Environmental regulation of land use and public compensation: principles, and Swiss and Australian examples

The authors discuss the regulation of rural land use and compensation for property-rights restrictions, both of which appear to have become more commonplace in recent years but also more contested. The implications of contemporary theories in relation to this matter are examined, including: the applicability of new welfare economics; the relevance of the neoclassical theory of politics; and the implications of contemporary theories of social conflict resolution and communication. Examination of examples of Swiss and Australian regulation of the use of rural properties, and the ensuing conflicts, reveals that many decisions reflect a mixture of these elements. Rarely, if ever, are social decisions in this area made solely on the basis of welfare economics, for instance social cost-benefit analysis. Only some aspects of such decisions can be explained by the neoclassical theory of politics. Theories of social conflict resolution suggest why, and in what way, approaches of discourse and participation may resolve conflicts regarding regulation and compensation. These theories and their practical application seem to gain in importance as opposition to government decisions increases. The high degree of complexity of most conflicts concerning regulation and compensation cannot be tackled with narrow economic theories. Moreover, the Swiss and Australian examples show that approaches involving conflict resolution may favour environmental standards.

Public investment and the risk premium for equity

Analysis of the equity premium puzzle has focused on private-sector capital markets. However, the existence of an anomalous equity premium raises important issues in the evaluation of public-sector investment projects. These issues are explored below. We begin by formalizing the argument that an equity premium may arise from uninsurable systematic risk in labour income, and show that, other things being equal, increases in public ownership of equity will improve welfare, up to the point where the equity premium is eliminated. Finally, we consider policy implications and the optimal extent of public ownership.

The changing public-private infrastructure mix: Economy-wide implications

This article provides an economy-wide perspective on the changing role of the public sector in developing economic and social infrastructure in Australia. It analyses the scale and macroeconomic significance of the key economic and social infrastructure sectors - communication services, electricity, gas and water supply, transport, education, health and community services, government administration and defence. It then canvasses the major policy issues that have arisen in the progression from public to private infrastructure provision and considers why concerns about the trend fall in traditional public works spending may be misplaced in light of recent economic and institutional changes.

Optimal price regulation in a growth model with monopolistic suppliers of intermediate goods

In this paper we investigate the trade-off faced by regulators who must set a price for an intermediate good somewhere between the marginal cost and the monopoly price. We utilize a growth model with monopolistic suppliers of intermediate goods. Investment in innovation is required to produce a new intermediate good. Marginal cost pricing deters innovation, while monopoly pricing maximizes innovation and economic growth at the cost of some static inefficiency. We demonstrate the existence of a second-best price above the marginal cost but below the monopoly price, which maximizes consumer welfare. Simulation results suggest that substantial reductions in consumption, production, growth, and welfare occur where regulators focus on static efficiency issues by setting prices at or near marginal cost.

Competitive advantage in public-sector organizations: explaining the public good/sustainable competitive advantage paradox

Resource-based views of the firm and in particular Kay's (Why Firms Succeed. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1995) model of sustainable competitive advantage have been used to advance an understanding of differences in the competitive advantage of private-sector firms. We extend the analysis to a public-sector firm where its major purpose includes engaging in public good by giving away its knowledge base and services. The case highlights the paradox that many public-sector organizations face in simultaneously pursuing public good and sustainable competitive advantage. While Kay's model is applicable for understanding intergovernmental agency competition, we find it necessary to incorporate resource dependency theory to address the paradox. Implications for theory and practice are provided. (C) 2002 Elsevier Inc. All rights reseved.

Does pharmacogenomics provide an ethical challenge to the utilisation of cost-effectiveness analysis by public health systems?

Pharmacogenomics promotes an understanding of the genetic basis for differences in efficacy or toxicity of drugs in different individuals. Implementation of the outcomes of pharmacogenomic research into clinical practice presents a number of difficulties for healthcare. This paper aims to highlight one of the Unique ethical challenges which pharmacogenomics presents for the utilisation of cost-effectiveness analysis by public health systems. This paper contends that pharmacogenomics provides a challenge to fundamental principles which underlie most systems for deciding which drugs should be publicly subsidised. Pharmacogenomics brings into focus the conflict between equality and utility in the context of using cost-effectiveness analysis to aid distribution of a limited national drug budget.

Health investment, saving, and public policy

This paper develops an overlapping-generations model in which agents invest in health to prolong life in both working and retirement periods. It explores how unfunded social security with or without health subsidies affects life expectancy, economic growth, and welfare. In particular, by extending life at a possible cost of capital accumulation, health subsidies and a pay-as-you-go pension can improve welfare, especially in the short run.