DSE Econ 時事 第6週（2026年）

Ask students to explain why electricity distribution can be a natural monopoly using cost and barrier-to-entry arguments, draw a diagram showing monopoly pricing vs. perfectly competitive outcome, and evaluate regulatory options (price control, quality standards) that the government could use after reliability failures like the voltage dip.

Give a data-response scenario: present average cost curves for a small and large supplier and ask students to show where economies of scale justify a single firm; then ask them to discuss how maintenance costs or rare failures (as in the voltage dip) could create diseconomies and affect average costs and service quality.

Require students to identify and classify the externalities in the article, quantify potential social costs in a short-answer or data question (e.g., time lost, emergency responses), and evaluate policy responses (fines, mandatory compensation, regulation of reliability standards) to internalise these external costs.

Ask students to contrast electricity as a private good with the public-good aspects of network reliability; design an essay question on how this hybrid nature affects pricing, regulation and emergency provisioning (backup systems, mandatory redundancy) after incidents like the lift entrapments.

Ask students to draw supply and demand diagrams showing (a) an increase in demand for orchids before Lunar New Year and the effect on equilibrium price and quantity, and (b) how stricter enforcement (higher cost of supply for smugglers or reduced legal supply) alters the market; include short-answer parts asking for welfare effects (consumer and producer surplus) and to explain incentives for smuggling.

Provide a numeric elasticity (or ask students to assume elastic/inelastic demand) and ask them to calculate the effect of a given price increase on total revenue and quantity; include a follow-up evaluation: if demand is inelastic, explain why smugglers earn higher revenues and how that affects enforcement priorities.

Require students to explain the market failure using a diagram that adds the external cost to private marginal cost, and then evaluate policy responses mentioned in the article (e.g., patrols, fines, detector dogs, CITES rules) in terms of efficiency and practicality for Hong Kong.

Ask students to compare policy options: strengthen property rights/permits, command-and-control bans, or public education/enforcement (as used in the article); require an evaluation of equity and effectiveness in the Hong Kong context, with specific reference to border controls and public-awareness campaigns.

Ask students to draw supply and demand diagrams for the prime office market showing a rightward shift in demand; explain effects on equilibrium rent and quantity, and evaluate why overall office rents could still record an annual decline (use given figures: 2.1 million sq ft net absorption, −2.9% year‑on‑year rents).

Set a data-response question: using the article’s statistics (e.g., 1.56 million registered companies, 15,586 new non‑HK firms), evaluate how rising HQ activity changes demand for different factors of production and the likely short‑run vs long‑run effects on factor payments (rent, wages).

Ask students to explain and diagram how higher demand for HQ services alters labour demand in Hong Kong’s financial and professional sectors; include discussion of wage effects, non‑wage locational attractions (amenities, client proximity) and policy implications to attract/retain talent.

Design an evaluative essay question: discuss how economies of scale and agglomeration externalities from HQ clustering raise productivity and lower average costs for firms in prime areas, and analyse why secondary assets might not benefit (consider sustainability and workplace quality requirements).

Ask students to explain how adoption of AI and automation in Hong Kong’s construction and services sectors could change labour productivity and firms’ cost curves; require a short diagram of average product of labour and a 8–10 mark evaluation of effects on wages, employment and income distribution in the short and long run.

Set a data-response or structured question where students draw and label marginal private and social benefit curves for R&D, calculate welfare loss from underinvestment, and evaluate government policies (subsidies, grants, coordinating offices) to correct the market failure (10–12 marks, include policy trade-offs).

Ask students to compare advantages and disadvantages of state-owned vs private firms in developing the space economy, requiring application to Hong Kong (efficiency, innovation incentives, access to finance) and a concluding judgment (6–8 marks; include reference to principal–agent and access to capital).

Design a question that asks students to identify and classify possible expansion strategies for Hong Kong-based firms entering the space or AI supply chains, analyse expected effects on average costs and market structure, and evaluate which expansion types the government should encourage through the budget (8–10 marks).

