tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13194839.post5197225942641345218..comments2023-06-30T01:39:28.918-07:00Comments on B.C. Policy Perspectives: Government By Voucher?Mark Crawfordhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11904245045490682686noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13194839.post-37909979199816420042007-07-23T14:33:00.000-07:002007-07-23T14:33:00.000-07:00Thank you for that excellent comment. Yes, in the...Thank you for that excellent comment. Yes, in the back of my mind I have a fear of the slippery slope, and you articulate very well why that is a concern. Yet it is very hard to argue in either a political or a rationalist context "don't do it because it may work well and then it will lend credence to pro-voucher advocates and then may spread to an area where we don't want it". I think that as academics and public servants we should try to identify where vouchers might work best and flag the dangers, then hope that the politicians, journalists, and decision makers don't get carried away.<BR/> <BR/> Maybe I should try to write an article on "criteria for the adoption of vouchers". Objectives would have to be narrowly and clearly enough defined that more is gained in efficiency than is lost in managerial judgement or political accountability, etc. Suppliers would have to either come from a very competitive market or else be domestically chartered to peform specific tasks--i.e.not large, powerful foreign corporate monoplies with large advertising, lobbying and litigation budgets. On the demand side, consumers would need to be able to make informed judgements on the basis of a reasonable amount of effort and information and should have preferences that are universalizable--i.e. that could in principle be achievable by everyone. <BR/> <BR/>Perhaps post-secondary student aid could meet all of these criteria? Universities would be chartered in Canada as "public' universities, in order to qualify as suppliers of post-secondary education; students just need to choose between a limited number of universities and colleges that are already accredited according to fairly high standards; paternalistic concerns about "equality" among consumers are not as important after high school has afforded everyone a basic degree of equality of opportunity. A tied demand-side subsidy to students without price control sounds better than what we have now, which is $20-$30,000 bank loans for students and ad-hoc periodic price controls that lead to under-funding of universities.<BR/> <BR/>But I certainly agree with you--"vouchers as a panacea" could take hold, and that could be bad.<BR/> <BR/>MarkMark Crawfordhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11904245045490682686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13194839.post-26776696358044975332007-07-23T14:31:00.000-07:002007-07-23T14:31:00.000-07:00Hi Mark,I finally had a chance to read your vouche...Hi Mark,<BR/><BR/>I finally had a chance to read your vouchers book review. I thought your view was balanced and, after some pondering, think I agree that there may be room for vouchers in some well-defined, limited areas, such as the ones you mentioned. But if they work well in these contexts, arguments will surely be made to expand them into areas where they are not appropriate -- where a concern for the public good and an understanding of externalities are necessary for making the "right" choice. (Some would say that governments don't function well in this regard either, but that's a "normative" vs. "positive" issue.) Of course, it's difficult to say don't use vouchers, where they might work, for this reason.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com