dc.contributor.author | Dahlström, Carl | |
dc.contributor.author | Fazekas, Mihály | |
dc.contributor.author | Lewis, David E. | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2019-08-19T06:28:49Z | |
dc.date.available | 2019-08-19T06:28:49Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2019-05 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 1653 - 8919 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/2077/61609 | |
dc.description.abstract | The
U.S.
federal government spend
s
huge sums buying goods and services
from
outside
of
the public sector.
Given the sums involved, strategic government purchasing can have electoral consequences.
In this paper, we
suggest that more politicized agencies show favoritism to entrepreneurs in key electoral constituencies and to
firms connected to political parties.
We evaluate these claims using new data on United States government
contracts between 2003 and 2015. We find that executive departments, particularly more politicized
department
-
wide offices, are the most likely to have contracts characterized by non
-
comp
etitive procedures
and outcomes, indicating favoritism. Politically responsive agencies
–
but only those
–
give out more non
-
competitive contracts in battleground states. We also observe greater turnover in firms receiving government
contracts after party
change in the White House, but only in the more politicized agencies. We conclude that
agency designs that limit appointee representation in procurement decisions reduce political favoritism. | sv |
dc.language.iso | eng | sv |
dc.relation.ispartofseries | Working Papers | sv |
dc.relation.ispartofseries | 2019:4 | sv |
dc.relation.uri | https://qog.pol.gu.se/digitalAssets/1738/1738541_2019_4_dahlstrom_fazekas_lewis_corrected.pdf | sv |
dc.title | Agency Design, Favoritism and Procurement in the United States | sv |
dc.type | Text | sv |
dc.type.svep | article, other scientific | sv |
dc.contributor.organization | QoG Institute | sv |