Ask students to draw supply and demand diagrams showing the pre- and peak-holiday positions, label the shortage at the fixed timetable price, and explain how equilibrium price and quantity would change if MTR added more trains or if dynamic pricing were allowed.

Require a written response comparing price elasticity of demand for short (Guangdong) versus long (Nanjing) routes and for business-class versus economy seats, and predict revenue effects of a fare increase using qualitative or simple numerical elasticity calculations.

Pose a question asking students to explain the causes and consequences of the shortage, evaluate short-term market responses (resale, waiting lists, tour packages), and discuss policy or firm responses (extra services, price discrimination, or quotas).

Give students hypothetical demand schedules or supply capacity and ask them to calculate changes in consumer and producer surplus under (a) fixed fares with shortages and (b) market-clearing higher fares or added supply; include evaluation of equity and efficiency.

Ask students to draw and explain long-run average cost curves showing how expansion into green methanol and AI/data services could shift costs; include a short calculation using hypothetical unit-costs before and after expansion and require identification of specific sources of economies (e.g., technology, spreading fixed costs) and possible diseconomies (management complexity).

Require students to classify several Towngas initiatives (green methanol, EcoCeres SAF, TGT data centre, RWA tokenisation) into types of expansion, explain the economic motives (risk spreading, synergy, market power), and evaluate likely effects on profitability and competitive position in short and long run.

Set a problem where students diagram positive externality for SAF production, calculate the socially optimal output given an external benefit per unit, compare it with private market output, and recommend policy tools (subsidy, regulation, certification) with reference to Towngas/EcoCeres activities.

Ask students to evaluate how specific technologies mentioned (AI inspection, TGSE smart appliances, blockchain RWA) affect productive efficiency, allocative efficiency and consumer surplus; include a short-data task estimating change in consumer surplus if cost savings are partly passed to consumers.

Ask students to draw supply and demand diagrams for (a) the Central top-tier office submarket and (b) citywide market, showing the effect of two large leases (demand increase for top-tier) and the 2026–27 new supply (supply increase). Students should explain changes in equilibrium rent and quantity (vacancy), and evaluate which effect dominates using the article’s figures (e.g. citywide vacancy ~17%, rents down 41% since Q1 2019).

Require students to explain how price elasticity of demand differs between top-tier and older offices and to calculate elasticity from hypothetical or provided percentage changes (e.g. compute implied responsiveness if top-tier vacancy falls from 14% to below 10% while other rents remain weak). Ask for policy/landlord pricing implications of inelastic demand for top-tier space (ability to raise rents without large losses in occupancy).

Pose an evaluation question: explain the concept of scarcity in the context of Central’s top-tier offices, and discuss opportunity costs for a firm choosing to pay premium rents for limited top-tier space versus cheaper decentralised alternatives. Ask students to consider landlord choices (upgrade/redevelop older stock) and cost-benefit trade-offs given constrained top-tier supply.

Ask students to use welfare diagrams to show how the two big leases and incoming supply change consumer and producer surplus in top-tier versus non-top-tier markets. Include a numerical part where students estimate surplus changes using hypothetical price and quantity shifts informed by article data (e.g. 44% rent gap, 41% aggregate rent decline).

Provide students with the pre- and post-fee prices (or % price change) and the reported 21.3% fall in non-urgent visits; ask them to calculate the price elasticity of demand, interpret whether demand is elastic or inelastic, and discuss policy implications for using price to control A&E demand.

Ask students to explain how higher fees act as a rationing device and signal scarcity, then evaluate (using welfare analysis and equity considerations) whether raising prices alone is an appropriate policy to reduce A&E congestion versus non-price solutions (e.g., expanding night clinics, information tools).

Ask students to draw supply-and-demand diagrams showing the impact of a per-unit subsidy to private GPs who extend night hours (or a subsidy for preventive screenings), analyse changes in equilibrium price and quantity, calculate government expenditure given assumptions, and evaluate trade-offs including fiscal cost and distributional effects.

Pose an essay or data-response question asking students to identify the positive externalities from prevention (e.g., earlier cancer detection), justify public intervention (subsidies or inclusion in VHIS), and assess potential problems (overdiagnosis, moral hazard, premium inflation) plus policy design to mitigate these.

