{"title":"Universities as Royal Courts: A Fable","authors":"P. Frijters","doi":"10.22459/AG.20.01.2013.05","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22459/AG.20.01.2013.05","url":null,"abstract":"The Productivity Commission report 'Disability Care and Support' recommends tort liability be replaced by a compulsory, government-run, no-fault scheme. But theory and evidence indicate moving to a no-fault scheme will increase the accident rate. Even a move from non-risk-rated third-party insurance to non-risk-rated first-party insurance reduces incentives for care. A no-fault scheme is not superior to current policies; genuine reform will need to be informed by law and economics literature.","PeriodicalId":41700,"journal":{"name":"Agenda-A Journal of Policy Analysis and Reform","volume":"8 1","pages":"71-78"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2013-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84217265","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Age bias in the Australian welfare state","authors":"A. Tapper, A. Fenna, J. Phillimore","doi":"10.22459/AG.20.01.2013.01","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22459/AG.20.01.2013.01","url":null,"abstract":"This paper uses Australian Bureau of Statistics fiscal incidence figures to track trends across the period 1984 to 2010 in one key aspect of the Australian welfare state - whether welfare policies have favoured the elderly at the expense of the young. Our three main findings are: that there has been a substantial shift over this period in favour of the elderly; that this trend has accelerated rapidly in recent years; and that as a result of this accelerated trend, elderly households today are on average well off by comparison with younger households. We see little influence of party politics or ideology on the processes we are describing.","PeriodicalId":41700,"journal":{"name":"Agenda-A Journal of Policy Analysis and Reform","volume":"90 1","pages":"5-20"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2013-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75917793","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Beveridge and the brief life of 'Social Biology' at the LSE","authors":"J. Shearmur","doi":"10.22459/AG.20.01.2013.06","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22459/AG.20.01.2013.06","url":null,"abstract":"Sir William Beveridge, 1879-1963, was a distinguished figure in the history of public policy. His 1942 report Social Insurance and Allied Services widely known as the Beveridge Report played a key role in the development of the British welfare state. He was earlier the Director (equivalent to a Vice Chancellor of a British or Australian university) of the London School of Economics. This role throws interesting light both on Beveridge himself, and on issues relating to the financial support of academic research in Britain in the 1930s.","PeriodicalId":41700,"journal":{"name":"Agenda-A Journal of Policy Analysis and Reform","volume":"1 1","pages":"79-96"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2013-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90052017","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Richard Pomfret, The Age of Equality: The Twentieth Century in Economic Perspective","authors":"T. Hatton","doi":"10.5860/choice.49-3979","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.49-3979","url":null,"abstract":"Review(s) of: Richard Pomfret, The Age of Equality: The Twentieth Century in Economic Perspective (Belknap Press, 2011)","PeriodicalId":41700,"journal":{"name":"Agenda-A Journal of Policy Analysis and Reform","volume":"53 1","pages":"103"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2013-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83889001","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Management of the coastal zone in Byron Bay: the neglect of medium-term considerations","authors":"K. Roche, I. Goodwin, J. McAneney","doi":"10.22459/AG.20.01.2013.02","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22459/AG.20.01.2013.02","url":null,"abstract":"This paper documents the history of coastal management in Byron Bay and its implication for the property rights of landowners and other stakeholders. It finds that, until recently, planning for an uncertain future in a warming climate has overshadowed more immediate issues. The NSW Government has recently signalled its intention to allow individual landowners the right to apply to protect their properties from erosive events, thereby removing the need for councils to invoke statewide sea-level-rise projections. But these proposed changes fail to address the medium-term (~40 years) problem, whilst promoting ad hoc coastal protection measures. This paper argues that medium-term engineering solutions, including beach nourishment to defend some residential areas, should not be ruled out a priori. Parts of the present coastline may well need to be abandoned as they become impractical and too expensive to protect, but it is argued that this time has not yet arrived.","PeriodicalId":41700,"journal":{"name":"Agenda-A Journal of Policy Analysis and Reform","volume":"12 1","pages":"21-42"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2013-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90977167","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The Treasury's Non-modelling of the Stimulus","authors":"J. Humphreys","doi":"10.22459/AG.19.02.2012.04","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22459/AG.19.02.2012.04","url":null,"abstract":"In late 2008 the global financial crisis (GFC) sparked a boom in Keynesian economic commentary and activist fiscal policies. The Australian government responded with an immediate $10.4 billion 'cash-splash' to households (Commonwealth Treasury 2008), followed by a $42 billion 'Nation Building and Jobs Plan', which was to include $12.7 billion more hand-outs as well as a $28.8 billion increase in government capital investment. In total, the government 'stimulus' was