A review of rationale for allocating costs and payments in producing and supplying public sector information

Presentation given by Dr John S Cook at the Queensland Spatial Conference 2008, Global Warming: What’s Happening in Paradise?, held at Holiday Inn, Surfers Paradise,Queensland from 17-19 July, 2008 This presentation provides some semblance of an information infrastructure that is aligned generally to problems of governance in complex organisations.

Approaches for calculation of holding costs in the context of greenfield residential development

There are increasing indications that the contribution of holding costs and its impact on housing affordability is very significant. Their importance and perceived high level impact can be gauged from considering the unprecedented level of attention policy makers have given them recently. This may be evidenced by the embedding of specific strategies to address burgeoning holding costs (and particularly those cost savings associated with streamlining regulatory assessment) within statutory instruments such as the Queensland Housing Affordability Strategy, and the South East Queensland Regional Plan. However, several key issues require further investigation. Firstly, the computation and methodology behind the calculation of holding costs varies widely. In fact, it is not only variable, but in some instances completely ignored. Secondly, some ambiguity exists in terms of the inclusion of various elements of holding costs and assessment of their relative contribution. Perhaps this may in part be explained by their nature: such costs are not always immediately apparent. They are not as visible as more tangible cost items associated with greenfield development such as regulatory fees, government taxes, acquisition costs, selling fees, commissions and others. Holding costs are also more difficult to evaluate since for the most part they must be ultimately assessed over time in an ever-changing environment based on their strong relationship with opportunity cost which is in turn dependant, inter alia, upon prevailing inflation and / or interest rates. This paper seeks to provide a more detailed investigation of those elements related to holding costs, and in so doing determine the size of their impact specifically on the end user. It extends research in this area clarifying the extent to which holding costs impact housing affordability. Geographical diversity indicated by the considerable variation between various planning instruments and the length of regulatory assessment periods suggests further research should adopt a case study approach in order to test the relevance of theoretical modelling conducted.

Changes in accountancy costs for Tasmanian SMEs implementing computerised accounting systems

There have been powerful incentives for Tasmanian Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs) to adopt information technology to enable them to remain competitive and to comply with legislative regulations. This research study was undertaken to establish whether SMEs implementing computerised accounting systems have a subsequent change in their external accountancy fees. The research study employed a quantitative methodology using survey questionnaires. The study found that in less than 3% of cases SMEs reported a decrease in accountancy fees, in almost 45% of cases the organisation actually experienced a slight to substantial fee increase while 52% reported no change in accountancy fees.

Quantifying the costs of drought : new evidence from life satisfaction data

We estimate the cost of droughts by matching rainfall data with individual life satisfaction. Our context is Australia over the period 2001 to 2004, which included a particularly severe drought. Using fixed-effect models, we find that a drought in spring has a detrimental effect on life satisfaction equivalent to an annual reduction in income of A$18,000. This effect, however, is only found for individuals living in rural areas. Using our estimates, we calculate that the predicted doubling of the frequency of spring droughts will lead to the equivalent loss in life satisfaction of just over 1% of GDP annually.

The conceptualisation, sensitivity and measurement of holding costs and other selected elements impacting housing affordability (Literature review and research methodology for confirmation of PhD candidature)