Ask students to define private property rights and explain, with diagrams where appropriate, how secure property/contract rights influence foreign direct investment and firms' incentives to invest; evaluate the likely short-run and long-run effects on investment, employment and international trade if host countries revoke concessions.

Require students to identify and explain the sources of monopoly power in port concessions (legal barriers, control of critical infrastructure, economies of scale), use a diagram to show likely effects on price/output/consumer surplus, and evaluate policy options (regulation, breaking up concessions, competitive tendering).

Ask students to classify the market structure of major port terminals and justify it (natural monopoly vs oligopoly/contestable market), analyse how switching from a single-concession model to alternative arrangements (multiple operators, re-tendering) would change competition and welfare, and evaluate trade-offs.

Set a data-based or essay question asking students to assess whether annulling a concession is likely to improve overall economic efficiency (distinguish static vs dynamic effects), drawing diagrams of welfare changes and discussing issues such as regulatory credibility and long-term investment incentives.

Explain how weakened property rights (using the Panama-CK Hutchison case) alter a firm’s incentives to invest in long-term capital; use cost/benefit reasoning and evaluate the short-run and long-run consequences for port efficiency and consumer/producer surplus. (12 marks — include a policy evaluation of arbitration and compensation vs regulatory safeguards.)

With diagram(s), analyse how single-operator control of both terminals could lead to monopoly pricing and reduced welfare. Then evaluate whether splitting operators necessarily reduces monopoly power and improves outcomes, considering barriers to entry and strategic behaviour. (10 marks — draw consumer/producer surplus changes.)

Describe how economies of scale apply to large port terminals and illustrate the impact on average costs. Then assess the trade-off between potential cost rises from lost scale economies and the benefits of increased competition under a multi-operator model. (8–12 marks — include numerical or diagrammatic analysis.)

Classify the pre- and post-ruling market structures for the Panama terminals, justify your classification, and explain expected differences in price, output and efficiency. Conclude by evaluating which structure better serves national strategic interests vs economic efficiency. (10 marks)

Write a part (a)/(b) question: (a) Explain two advantages and two disadvantages for a mainland tech firm of raising funds through a Hong Kong IPO rather than a domestic listing. (b) Evaluate how issuing new shares (an IPO) can affect a firm's capital structure, ability to invest in R&D and long-run profit maximisation; refer to Montage’s planned HK$7 billion raise.

Ask students to define dual-listing and describe two reasons a memory firm would pursue a Hong Kong listing (e.g. access to international investors, regulatory/arbitrage considerations). Then evaluate which type of expansion (foreign listing vs domestic IPO vs retained earnings) best supports rapid global growth, giving real-world costs and benefits.

Set a quantitative diagram question: using TrendForce’s forecast (e.g. DRAM prices up 90–95%), draw and explain a supply-and-demand diagram showing the effect of an increased demand for memory on equilibrium price and quantity. Explain the short-run impact on consumer and producer surplus and discuss why prices may remain high until 2027.

Ask students to draw a long-run average cost (LRAC) curve and show how output expansion from domestic to global sales could reduce average cost. Then discuss limits — potential diseconomies — and evaluate how scale advantages could influence competitive position in an industry experiencing a price super cycle.

Ask students to draw and explain a supply and demand diagram for residential land (fixed vertical supply), show the effect of increased developer demand, and evaluate short-run effects on land price, quantity developed and consumer/producer surplus using the article’s facts (e.g. nine bids, estimated land value range).

Pose an exam question asking students to explain how land scarcity in Hong Kong leads to competitive bidding, describe resulting economic consequences (high land prices, allocation by price), and evaluate policy responses to scarcity (e.g. rezoning, reclamation, increasing density).

Require students to analyse the welfare implications of rezoning: distinguish public vs private goods, argue who gains/loses from the sale (government revenue, private developers, residents), and evaluate whether the government’s decision improves social welfare considering externalities and housing needs.

Ask students to identify and quantify (qualitatively) the opportunity costs of converting the site to private housing, including lost community services, demolition/asbestos-handling costs, and alternative uses; evaluate whether the expected land receipts and housing supply justify that opportunity cost.

