Stock market efficiency before and after a financial liberalisation reform:do breaks in volatility dynamics matter?

This article focuses on the deviations from normality of stock returns before and after a financial liberalisation reform, and shows the extent to which inference based on statistical measures of stock market efficiency can be affected by not controlling for breaks. Drawing from recent advances in the econometrics of structural change, it compares the distribution of the returns of five East Asian emerging markets when breaks in the mean and variance are either (i) imposed using certain official liberalisation dates or (ii) detected non-parametrically using a data-driven procedure. The results suggest that measuring deviations from normality of stock returns with no provision for potentially existing breaks incorporates substantial bias. This is likely to severely affect any inference based on the corresponding descriptive or test statistics.

Selection of power market structure using the analytic hierarchy process

Selection of a power market structure from the available alternatives is an important activity within an overall power sector reform programme. The evaluation criteria for selection are both subjective as well as objective in nature and the selection of alternatives is characterised by their conflicting nature. This study demonstrates a methodology for power market structure selection using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP), a multiple attribute decision-making technique, to model the selection methodology with the active participation of relevant stakeholders in a workshop environment. The methodology is applied to a hypothetical case of a State Electricity Board reform in India.

Logics of marginalisation in health and social care reform:integration, choice, and provider-blind provision

The period 2010–2013 was a time of far-reaching structural reforms of the National Health Service in England. Of particular interest in this paper is the way in which radical critiques of the reform process were marginalised by pragmatic concerns about how to maintain the market-competition thrust of the reforms while avoiding potential fragmentation. We draw on the Essex school of political discourse theory and develop a ‘nodal’ analytical framework to argue that widespread and repeated appeals to a narrative of choice-based integrated care served to take the fragmentation ‘sting’ out of radical critiques of the pro-competition reform process. This served to marginalise alternative visions of health and social care, and to pre-empt the contestation of a key norm in the provision of health care that is closely associated with the notions of ‘any willing provider’ and ‘any qualified provider’: provider-blind provision.