It is widely held that strong relationships exist between housing, economic status, and well being. This is exemplified by widespread housing stock surpluses in many countries which threaten to destabilise numerous aspects related to individuals and community. However, the position of housing demand and supply is not consistent. The Australian position provides a distinct contrast whereby seemingly inexorable housing demand generally remains a critical issue affecting the socio-economic landscape. Underpinned by high levels of immigration, and further buoyed by sustained historically low interest rates, increasing income levels, and increased government assistance for first home buyers, this strong housing demand ensures elements related to housing affordability continue to gain prominence. A significant, but less visible factor impacting housing affordability – particularly new housing development – relates to holding costs. These costs are in many ways “hidden” and cannot always be easily identified. Although it is only one contributor, the nature and extent of its impact requires elucidation. In its simplest form, it commences with a calculation of the interest or opportunity cost of land holding. However, there is significantly more complexity for major new developments - particularly greenfield property development. Preliminary analysis conducted by the author suggests that even small shifts in primary factors impacting holding costs can appreciably affect housing affordability – and notably, to a greater extent than commonly held. Even so, their importance and perceived high level impact can be gauged from the unprecedented level of attention policy makers have given them over recent years. This may be evidenced by the embedding of specific strategies to address burgeoning holding costs (and particularly those cost savings associated with streamlining regulatory assessment) within statutory instruments such as the Queensland Housing Affordability Strategy, and the South East Queensland Regional Plan. However, several key issues require investigation. Firstly, the computation and methodology behind the calculation of holding costs varies widely. In fact, it is not only variable, but in some instances completely ignored. Secondly, some ambiguity exists in terms of the inclusion of various elements of holding costs, thereby affecting the assessment of their relative contribution. Perhaps this may in part be explained by their nature: such costs are not always immediately apparent. Some forms of holding costs are not as visible as the more tangible cost items associated with greenfield development such as regulatory fees, government taxes, acquisition costs, selling fees, commissions and others. Holding costs are also more difficult to evaluate since for the most part they must be ultimately assessed over time in an ever-changing environment, based on their strong relationship with opportunity cost which is in turn dependant, inter alia, upon prevailing inflation and / or interest rates. By extending research in the general area of housing affordability, this thesis seeks to provide a more detailed investigation of those elements related to holding costs, and in so doing determine the size of their impact specifically on the end user. This will involve the development of soundly based economic and econometric models which seek to clarify the componentry impacts of holding costs. Ultimately, there are significant policy implications in relation to the framework used in Australian jurisdictions that promote, retain, or otherwise maximise, the opportunities for affordable housing.

Determinants of health costs due to farmers’ exposure to pesticides : an empirical analysis

It is now well known that pesticide spraying by farmers has an adverse impact on their health. This is especially so in developing countries where pesticide spraying is undertaken manually. The estimated health costs are large. Studies to date have examined farmers’ exposure to pesticides, the costs of ill-health and their determinants based on information provided by farmers. Hence, some doubt has been cast on the reliability of such studies. In this study, we rectify this situation by conducting surveys among two groups of farmers. Farmers who perceive that their ill-health is due to exposure to pesticides and obtained treatment and farmers whose ill-health have been diagnosed by doctors and who have been treated in hospital for exposure to pesticides. In the paper, cost comparisons between the two groups of farmers are made. Furthermore, regression analysis of the determinants of health costs show that the quantity of pesticides used per acre per month, frequency of pesticide use and number of pesticides used per hour per day are the most important determinants of medical costs for both samples. The results have important policy implications.

The impact of holding costs in the housing affordability puzzle

Research is now emerging which exposes the significance and extent to which even small shifts in the regulatory assessment period, and other factors, affect housing affordability. It suggests that the extent of its significance has not been hitherto completely demonstrated.

Measuring costs of sustainability issues in highway infrastructure : perception of stakeholders in Australia

With increasing pressure to deliver environmentally friendly and socially responsible highway infrastructure projects, stakeholders are also putting significant focus on the early identification of financial viability and outcomes for these projects. Infrastructure development typically requires major capital input, which may cause serious financial constraints for investors. The push for sustainability has added new dimensions to the evaluation of highway projects, particularly on the cost front. Comprehensive analysis of the cost implications of implementing place sustainable measures in highway infrastructure throughout its lifespan is highly desirable and will become an essential part of the highway development process and a primary concern for decision makers. This paper discusses an ongoing research which seeks to identify cost elements and issues related to sustainable measures for highway infrastructure projects. Through life-cycle costing analysis (LCCA), financial implications of pursuing sustainability, which are highly concerned by the construction stakeholders, have been assessed to aid the decision making when contemplating the design, development and operation of highway infrastructure. An extensive literature review and evaluation of project reports from previous Australian highway projects was first conducted to reveal all potential cost elements. This provided the foundation for a questionnaire survey, which helped identify those specific issues and related costs that project stakeholders consider to be most critical in the Australian industry context. Through the survey, three key stakeholders in highway infrastructure development, namely consultants, contractors and government agencies, provided their views on the specific selection and priority ranking of the various categories. Findings of the survey are being integrated into proven LCCA models for further enhancement. A new LCCA model will be developed to assist the stakeholders to evaluate costs and investment decisions and reach optimum balance between financial viability and sustainability deliverables.

