(Translated by https://www.hiragana.jp/)
Rules, Discretion, and Corruption in Procurement: Evidence from Italian Government Contracting
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/bos/iedwpr/dp-344.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Rules, Discretion, and Corruption in Procurement: Evidence from Italian Government Contracting

Author

Listed:
  • Francesco Decarolis

    (Bocconi University, IGIER)

  • Raymond Fisman

    (Boston University)

  • Paolo Pinotti

    (Bocconi University, BAFFI-CAREFIN)

  • Silvia Vannutelli

    (Boston University)

Abstract

The benefits of bureaucratic discretion depend on the extent to which it is used for public benefit versus exploited for private gain. We study the relationship between discretion and corruption in Italian government procurement auctions, using a confidential database of firms and procurement officials investigated for corruption by Italian enforcement authorities. Based on a regression discontinuity design around thresholds for discretion, we find that, overall, a large increase in the use of discretionary procedures in the 2000s led to a minimal increase in auctions won by investigated firms. To understand this ‘non-result,’ we further investigate the attributes of “corrupted†auctions. We show that discretionary procedure auctions are associated with corruption only when conducted with fewer than the formally required number of bidders; similarly, discretionary criteria (“scoring rule†rather than first price) auctions are won more often by investigated firms. We further show that these “corruptible†discretionary auctions are chosen more often by officials who are themselves investigated for corruption, but less often in procurement administrations in which at least one official is investigated for corruption. These findings fit with a framework in which more discretion leads to greater efficiency as well as more opportunities for theft, and a central monitor manages this trade-off by limiting discretion for high-corruption procedures and locales. Additional results based on two standard tools for curbing corruption – turnover and subcontracting limits – corroborate this interpretation. Overall, our results imply that discretion is under-utilized, given the high potential benefits as compared to the modest increment in corruption.

