Microeconomic Reform and Productivity Growth: Workshop Proceedings, proceedings of a conference “Microeconomic Reform and Productivity Growth”: 26-27 February 1998. (Productivity Commission and ANU, 1998) p.155-181.
Keywords: Growth & Innovation; Macroeconomics & Money; Political Economy & History;
Prologue
This being the first occasion which I have visited the Australian National University since the death of Professor Fred Gruen, may I briefly pay him a tribute. When we first met, Fred was suspicious of my approach, thinking I was anti-market. Over some long discussions he came to recognize I have a deep Marshallian respect for the market, even though we might not always agree on the details of policy. I would have appreciated a continuation of our intermittent dialogue with his response to this paper. It would have been thoughtful and shrewd. I would have responded in my revision, each of us shifting our position in the light of analysis and facts. I am sorry he is not here, except in spirit.
Introduction
Economic reform in New Zealand has been unusually comprehensive and thorough. For the scientist it provides a test of the theory which underpinned the reforms. The overt theory was essentially that which is known in Australia as “economic rationalism”, the consistent application of modern neo-classical market theory. At the practical microeconomic policy level this has been the withdrawal of government interventions which preferred one firm, industry, or sector (relative to others), in favour of market regulation of economic activity. Thus import licences have been abandoned, tariff levels steadily reduced, subsidies and tax incentives withdrawn, the tax regime made more uniform with exemptions barriers to entry eradicated, corporatization and privatisation of government trading activities, and greater reliance on competition law.1 There remain some (now much lower) tariffs, a few special taxes, occasional interventions, and so on. Nevertheless the extent of the microeconomic reforms is such to that they become a test of the theory which underpins them.