The importance of environmental issues and costs in Life Cycle Cost Analysis (LCCA) for highway projects

Sustainability has been increasingly recognised as an integral part of highway infrastructure development. In practice however, the fact that financial return is still a project’s top priority for many, environmental aspects tend to be overlooked or considered as a burden, as they add to project costs. Sustainability and its implications have a far-reaching effect on each project over time. Therefore, with highway infrastructure’s long-term life span and huge capital demand, the consideration of environmental cost/ benefit issues is more crucial in life-cycle cost analysis (LCCA). To date, there is little in existing literature studies on viable estimation methods for environmental costs. This situation presents the potential for focused studies on environmental costs and issues in the context of life-cycle cost analysis. This paper discusses a research project which aims to integrate the environmental cost elements and issues into a conceptual framework for life cycle costing analysis for highway projects. Cost elements and issues concerning the environment were first identified through literature. Through questionnaires, these environmental cost elements will be validated by practitioners before their consolidation into the extension of existing and worked models of life-cycle costing analysis (LCCA). A holistic decision support framework is being developed to assist highway infrastructure stakeholders to evaluate their investment decision. This will generate financial returns while maximising environmental benefits and sustainability outcome.

Preliminary modelling outcomes : calculation of holding costs in greenfield residential development

Many of the costs associated with greenfield residential development are apparent and tangible. For example, regulatory fees, government taxes, acquisition costs, selling fees, commissions and others are all relatively easily identified since they represent actual costs incurred at a given point in time. However, identification of holding costs are not always immediately evident since by contrast they characteristically lack visibility. One reason for this is that, for the most part, they are typically assessed over time in an ever-changing environment. In addition, wide variations exist in development pipeline components: they are typically represented from anywhere between a two and over sixteen years time period - even if located within the same geographical region. Determination of the starting and end points, with regards holding cost computation, can also prove problematic. Furthermore, the choice between application of prevailing inflation, or interest rates, or a combination of both over time, adds further complexity. Although research is emerging in these areas, a review of the literature reveals attempts to identify holding cost components are limited. Their quantification (in terms of relative weight or proportionate cost to a development project) is even less apparent; in fact, the computation and methodology behind the calculation of holding costs varies widely and in some instances completely ignored. In addition, it may be demonstrated that ambiguities exists in terms of the inclusion of various elements of holding costs and assessment of their relative contribution. Yet their impact on housing affordability is widely acknowledged to be profound, with their quantification potentially maximising the opportunities for delivering affordable housing. This paper seeks to build on earlier investigations into those elements related to holding costs, providing theoretical modelling of the size of their impact - specifically on the end user. At this point the research is reliant upon quantitative data sets, however additional qualitative analysis (not included here) will be relevant to account for certain variations between expectations and actual outcomes achieved by developers. Although this research stops short of cross-referencing with a regional or international comparison study, an improved understanding of the relationship between holding costs, regulatory charges, and housing affordability results.

A review of rationale for allocating costs and payments in producing and supplying public sector information PART A of 2 Parts – Chapters 1, 2 and 3) 13 March 2011 version

This work reviews the rationale and processes for raising revenue and allocating funds to perform information intensive activities that are pertinent to the work of democratic government. ‘Government of the people, by the people, for the people’ expresses an idea that democratic government has no higher authority than the people who agree to be bound by its rules. Democracy depends on continually learning how to develop understandings and agreements that can sustain voting majorities on which democratic law making and collective action depends. The objective expressed in constitutional terms is to deliver ‘peace, order and good government’. Meeting this objective requires a collective intellectual authority that can understand what is possible; and a collective moral authority to understand what ought to happen in practice. Facts of life determine that a society needs to retain its collective competence despite a continual turnover of its membership as people die but life goes on. Retaining this ‘collective competence’ in matters of self-government depends on each new generation: • acquiring a collective knowledge of how to produce goods and services needed to sustain a society and its capacity for self-government; • Learning how to defend society diplomatically and militarily in relation to external forces to prevent overthrow of its self-governing capacity; and • Learning how to defend society against divisive internal forces to preserve the authority of representative legislatures, allow peaceful dispute resolution and maintain social cohesion.

