ABSTRACT
Corruption in public procurement generates inefficiencies mainly due to a misallocation of the contract, higher price and/or lower quality, and a distortion of competition. The regulation of public procurement in France is a good illustration of this trade-off and is the subject. An optimal award procedure should therefore be the result of a balance between the costs of corruption and the benefits of discretion. Bandiera et al. (2009) propose a distinction between active and passive waste in public procurement. An optimal award procedure should therefore be the result of a balance between the costs of corruption and the benefits of discretion. Bandiera et al. propose a distinction between active and passive waste in public procurement. Detecting corruption in public procurement represents a huge waste of public funds. Increasing transparency of public procurement and reducing the discretion of the public authorities in charge of the procurement process are regular ways to contain corruption.
