- Newsletters in 2000
- Newsletters in 2001
- Newsletters in 2002
- Newsletters in 2003
- Newsletters in 2004
- Newsletters in 2005
- Newsletters in 2006
- Newsletters in 2007
- Newsletters in 2008
- Newsletters in 2009
- Newsletters in 2011
- Issue 31 March 2010
- Issue 32 July 2010
- Issue 33 November 2010
- Issue 34 March 2011
- Newsletters in 2010
Issue 25 March 2008
- They shoot horses don't they...but what about their trainers?
- Raising the quality of debate
- Cooperative? Investor-owned? A tale of two organisational forms
- Ranking the Unrankable: How useful are OECD league tables?
- Does everyone get a bargain?
- Unravelling a riddle the healthcare enigma
- iPredict and you can too
They shoot horses don't they...but what about their trainers?
Many economic transactions - particularly those involving 'experts' and 'clients' - are characterised by information differences between the parties. Such differences may encourage self-serving behaviour by the party with the information advantage, and thus are said to necessitate constraining rules and regulations. But as Glenn Boyle explains, most experts rely on repeat business - a dynamic incentive that can provide effective self-regulation
Raising the quality of debate
ISCR's new chairman Rob Cameron gives his views on ISCR and what it does.
Cooperative? Investor-owned? A tale of two organisational forms
The age-old contest between cooperative (supplier-owned) and investor-owned organisational forms rolls on in New Zealand and elsewhere. Typically the debate assembles pros and cons of each form, and then usually reaches the conclusion that the best test is the survival of each form in competitive industries. But many industries have the two forms of organisation existing side by- side, with the prevalence of each changing over time in response to technological, economic and social change. Lewis Evans re-examines this issue in the context of the New Zealand meat processing industry.
Ranking the Unrankable: How useful are OECD league tables?
Using OECD rankings as either a measure of a country's performance or as a target to justify adopting a particular policy has become popular amongst the OECD's member states in recent years. Policies benchmarked through rankings are simple concepts to market to voters and appeal to a sense of nationalistic pride: ‘winning' is important, but if you can't win then at least you want to be seen to be outranking your fiercest national rival. However, as Glenn Boyle and Bronwyn Howell note, using rankings in this way is simplistic and potentially dangerous.
Does everyone get a bargain?
Over the course of 25 years, The Warehouse has grown from a single store in Auckland to a 128- strong national behemoth. In doing so, it has become New Zealand's largest retailer - and its ability to offer consumers a wide range of products at low prices has made it a national icon. But critics argue that this apparent success has come at the cost of significant economic and social problems. Laura Hubbard outlines these claims and assesses their validity by looking at research into similar arguments made about The Warehouse's US counterpart, Wal-Mart.
Unravelling a riddle the healthcare enigma
Why does society appear to tolerate less-competitive behaviour amongst medical practitioners when it doesn't do the same for panelbeaters? The explanation typically offered in health policy literature is that extensive treatment-subsidies provided by governments and insurers make healthcare markets fundamentally different, resulting in over-much care being consumed by individuals who do not pay its full cost. Consequently, if there is a relaxation in competitive standards resulting in higher prices to patients, then consumption will fall to a level much closer to the unsubsidised optimum. By comparing and contrasting the health/vehicle insurance and healthcare/vehicle-repair markets, Bronwyn Howell begins unravelling the healthcare competition enigma
iPredict and you can too
ISCR (in partnership with Victoria University) will later this year launch iPredict, New Zealand's first prediction market. While prediction markets have established a strong record in picking election outcomes and Oscar winners, their greatest potential may lie within large organisations. Much of what senior management needs to know about their organisation resides in the heads of its employees - and prediction markets can collect and synthesise that information simply by providing employees with the opportunity to profit from revealing what they know. Matt Burgess describes these public and private roles of iPredict.