Posted: September 19th, 2015

Immunization rate in australia.

class=”Apple-interchange-newline“>
Your musings were overheard by the CEO. The CEO was impressed by your insights and has asked that
you write a critical overview of the changes to the government’s immunisation incentive scheme in Australia
from an economics perspective.
You email your unit coordinator for Economics desperate for some help. Louisa suggests breaking your
report down as follows:
1. A brief overview of immunisation rates in Australia AND the current and proposed changes to policy that
links Child Care Benefit, Child Care Rebate and Family Tax Benefit to immunisation in Australia.
Hint: As an economist, we generally start by framing the problem. We also refer to this as setting the
context. In this part of your essay, you need to clearly articulate what the issue is from a societal
perspective. This is not simply a case of stating “I think it is a problem because …”. You need to
present and interpret data on immunisation rates and note key policies that have attempted to
increase immunisation rates.
2. A description of the relevant economic theory to show how the policy that increases immunisation rates
could result in a socially efficient level of immunisation rates.
Hint: So what is the economic theory that underpins your economic analysis? We have been pretty
focused on developing one key theory so far this semester. Remember that “X” marks the spot! In
this case it is under consumption of a good that is potentially leading to a socially inefficient outcome.
To correct for that, you can use an economic theory to demonstrate how increasing immunisation
rates will move the market to a socially efficient level of consumption. And yes — you will be
expected to include a relevant graph of the economic theory!
3. A critical analysis, informed by research, as to whether the proposed government intervention will be
effective in correcting the market failure and result in an efficient level of immunisation in the community.
Hint: You are working with a word limit so you will need to be selective and concise with your
arguments. Again, your analysis needs to be objective, we expect you to draw on appropriate
academic literature and/or present empirical evidence to support your arguments about either the
limitation of the proposed policy and suggest alternative policies that may be more effective or
appropriate. To keep it manageable, Louisa has suggested your critical analysis should include:
• a brief discussion on the potential limitations of the policy in addressing issues that affect
immunisation rates — e.g. asymmetric information, equality of access, etc.
• ONE policy alternative that research shows can increase immunisation rates
In your essay keep it simple — give an overview of how the policy will work and a summary of the
potential strengths and weaknesses of that policy. Note, you are not required to say that the
alternative policy is better than what has been proposed by the government — simply that it
addresses the problem in a different way.
Louisa also recommends that:
• you write an unbiased informed critical economic essay and not a political document
• your essay is academically rigorous with references to relevant data and academic literature
• you do not get drawn into reporting emotive arguments (interesting as they are).
In a panic you contacted your BSB113 unit coordinator (again!) and asked her if she could indicate some
relevant reading in the area. Note that there is a list of references provided in the “background” section to
6
this document. In addition, Louisa provides you with a few more below. This is not an exhaustive list of
references.
You are also expected to research the literature yourself (refer to the Criterion Reference Assessment
(CRA)) table at the end of this document)

Looking for the best essay writer? Click below to have a customized paper written as per your requirements.