[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/hpe/journl/y2019v228i1p55-81.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Weight Values, Scoring Rules and Abnormally Low Tenders Criteria in Multidimensional Procurement: Effects on Price

Author

Listed:
  • Jorge González Chapela

    (Centro Universitario de la Defensa de Zaragoza)

Abstract
Many weighing functions are currently in use for evaluating quotes in multidimensional procurement. Although these may affect the price paid by the buyer, their design has been little informed by empiri-cal considerations. This paper studies the impacts of weight values, scoring rules, and abnormally low tenders criteria (ALTC) in an original sample of procurements of services. The panel dimension of the data and the rich set of procurement characteristics are exploited to show that convex price scoring rules (PSRs) and increases in the weight for price yield lower prices, whereas independent/interdepend-ent PSRs and different ALTC result in the same price.

Suggested Citation

  • Jorge González Chapela, 2019. "Weight Values, Scoring Rules and Abnormally Low Tenders Criteria in Multidimensional Procurement: Effects on Price," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 228(1), pages 55-81, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:hpe:journl:y:2019:v:228:i:1:p:55-81
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ief.es/docs/destacados/publicaciones/revistas/hpe/228_Art3.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gregory Lewis & Patrick Bajari, 2011. "Procurement Contracting With Time Incentives: Theory and Evidence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 126(3), pages 1173-1211.
    2. Pablo Ballesteros-P�rez & Martin Skitmore & Eugenio Pellicer & M. Carmen Gonz�lez-Cruz, 2015. "Scoring rules and abnormally low bids criteria in construction tenders: a taxonomic review," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(4), pages 259-278, April.
    3. NAKABAYASHI Jun & HIROSE Yohsuke, 2016. "Structural Estimation of the Scoring Auction Model," Discussion papers 16008, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    4. Domberger, Simon & Hall, Christine & Li, Eric Ah Lik, 1995. "The Determinants of Price and Quality in Competitively Tendered Contracts," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 105(433), pages 1454-1470, November.
    5. Koning, Pierre & van de Meerendonk, Arthur, 2014. "The impact of scoring weights on price and quality outcomes: An application to the procurement of Welfare-to-Work contracts," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 1-14.
    6. Sofia Lundberg, 2006. "Auction Formats and Award Rules in Swedish Procurement Auctions," Rivista di Politica Economica, SIPI Spa, vol. 96(1), pages 91-114, January-F.
    7. 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.
    8. Yeon-Koo Che, 1993. "Design Competition through Multidimensional Auctions," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 24(4), pages 668-680, Winter.
    9. Fernando Branco, 1997. "The Design of Multidimensional Auctions," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 28(1), pages 63-81, Spring.
    10. John Asker & Estelle Cantillon, 2010. "Procurement when price and quality matter," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(1), pages 1-34, March.
    11. Hausman, Jerry, 2015. "Specification tests in econometrics," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 38(2), pages 112-134.
    12. John Asker & Estelle Cantillon, 2008. "Properties of scoring auctions," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(1), pages 69-85, March.
    13. Krishnendu Ghosh Dastidar, 2014. "Scoring auctions with non-quasilinear scoring rules," ISER Discussion Paper 0902, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    14. Francesco Decarolis, 2014. "Awarding Price, Contract Performance, and Bids Screening: Evidence from Procurement Auctions," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 6(1), pages 108-132, January.
    15. Dimitri,Nicola & Piga,Gustavo & Spagnolo,Giancarlo (ed.), 2006. "Handbook of Procurement," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521870733, September.
    16. Lisa J. Cameron, 2000. "Limiting Buyer Discretion: Effects on Performance and Price in Long-Term Contracts," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(1), pages 265-281, March.
    17. Makoto HANAZONO & Jun NAKABAYASHI & Masanori TSURUOKA, 2013. "Procurement Auctions with General Price-Quality Evaluation," KIER Working Papers 845, Kyoto University, Institute of Economic Research.
    18. McAfee, R Preston & McMillan, John, 1987. "Auctions and Bidding," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 25(2), pages 699-738, June.
    19. Victor P. Goldberg, 1977. "Competitive Bidding and the Production of Precontract Information," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 8(1), pages 250-261, Spring.
    20. Wang, Mingxi & Liu, Shulin, 2014. "Equilibrium bids in practical multi-attribute auctions," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 123(3), pages 352-355.
    21. Takeshi Nishimura, 2015. "Optimal design of scoring auctions with multidimensional quality," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 19(2), pages 117-143, 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. Jordi Rosell, 2023. "Green Public Procurement in Spain," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 245(1), pages 95-117, June.

