Local favoritism in China's public procurement: Information frictions or incentive distortion?
Journal of Urban Economics, ISSN: 0094-1190, Vol: 145, Page: 103716
2025
- 2Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Captures2
- Readers2
Article Description
This paper aims to disentangle the roles of information frictions and career incentives of local officials in the allocation of government contracts. Drawing on a unique dataset including both winning and losing bidders of public procurement auctions in China, we document a strong local bias in the contract allocation. These patterns are hardly reconciled with explanations rooted in information frictions or corruption. Instead, we highlight the role of local leaders’ career incentives, presenting evidence that local favoritism is more pronounced in localities with more incentivized mayors. Our findings prompt a reconsideration of the effectiveness of bureaucratic discretion in allocating public resources. (JEL H57, H77, H72, D73, R51)
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S009411902400086X; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jue.2024.103716; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85209079398&origin=inward; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S009411902400086X; https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jue.2024.103716
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know