Public Policy: Using Market-Based Approaches - Department for ...
Public Policy: Using Market-Based Approaches - Department for ...
Public Policy: Using Market-Based Approaches - Department for ...
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
in outcomes are difficult to distinguish from other education re<strong>for</strong>ms enacted<br />
during the period. However, Bradley and Taylor (2002) find evidence to suggest<br />
that standards improved more sharply where there was greater competition<br />
between schools. They estimate that a 3 per cent improvement in the<br />
per<strong>for</strong>mance of a secondary school’s competitors at GCSE level is associated<br />
with a 1 per cent improvement in the school’s own GCSE results, and find that<br />
new admissions are positively related to a school’s own per<strong>for</strong>mance and<br />
negatively to the exam per<strong>for</strong>mance of its competitors. Glennerster (2002) finds<br />
evidence that educational inequalities have narrowed under a system of choice,<br />
with the worse per<strong>for</strong>ming schools experiencing the largest improvements in<br />
students meeting target levels.<br />
Choice-based lettings<br />
The use of consumer choice in the provision of social housing in the UK is<br />
described as one of our case studies in Part IV.<br />
IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES<br />
Economic theory and studies of past experience suggest that the following<br />
implementation issues can affect the success of consumer choice schemes:<br />
● capacity constraints;<br />
● inequality of access;<br />
● segregation;<br />
● in<strong>for</strong>mation; and<br />
● incentives to over-consume.<br />
The evidence on these issues which we have examined is set out in Part V. Below<br />
we summarise the main conclusions we have drawn from this evidence<br />
Capacity constraints<br />
Section 7 – <strong>Market</strong>-<strong>Based</strong> Mechanisms<br />
The introduction of consumer choice is likely to lead to capacity constraints <strong>for</strong><br />
those providers that are most popular with users. On the supply-side of the<br />
market, this problem can lead to the need <strong>for</strong> some <strong>for</strong>m of rationing between<br />
consumers, reintroducing some element of command and control. One rationing<br />
mechanism is <strong>for</strong> the provider to ‘cream skim’ the most desirable consumers. For<br />
example, schools may decide to allocate places to the most academically able<br />
pupils. This cream skimming can allow the school to improve its apparent<br />
per<strong>for</strong>mance without increasing its actual per<strong>for</strong>mance. To some extent, the<br />
effect on apparent per<strong>for</strong>mance can be addressed if more sophisticated measures<br />
of per<strong>for</strong>mance are used (which adjust <strong>for</strong> differences in pupil intakes, <strong>for</strong><br />
example). The problem can also be dealt with by specifying the rationing<br />
mechanism to be used.<br />
53