The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics

2018 Edition
| Editors: Macmillan Publishers Ltd

Auctions (Empirics)

  • Isabelle Perrigne
  • Quang Vuong
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-95189-5_2762

Abstract

The structural analysis of auction data relying on game theoretic models has undergone a tremendous development since the mid-1990s. This article reviews some important contributions for first-price and ascending auctions. It stresses identification of the structure and the development of tractable econometric methods, while addressing bidders’ asymmetry, common value, bidders’ risk aversion, endogenous entry, dynamic and multi-unit auctions as well as the choice of the reserve price and the auction mechanism. Various domains are studied, such as auctions of timber, gas lease, treasury bills, agricultural products, electricity and construction procurements.

Keywords

Affiliated private value model Asymmetric information Auctions Bayesian Nash equilibrium Bidding Collusion Game theory Log-normal distribution Maximum likelihood Maximum likelihood Nonlinear least squares Nonparametric estimation Nonparametric methods Reserve price Risk aversion 

JEL Classification

D44 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access

Bibliography

  1. Athey, S., and P. Haile. 2002. Identification of standard auction models. Econometrica 70: 2107–2140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bajari, P., and A. Hortaçsu. 2003. The winner’s curse, reserve prices and endogenous entry: Empirical insights from eBay auctions. Rand Journal of Economics 34: 329–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Campo, S., E. Guerre, I. Perrigne, and Q. Vuong. 2006. Semiparametric estimation of first-price auctions with risk averse bidders. Working paper. University Park: Pennsylvania State University.Google Scholar
  4. Guerre, E., I. Perrigne, and Q. Vuong. 2000. Optimal nonparametric estimation of first-price auctions. Econometrica 68: 525–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Haile, P., and E. Tamer. 2003. Inference with an incomplete model of English auctions. Journal of Political Economy 111: 1–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hong, H., and M. Shum. 2003. Econometric models of asymmetric ascending auctions. Journal of Econometrics 112: 327–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hortaçsu, A. 2002. Mechanism choice and strategic bidding in divisible good auctions: An empirical analysis of the Turkish treasury auction market. Working paper. Chicago: University of Chicago.Google Scholar
  8. Jofre-Bonet, M., and M. Pesendorfer. 2003. Estimation of a dynamic auction game. Econometrica 71: 1443–1489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Laffont, J.-J., and Q. Vuong. 1996. Structural analysis of auction data. American Economic Review: Papers and Proceedings 86: 414–420.Google Scholar
  10. Laffont, J.-J., H. Ossard, and Q. Vuong. 1995. Econometrics of first-price auctions. Econometrica 63: 953–980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Li, T., I. Perrigne, and Q. Vuong. 2000. Conditionally independent private information in OCS wildcat auctions. Journal of Econometrics 98: 129–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Paarsch, H. 1992. Deciding between the common and private value paradigms in empirical models of auctions. Journal of Econometrics 51: 191–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Porter, R. 1995. The role of information in US offshore oil and gas lease auctions. Econometrica 63: 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Isabelle Perrigne
    • 1
  • Quang Vuong
    • 1
  1. 1.