A conceptual note on accounting for budget internalities in public policy making
In a recent paper, Fleming, Heinecke and Dollery (2007) developed the government failure taxonomic system advanced by Charles Wolf into a conceptual framework to incorporate positive and negative internalities for analyzing public programs and policies. However, their paper unfortunately ignored the treatment of budget internalities, often an important question in real-world policy applications. This neglect is remedied in the present note by extending the analytical framework to include this important type of internal cost.
THE GOOD, THE BAD AND THE UGLY: ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVES ON REGULATION IN AUSTRALIA
The paper examines the existing scope and role of regulations in Australia. While there are many benefits from regulation, there is also a myriad of, often underplayed, costs associated with regulations. While compliance costs are large, probably the most significant costs arise from behavioural responses to regulations that reduce efficiency or compromise social goals. These adverse effects are often unanticipated and arise from complex interactions between regulations. The main reasons for regulatory failure are excessive ambition (underestimating the deficiencies of the regulatory ‘solution’), capture of regulatory agencies, and poor regulatory processes and institutions. The paper offers some guidelines for producing better regulation.
Inequality trends in health and future health risk among English children and young people, 1999–2009
Objective To investigate trends in health inequality among children and young people between 1999 and 2009, using outcomes consistent with the current NHS reforms. Design/data Secondary analysis of participants aged 0–24 in the Health Surveys for England (HSE) undertaken in 1999, 2004, 2006 and 2009. Main outcome measures Changes in the absolute and relative risks of four health outcomes by deprivation tertiles, based on occupation of the head of household ▸ self/parent-reported general health, ▸ presence of a long-standing illness (LSI), ▸ obesity ▸ smoking. Results No indicator showed a reduction in relative or absolute inequality between 1999 and 2009. For children (0–12 years), the relative risk comparing the most and least deprived tertiles increased significantly for poor general health (1999:1.6 (95% CI 1.2 to 2.2); 2009:3.9 (2.4 to 6.2), while the absolute difference in LSI prevalence(%) increased from 1.3 (−2.9 to 5.5) to 7.4 (3.6 to 11.4). Among young people (13–24 years), the absolute difference in LSI prevalence increased from −5.9 (−10.9 to −1.1) to 3.1 (−4.1 to 10.7). Absolute inequality in having tried smoking among children aged 8–15(%) increased significantly in the first half of the decade before decreasing in the second half (1999:3.3 (−1.1 to 7.7); 2004:14.1 (9.6 to 18.8); 2009:4.1 (0.1 to 8.8)). However, the increase in absolute inequality for smoking prevalence among young adults (16–24 years) was maintained throughout the decade (1999:−7.0 (−15.6 to 1.3); 2004:11.6 (3.7 to 20.0); 2009:8.2 (−0.3 to 16.9)). Conclusions The national programme between 1999 and 2009 was not successful in reducing inequality in four key indicators of health status and future health risk among children and young people. Some inequality measures for general health, LSI prevalence and smoking increased over this time.