estimated to be about $52 billion. If we included all discretionary government spending that happened after the GFC then the number would be far higher.","PeriodicalId":41700,"journal":{"name":"Agenda-A Journal of Policy Analysis and Reform","volume":"19 1","pages":"39-51"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2012-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82534151","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The Treasury-Reserve Bank ATM Taskforce Report: Would it Pass a Cost-Benefit Analysis?","authors":"Hugh Green","doi":"10.22459/AG.19.02.2012.06","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22459/AG.19.02.2012.06","url":null,"abstract":"In December 2010 the Commonwealth Government announced that the Reserve Bank of Australia and the Treasury would establish a joint 'ATM Taskforce' to analyse reforms to Australia's ATM market in 2009 which aimed to improve the competition and efficiency of the market by removing interchange fees on ATM transactions, replacing them with direct charges, while at the same time improving the information given to consumers about the costs of transactions at 'foreign' ATMs.","PeriodicalId":41700,"journal":{"name":"Agenda-A Journal of Policy Analysis and Reform","volume":"14 1","pages":"63-68"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2012-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75138642","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The Treasury-KPMG Econtech Modelling of the Excess Burden of Mining Taxation: Some Doubts","authors":"J. Pincus","doi":"10.22459/AG.19.02.2012.03","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22459/AG.19.02.2012.03","url":null,"abstract":"The Commonwealth Treasury commissioned KPMG Econtech to model the efficiency of the existing Australian tax system. The report was an input to the 2010 'Henry Review' of the Australian tax system (henceforth AFTS), and proved very influential to both it and (especially) the Rudd government's response to AFTS. That response comprised proposals for a new Commonwealth tax on mining, called the Resource Super Profits Tax (RSPT); a proposal to abolish royalties; and a proposal to reduce the rate of corporate income taxation. Subsequently, Treasury commissioned a second KPMG Econtech report to model the welfare effects of that response.","PeriodicalId":41700,"journal":{"name":"Agenda-A Journal of Policy Analysis and Reform","volume":"346 1","pages":"23-38"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2012-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74985054","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Investments in fire management: Does saving lives cost lives?","authors":"B. Ashe, F. D. Oliveira, J. McAneney","doi":"10.22459/AG.19.02.2012.09","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22459/AG.19.02.2012.09","url":null,"abstract":"The total cost of structural fires and bushfires in Australia was estimated at around A$18 billion in 2010, or about 1.5 per cent of GDP. This cost includes some A$16 billion devoted to managing the risk. At the same time, Australia's fire fatality rate of 0.6 per 100 000 of population, already low by international standards, has proved resistant to increasing expenditure on fire management and protection. Following a concern that this expenditure might encompass an overinvestment compared with the real risk, this paper examines the regulatory cost of this investment. Since on average poorer people have worse health outcomes, and governments or companies have no alternative but to pass on increased costs or taxes, it is possible to estimate the lives forgone, on account of an increased mortality rate, of any overinvestment. Adapting a model of Keeney (1997) for Australian conditions, we determine the Australian willingness to spend (WTS) for preventing a loss of a life in the fire space to be between A$20 and A$50 million, depending upon how these costs or taxes are imposed upon the population. If we accept, by way of example, the results of an expert elicitation (Ashe and McAneney 2011) to imply an overinvestment in fire prevention and management of the order of A$4.5 billion per annum (2010 dollars), this excess would imply between 90 and 225 extra fatalities annually. These numbers are of the same order as the annual average number of fire fatalities actually experienced. The analysis shows the importance of carefully evaluating the unintended costs of any new safety regulations and particularly in insuring that the costs are at least grosso modo in line with the purported benefits.","PeriodicalId":41700,"journal":{"name":"Agenda-A Journal of Policy Analysis and Reform","volume":"79 1","pages":"89-106"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2012-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83763269","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Modelling as Agit-prop: The Treasury's Role in Australia's Carbon Tax Debate","authors":"H. Ergas, A. Robson","doi":"10.22459/AG.19.02.2012.02","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22459/AG.19.02.2012.02","url":null,"abstract":"This paper examines the modelling undertaken by the Commonwealth Treasury of the costs of an Australian emissions trading scheme, published in 'Strong Growth, Low Pollution'. Despite its considerable technical sophistication, we argue that this modelling is primarily an exercise in propaganda: 'the systematic dissemination of selected information to promote a particular doctrine' (Oxford English Dictionary). That propaganda role determined the limited range of questions asked in the modelling, the myriad unrealistic assumptions made in answering those questions, and the limitations imposed on third-party access to the model and data.","PeriodicalId":41700,"journal":{"name":"Agenda-A Journal of Policy Analysis and Reform","volume":"5 1","pages":"9-22"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2012-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85160211","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}