Suggested Citation

  • Francesco Decarolis & Raymond Fisman & Paolo Pinotti & Silvia Vannutelli, 2019. "Rules, Discretion, and Corruption in Procurement: Evidence from Italian Government Contracting," Boston University - Department of Economics - The Institute for Economic Development Working Papers Series dp-344, Boston University - Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:bos:iedwpr:dp-344
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://sites.bu.edu/fisman/files/2019/12/criminal_procurement_final.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Juan Ortner & Sylvain Chassang, 2018. "Making Corruption Harder: Asymmetric Information, Collusion, and Crime," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 126(5), pages 2108-2133.
    2. Audinga Baltrunaite & Cristina Giorgiantonio & Sauro Mocetti & Tommaso Orlando, 2021. "Discretion and Supplier Selection in Public Procurement," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 37(1), pages 134-166.
    3. Sean Lewis-Faupel & Yusuf Neggers & Benjamin A. Olken & Rohini Pande, 2016. "Can Electronic Procurement Improve Infrastructure Provision? Evidence from Public Works in India and Indonesia," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 8(3), pages 258-283, August.
    4. 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.
    5. Oriana Bandiera & Andrea Prat & Tommaso Valletti, 2009. "Active and Passive Waste in Government Spending: Evidence from a Policy Experiment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(4), pages 1278-1308, September.
    6. Decarolis, Francesco & Giorgiantonio, Cristina, 2015. "Local public procurement regulations: The case of Italy," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 209-226.
    7. Auriol, Emmanuelle & Straub, Stéphane & Flochel, Thomas, 2016. "Public Procurement and Rent-Seeking: The Case of Paraguay," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 395-407.
    8. Benjamin A. Olken & Rohini Pande, 2012. "Corruption in Developing Countries," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 4(1), pages 479-509, July.
    9. Maxim Mironov & Ekaterina Zhuravskaya, 2016. "Corruption in Procurement and the Political Cycle in Tunneling: Evidence from Financial Transactions Data," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 8(2), pages 287-321, May.
    10. Matias D. Cattaneo & Michael Jansson & Xinwei Ma, 2020. "Simple Local Polynomial Density Estimators," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 115(531), pages 1449-1455, July.
    11. Emanuele Colonnelli & Mounu Prem, 2022. "Corruption and Firms," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 89(2), pages 695-732.
    12. Paolo Pinotti, 2017. "Clicking on Heaven's Door: The Effect of Immigrant Legalization on Crime," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(1), pages 138-168, January.
    13. Ernesto Dal Bó & Frederico Finan & Martín A. Rossi, 2013. "Strengthening State Capabilities: The Role of Financial Incentives in the Call to Public Service," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 128(3), pages 1169-1218.
    14. Sebastian Calonico & Matias D. Cattaneo & Rocio Titiunik, 2014. "Robust Nonparametric Confidence Intervals for Regression‐Discontinuity Designs," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 82, pages 2295-2326, November.
    15. Roberto Burguet & Juan José Ganuza & José Garcia Montalvo, 2016. "The microeconomics of corruption. A review of thirty years of research," Economics Working Papers 1525, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    16. Roberto Burguet & Yeon-Koo Che, 2004. "Competitive Procurement with Corruption," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 35(1), pages 50-68, Spring.
    17. Claudio Ferraz & Frederico Finan, 2011. "Electoral Accountability and Corruption: Evidence from the Audits of Local Governments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(4), pages 1274-1311, June.
    18. Raffaella Coppier & Mauro Costantini & Gustavo Piga, 2013. "The Role Of Monitoring Of Corruption In A Simple Endogenous Growth Model," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 51(4), pages 1972-1985, October.
    19. Choi, Jay Pil & Thum, Marcel, 2003. "The dynamics of corruption with the ratchet effect," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(3-4), pages 427-443, March.
    20. Benjamin A. Olken, 2007. "Monitoring Corruption: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Indonesia," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 115(2), pages 200-249.
    21. Manelli, Alejandro M & Vincent, Daniel R, 1995. "Optimal Procurement Mechanisms," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(3), pages 591-620, May.
    22. Ernesto Dal Bó & Frederico Finan, 2018. "Progress and Perspectives in the Study of Political Selection," NBER Working Papers 24783, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    23. Banfield, Edward C, 1975. "Corruption as a Feature of Governmental Organization," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 18(3), pages 587-605, December.
