{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.025544703230653644, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.027149321266968, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Discussion of Case Studies of the Productivity Effects of Microeconomic Reform

Case studies of industry restructuring all too often fall into two literary genres. The first is the ‘Boy’s Own’ school of analysis, full of villainous foreigners, visionary heroes, courageous gestures and ultimate triumphs – readers of Peter Roberts’ column, in which the brave Aussie battler invariably wins the day, will immediately recognise the style I have in mind. At the other extreme, and especially well-represented in the writing of economists, lies the cautionary tale. Like fallen maidens, firms, industries and countries are shown to lose their way; and regardless of the efforts they might subsequently make, virtue once lost is almost impossible to regain – although, extreme penitence and liberal self-flagellation may help, and are in any case widely seen as being their own reward. The papers presented in this session mercifully avoid these approaches and provide a useful basis for examining aspects of the Australian experience. The industries they cover differ greatly, as do the changes they discuss. Yet there are some common elements, and it may be helpful to bring them out. Viewed as a whole, they suggested a profound change in the way Australian business operate – one yielding greater efficiencies, but not at zero cost.