firm participation. The efficiency loss conditional on firm participation is estimated to represent around 0.1 percent of overall procurement costs. Including the adverse effect of preferences on the participation of large firms increases the estimated efficiency loss to 3.6 percent, which represents 27 cents for each additional dollar awarded to small businesses through the program. Counterfactual simulations indicate that if participation were instead inelastic to bid preferences, the 5-percent bid preference would be close to the optimal level. (c) 2007 Elsevier B.V. All tights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:1591 / 1624
页数:34
相关论文
共 32 条
[1]  
Athey S., 2004, COMP OPEN SEALED BID
[2]   Deficit reduction through diversity: How affirmative action at the FCC increased auction competition [J].
Ayres, I ;
Cramton, P .
STANFORD LAW REVIEW, 1996, 48 (04) :761-815
[3]   Comparing competition and collusion: a numerical approach [J].
Bajari, P .
ECONOMIC THEORY, 2001, 18 (01) :187-205
[4]  
Bates T, 1996, AM ECON REV, V86, P294
[5]   THE ROLE OF FERTILITY AND POPULATION IN ECONOMIC-GROWTH - EMPIRICAL RESULTS FROM AGGREGATE CROSS-NATIONAL DATA [J].
BRANDER, JA ;
DOWRICK, S .
JOURNAL OF POPULATION ECONOMICS, 1994, 7 (01) :1-25
[6]  
CABRAL L, 1990, J LAW ECON ORGAN, V6, P453
[7]  
CHAY K, 1998, UNPUB MINORITY BUSIN
[8]   Can affirmative action be cost effective? An experimental examination of price-preference auctions [J].
Corns, A ;
Schotter, A .
AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, 1999, 89 (01) :291-305
[10]  
ELYAKIME B, 1994, ANN EC STAT, V34, DOI UNSP 115141