    24. Nicola Branzoli & Francesco Decarolis, 2015. "Entry and Subcontracting in Public Procurement Auctions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(12), pages 2945-2962, December.
    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. Tancredi Buscemi & Giulia Romani, 2022. "Allocation of authority and tactical redistribution of public investments: A historical quasi-experiment," Working Papers 2022:18, Department of Economics, University of Venice "Ca' Foscari", revised 2024.
    2. Massimo Finocchiaro Castro & Calogero Guccio, 2021. "Does greater discretion improve the performance in the execution of public works? Evidence from the reform of discretionary thresholds in Italy," Working papers 108, Società Italiana di Economia Pubblica.
    3. Colonnelli, Emanuele & Lagaras, Spyridon & Ponticelli, Jacopo & Prem, Mounu & Tsoutsoura, Margarita, 2022. "Revealing corruption: Firm and worker level evidence from Brazil," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(3), pages 1097-1119.
    4. Rodrigo Carril & Andres Gonzalez-Lira & Michael S. Walker, 2022. "Competition under incomplete contracts and the design of procurement policies," Economics Working Papers 1824, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    5. Federico Cingano & Filippo Palomba & Paolo Pinotti & Enrico Rettore, 2022. "Making Subsidies Work: Rules vs. Discretion," CESifo Working Paper Series 9560, CESifo.
    6. Paolo Pinotti, 0. "The Credibility Revolution in the Empirical Analysis of Crime," Italian Economic Journal: A Continuation of Rivista Italiana degli Economisti and Giornale degli Economisti, Springer;Società Italiana degli Economisti (Italian Economic Association), vol. 0, pages 1-14.
    7. Clark, Robert & Coviello, Decio & de Leverano, Adriano, 2021. "Centralized procurement and delivery times: Evidence from a natural experiment in Italy," ZEW Discussion Papers 21-063, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    8. Tukiainen, Janne & Blesse, Sebastian & Bohne, Albrecht & Giuffrida, Leonardo M. & Jääskeläinen, Jan & Luukinen, Ari & Sieppi, Antti, 2021. "What are the priorities of bureaucrats? Evidence from conjoint experiments with procurement officials," ZEW Discussion Papers 21-033, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    9. Marco Di Cataldo & Nicola Mastrorocco, 2022. "Organized Crime, Captured Politicians, and the Allocation of Public Resources [“Mafiaand Public Spending: Evidence on the Fiscal Multiplier from a Quasi-Experiment]," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 38(3), pages 774-839.
    10. Jaime Arellano-Bover & Marco De Simoni & Luigi Guiso & Rocco Macchiavello & Domenico J. Marchetti & Mounu Prem, 2024. "Mafias and Firms," CESifo Working Paper Series 11043, CESifo.
      • Arellano-Bover, Jaime & De Simoni, Marco & Guiso, Luigi & Macchiavello, Rocco & Marchetti, Domenico J. & Prem, Mounu, 2024. "Mafias and Firms," IZA Discussion Papers 16893, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
      • Arellano-Bover, Jaime & De Simoni, Marco & Guiso, Luigi & Macchiavello, Rocco & Marchetti, Domenico J. & Prem, Mounu, 2024. "Mafias and Firms," SocArXiv sr6ep, Center for Open Science.
      • De Simoni, Marco & Guiso, Luigi & Macchiavello, Rocco & Marchetti, Domenico J. & Prem, Mounu, 2024. "Mafias and Firms," CEPR Discussion Papers 18982, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    11. Gallego, Jorge & Prem, Mounu & Vargas, Juan F., 2020. "Corruption in the Times of Pandemia," Working papers 43, Red Investigadores de Economía.
    12. Antonio Estache & Renaud Foucart & Konstantinos Georgalos, 2024. "Preference for Control vs. Random Dictatorship," Working Papers 413554011, Lancaster University Management School, Economics Department.
    13. Vitezslav Titl, 2023. "The One and Only: Single-Bidding in Public Procurement," Working Papers 2308, Utrecht School of Economics.
    14. Lisciandra, Maurizio & Milani, Riccardo & Millemaci, Emanuele, 2022. "A corruption risk indicator for public procurement," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    15. Rodrigo Carril, 2021. "Rules versus discretion in public procurement," Economics Working Papers 1765, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    16. Pinotti, Paolo, 2020. "The credibility revolution in the empirical analysis of crime," CEPR Discussion Papers 14850, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    17. Titl, Vitezslav & De Witte, Kristof & Geys, Benny, 2021. "Political donations, public procurement and government efficiency," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    18. Paolo Pinotti, 2020. "The Credibility Revolution in the Empirical Analysis of Crime," Italian Economic Journal: A Continuation of Rivista Italiana degli Economisti and Giornale degli Economisti, Springer;Società Italiana degli Economisti (Italian Economic Association), vol. 6(2), pages 207-220, July.
    19. Hoekman, Bernard & Onur Taş, Bedri Kamil, 2024. "Discretion and public procurement outcomes in Europe," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).