Essays on irrigation development, farm production and unaccounted costs : theory and empirical evidence

A review of the literature related to issues involved in irrigation induced agricultural development (IIAD) reveals that: (1) the magnitude, sensitivity and distribution of social welfare of IIAD is not fully analysed; (2) the impacts of excessive pesticide use on farmers’ health are not adequately explained; (3) no analysis estimates the relationship between farm level efficiency and overuse of agro-chemical inputs under imperfect markets; and (4) the method of incorporating groundwater extraction costs is misleading. This PhD thesis investigates these issues by using primary data, along with secondary data from Sri Lanka. The overall findings of the thesis can be summarised as follows. First, the thesis demonstrates that Sri Lanka has gained a positive welfare change as a result of introducing new irrigation technology. The change in the consumer surplus is Rs.48,236 million, while the change in the producer surplus is Rs. 14,274 millions between 1970 and 2006. The results also show that the long run benefits and costs of IIAD depend critically on the magnitude of the expansion of the irrigated area, as well as the competition faced by traditional farmers (agricultural crowding out effects). The traditional sector’s ability to compete with the modern sector depends on productivity improvements, reducing production costs and future structural changes (spillover effects). Second, the thesis findings on pesticides used for agriculture show that, on average, a farmer incurs a cost of approximately Rs. 590 to 800 per month during a typical cultivation period due to exposure to pesticides. It is shown that the value of average loss in earnings per farmer for the ‘hospitalised’ sample is Rs. 475 per month, while it is approximately Rs. 345 per month for the ‘general’ farmers group during a typical cultivation season. However, the average willingness to pay (WTP) to avoid exposure to pesticides is approximately Rs. 950 and Rs. 620 for ‘hospitalised’ and ‘general’ farmers’ samples respectively. The estimated percentage contribution for WTP due to health costs, lost earnings, mitigating expenditure, and disutility are 29, 50, 5 and 16 per cent respectively for hospitalised farmers, while they are 32, 55, 8 and 5 per cent respectively for ‘general’ farmers. It is also shown that given market imperfections for most agricultural inputs, farmers are overusing pesticides with the expectation of higher future returns. This has led to an increase in inefficiency in farming practices which is not understood by the farmers. Third, it is found that various groundwater depletion studies in the economics literature have provided misleading optimal water extraction quantity levels. This is due to a failure to incorporate all production costs in the relevant models. It is only by incorporating quality changes to quantity deterioration, that it is possible to derive socially optimal levels. Empirical results clearly show that the benefits per hectare per month considering both the avoidance costs of deepening agro-wells by five feet from the existing average, as well as the avoidance costs of maintaining the water salinity level at 1.8 (mmhos/Cm), is approximately Rs. 4,350 for farmers in the Anuradhapura district and Rs. 5,600 for farmers in the Matale district.

What are the real costs of major trauma?

Background This economic evaluation reports the results of a detailed study of the cost of major trauma treated at Princess Alexandra Hospital (PAH), Australia. Methods A bottom-up approach was used to collect and aggregate the direct and indirect costs generated by a sample of 30 inpatients treated for major trauma at PAH in 2004. Major trauma was defined as an admission for Multiple Significant Trauma with an Injury Severity Score >15. Direct and indirect costs were amalgamated from three sources, (1) PAH inpatient costs, (2) Medicare Australia, and (3) a survey instrument. Inpatient costs included the initial episode of inpatient care including clinical and outpatient services and any subsequent representations for ongoing-related medical treatment. Medicare Australia provided an itemized list of pharmaceutical and ambulatory goods and services. The survey instrument collected out-of-pocket expenses and opportunity cost of employment forgone. Inpatient data obtained from a publically funded trauma registry were used to control for any potential bias in our sample. Costs are reported in Australian dollars for 2004 and 2008. Results The average direct and indirect costs of major trauma incurred up to 1-year postdischarge were estimated to be A$78,577 and A$24,273, respectively. The aggregate costs, for the State of Queensland, were estimated to range from A$86.1 million to $106.4 million in 2004 and from A$135 million to A$166.4 million in 2008. Conclusion These results demonstrate that (1) the costs of major trauma are significantly higher than previously reported estimates and (2) the cost of readmissions increased inpatient costs by 38.1%.