23.03.2013 Views

FortisBC Inc. (FortisBC) Application for a Certificate of Public ...

FortisBC Inc. (FortisBC) Application for a Certificate of Public ...

FortisBC Inc. (FortisBC) Application for a Certificate of Public ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Appendix D: Delay Times and the Number <strong>of</strong> Grow-Ops<br />

To get an estimate <strong>of</strong> the delay times we use data<br />

from Plecas et al. <strong>for</strong> 32 regions. In the regression<br />

we have the log <strong>of</strong> the time to bust, D, regressed<br />

against the log <strong>of</strong> the number <strong>of</strong> busts, B. The<br />

panel data are based on eight regions and four<br />

years <strong>of</strong> data using a fixed effect model since the<br />

regions do not change and may have individual<br />

characteristics. The coefficient on D tells us the effect<br />

<strong>of</strong> delay on the number <strong>of</strong> busts. In this case, a<br />

Dependent Variable: LOG(B?)<br />

Method: GLS (Cross Section Weights)<br />

Sample: 1997 2000<br />

<strong>Inc</strong>luded observations: 4<br />

Number <strong>of</strong> cross-sections used: 8<br />

Total panel (unbalanced) observations: 31<br />

One-step weighting matrix<br />

PUBLIC POLICY SOURCES, NUMBER 74<br />

White Heteroskedasticity-Consistent Standard Errors & Covariance<br />

Appendix BCUC IR1 74.1<br />

10 percent increase in the time <strong>of</strong> delay results in a<br />

1.4 percent decrease in the number <strong>of</strong> busts. In<br />

terms <strong>of</strong> the model, it suggests that the effect <strong>of</strong><br />

the number <strong>of</strong> grow ops measured is affected by<br />

the number <strong>of</strong> grow ops. With more delay, fewer<br />

grow-ops are discovered. Although there may be<br />

many reasons <strong>for</strong> this, the subtleties <strong>of</strong> the model<br />

in appendix C are clearly an issue that should be<br />

investigated.<br />

Variable Coefficient Std. Error t-Statistic Prob.<br />

LOG(D?) -0.14 0.017 -8.48 0.0000<br />

YEAR<br />

Fixed Effects<br />

0.22 0.013 16.7 0.0000<br />

C—C 4.14<br />

K—C 4.44<br />

M—C 6.80<br />

NC—C 2.70<br />

T—C 5.40<br />

V—C 5.95<br />

NE—C 1.86<br />

NK—C<br />

Weighted Statistics<br />

2.28<br />

R-squared 0.998 Mean dependent var 6.73<br />

Adjusted R-squared 0.997 S.D. dependent var 4.33<br />

S.E. <strong>of</strong> regression 0.216 Sum squared resid 0.98<br />

F-statistic 12060 Durbin-Watson stat 2.49<br />

Prob(F-statistic)<br />

Unweighted Statistics<br />

0.00<br />

R-squared 0.988 Mean dependent var. 4.45<br />

Adjusted R-squared 0.98 S.D. dependent var. 1.66<br />

S.E. <strong>of</strong> regression 0.218 Sum squared resid. 0.996<br />

Durbin-Watson stat. 2.81<br />

Marijuana Growth in British Columbia 38 The Fraser Institute

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!