    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. Gallego, J & Prem, M & Vargas, J. F, 2020. "Corruption in the times of pandemia," Documentos de Trabajo 18178, Universidad del Rosario.
    2. Francesco Decarolis & Cristina Giorgiantonio, 2020. "Corruption red flags in public procurement: new evidence from Italian calls for tenders," Questioni di Economia e Finanza (Occasional Papers) 544, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
    3. Sarah Brierley, 2020. "Unprincipled Principals: Co‐opted Bureaucrats and Corruption in Ghana," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 64(2), pages 209-222, April.
    4. Roberto Burguet & Juan-José Ganuza & José García-Montalvo, 2016. "The Microeconomics of Corruption. A Review of Thirty Years of Research," Working Papers 908, Barcelona School of Economics.
    5. 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.
    6. Abhijit Banerjee & Esther Duflo & Clément Imbert & Santhosh Mathew & Rohini Pande, 2020. "E-governance, Accountability, and Leakage in Public Programs: Experimental Evidence from a Financial Management Reform in India," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 12(4), pages 39-72, October.
    7. Maximiliano Lauletta & Martín A. Rossi & Christian A. Ruzzier, 2022. "Audits and Government Hiring Practices," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 89(353), pages 214-227, January.
    8. Rodrigo Carril, 2021. "Rules Versus Discretion in Public Procurement," Working Papers 1232, Barcelona School of Economics.
    9. Gallego, Jorge & Rivero, Gonzalo & Martínez, Juan, 2021. "Preventing rather than punishing: An early warning model of malfeasance in public procurement," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 360-377.
    10. Audinga Baltrunaite & Cristina Giorgiantonio & Sauro Mocetti & Tommaso Orlando, 2021. "Discretion and Supplier Selection in Public Procurement," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 37(1), pages 134-166.
    11. Decio Coviello & Andrea Guglielmo & Giancarlo Spagnolo, 2018. "The Effect of Discretion on Procurement Performance," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(2), pages 715-738, February.
    12. Gianmarco Daniele & Tommaso Giommoni, 2019. "Corruption under Austerity," BAFFI CAREFIN Working Papers 19131, BAFFI CAREFIN, Centre for Applied Research on International Markets Banking Finance and Regulation, Universita' Bocconi, Milano, Italy.
    13. Gans-Morse, Jordan & Borges, Mariana & Makarin, Alexey & Mannah-Blankson, Theresa & Nickow, Andre & Zhang, Dong, 2018. "Reducing bureaucratic corruption: Interdisciplinary perspectives on what works," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 171-188.
    14. Chiappinelli, Olga, 2020. "Political corruption in the execution of public contracts," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 116-140.
    15. Angelo D'Andrea, 2019. "Mayor’s wage and Public procurement," BAFFI CAREFIN Working Papers 19125, BAFFI CAREFIN, Centre for Applied Research on International Markets Banking Finance and Regulation, Universita' Bocconi, Milano, Italy.
    16. Britto, Diogo G.C. & Fiorin, Stefano, 2020. "Corruption and legislature size: Evidence from Brazil," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    17. Bergman, Mats A. & Johansson, Per & Lundberg, Sofia & Spagnolo, Giancarlo, 2016. "Privatization and quality: Evidence from elderly care in Sweden," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 109-119.
    18. Colonnelli, Emanuele & Lagaras, Spyridon & Ponticelli, Jacopo & Prem, Mounu & Tsoutsoura, Margarita, 2022. "Revealing corruption: Firm and worker level evidence from Brazil," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(3), pages 1097-1119.
    19. Gauthier, Bernard & Goyette, Jonathan & Kouamé, Wilfried A.K., 2021. "Why do firms pay bribes? Evidence on the demand and supply sides of corruption in developing countries," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 190(C), pages 463-479.
    20. Eric Avis & Claudio Ferraz & Frederico Finan, 2018. "Do Government Audits Reduce Corruption? Estimating the Impacts of Exposing Corrupt Politicians," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 126(5), pages 1912-1964.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Corruption; Procurement; Bureaucracy; Competition; Bribes;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C73 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Stochastic and Dynamic Games; Evolutionary Games
    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • D73 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Bureaucracy; Administrative Processes in Public Organizations; Corruption
    • K42 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - Illegal Behavior and the Enforcement of Law

    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:bos:iedwpr:dp-344. 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: Program Coordinator (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/decbuus.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.