    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. Riccardo Camboni Marchi Adani, 2018. "Procuring price and quality using scoring auctions: where do we stand?," Economia e Politica Industriale: Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, Springer;Associazione Amici di Economia e Politica Industriale, vol. 45(1), pages 17-36, March.
    2. Dastidar, Krishnendu Ghosh & Mukherjee, Diganta, 2014. "Corruption in delegated public procurement auctions," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 122-127.
    3. Miguel Vazquez & Michelle Hallack, 2017. "Efficiency versus transaction costs in multidimensional auctions: the case of Brazilian oil and gas lease auctions," IEFE Working Papers 94, IEFE, Center for Research on Energy and Environmental Economics and Policy, Universita' Bocconi, Milano, Italy.
    4. Takeshi Nishimura, 2015. "Optimal design of scoring auctions with multidimensional quality," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 19(2), pages 117-143, June.
    5. Riccardo Camboni Marchi Adani & Paola Valbonesi, 2016. "Favouritism in scoring rule auctions," "Marco Fanno" Working Papers 0210, Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche "Marco Fanno".
    6. 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.
    7. Jorge González Chapela & José M. Labeaga & Luis A. Medrano, 2019. "Further econometric evidence on the extent and sources of cost savings in competitively tendered contracts," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 56(2), pages 679-701, February.
    8. NAKABAYASHI Jun & HIROSE Yohsuke, 2016. "Structural Estimation of the Scoring Auction Model," Discussion papers 16008, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    9. Huang, Yangguang, 2019. "An empirical study of scoring auctions and quality manipulation corruption," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    10. Krishnendu Ghosh Dastidar, 2014. "Scoring auctions with non-quasilinear scoring rules," ISER Discussion Paper 0902, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    11. Werner Hölzl & Michael Böheim & Michael Klien & Eva Pichler, 2017. "Das öffentliche Beschaffungswesen im Spannungsfeld zwischen Billigst- und Bestbieterprinzip," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 59256, August.
    12. Takahashi, Hidenori, 2015. "Strategic design under uncertain evaluations : structural analysis of design-build auctions," Working Papers 15-08, University of Mannheim, Department of Economics.
    13. Albano, Gian Luigi & Dini, Federico & Zampino, Roberto, 2008. "Bidding for Complex Projects: Evidence From the Acquisitions of IT Services," Privatisation Regulation Corporate Governance Working Papers 46547, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    14. Zhijuan Hong & Ruhai Wu & Yan Sun & Kunxiang Dong, 2020. "Buyer preferences for auction pricing rules in online outsourcing markets: fixed price vs. open price," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 30(1), pages 163-179, March.
    15. He, Chusu & Milne, Alistair & Ataullah, Ali, 2023. "What explains delays in public procurement decisions?," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    16. Visa Pitkänen, 2022. "Competition and efficiency in repeated procurements: Lessons from the Finnish rehabilitation markets," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(5), pages 820-835, May.
    17. Krishnendu Ghosh Dastidar, 2014. "Scoring Auctions," Studies in Microeconomics, , vol. 2(1), pages 35-48, June.
    18. Stoll, Sebastian & Zöttl, Gregor, 2012. "Information Disclosure in Dynamic Buyer-Determined Procurement Auctions: An Empirical Study," VfS Annual Conference 2012 (Goettingen): New Approaches and Challenges for the Labor Market of the 21st Century 62044, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    19. Jason Allen & Robert Clark & Brent Hickman & Eric Richert, 2019. "Resolving Failed Banks: Uncertainty, Multiple Bidding & Auction Design," Staff Working Papers 19-30, Bank of Canada.
    20. Chandel, Shivangi & Sarkar, Shubhro, 2023. "Corruption in multidimensional procurement auctions under asymmetry," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Multidimensional procurement; weighing function; scoring rule; abnormally low tenders criterion; Spanish Armed Forces.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H57 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Procurement

    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:hpe:journl:y:2019:v:228:i:1:p:55-81. 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: Miguel Gómez de Antonio (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iefgves.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.