Ask students to explain how unexpected executive news can shift demand or supply for a company's shares and change price (draw a supply-demand diagram for the share market), or evaluate why SHKP shares might have risen 2.3% before the resignation was announced.

Pose an evaluative question on how governance problems (e.g., alleged corruption, executive suspension/resignation) could affect owners, managers and other stakeholders, asking students to discuss agency problems and suggest governance measures that could protect shareholders.

Require students to compare internal (organic) expansion versus external expansion (e.g., acquisitions, joint ventures) for a property developer expanding into mainland China and assess risks if key managers leave during expansion.

Ask students to identify likely economies and diseconomies of scale for a large developer like SHKP and explain how the sudden loss of a senior manager might temporarily increase diseconomies and affect costs or service quality.

Ask students to illustrate with a diagram how private marginal cost differs from social marginal cost because of the externality; evaluate whether a fixed HK$3,000 fine is likely to internalise the externality compared with a court-determined fine, and discuss welfare effects and policy trade-offs (effectiveness, enforcement costs, deterrence).

Give numerical scenarios (probability of detection, fine size) and ask students to calculate the expected penalty and the minimum fine required to deter smoking; compare the effectiveness of a fixed penalty versus an alternative instrument (e.g., higher fine, certainty of detection, employer liability), and assess which better approximates the optimal Pigouvian tax equal to marginal external cost.

Ask students to analyse how imposing the fixed penalty could affect short-run labour supply (absenteeism or reduced acceptance of hazardous renovation jobs), compute potential income losses from court appearances, and evaluate policy complementarities (on-site enforcement, designated smoking areas) to reduce adverse labour-supply impacts.

Require an evaluation of the distributional consequences of fixed vs variable fines: discuss whether a flat HK$3,000 fine is regressive, propose alternative designs (sliding fines, employer sanctions, community service) and ask students to weigh equity against administrative feasibility and deterrence.

Ask students to explain scarcity in the context of limited oncology infusion capacity and evaluate how changing appointment timing could reallocate scarce medical resources to improve outcomes; include a short-data question asking which group benefits and why given fixed capacity.

Pose a numerical scenario where a fixed number of morning slots must be assigned between two patient groups; ask students to calculate the opportunity cost (in months of median survival or in number of patients benefitting) when moving one slot from afternoon to morning, and discuss ethical/policy considerations.

Require students to draw supply and demand diagrams showing how an earlier-treatment protocol shifts the supply curve (or raises quality), then explain effects on waiting time/quantity treated and evaluate possible market/policy instruments (price incentives, priority rules) to allocate slots.

Ask candidates to assess efficiency gains from timing changes, identify any positive externalities (e.g., reduced downstream healthcare costs, increased labour productivity), and discuss policies to ensure equitable access to morning slots (e.g., lottery, clinical-priority rules), weighing trade-offs.

Ask students to draw and explain supply and demand for dog-friendly restaurant meals: show the effect of a HK$140 permit (a fixed cost) and extra compliance costs shifting supply, and analyse changes in equilibrium price, quantity, and consumer/producer surplus. Include a short calculation using given demand/supply schedules or discuss how elasticity of demand among pet-owners affects price pass-through.

Require a diagram showing a binding quota and its welfare effects: calculate/explain shortage, deadweight loss and distributional outcomes under lottery allocation versus price-based rationing. Ask students to evaluate alternative allocation methods (lottery, auction, first-come-first-served) for efficiency and equity.

Have students identify and classify the externalities, show them on marginal social cost/benefit diagrams, and evaluate policy instruments (permits, fines, mandatory leashing, training programmes) for internalising externalities—discuss cost-effectiveness and possible unintended consequences.

Pose a short essay: explain how clearly defined property rights and voluntary contracts (e.g., signage, house rules, liability clauses) can reduce conflicts and external costs; assess when government intervention (permits, fines) is justified versus relying on market/private solutions.

Ask students to explain how weak or contested property-rights institutions (e.g. dissolved owners’ corporation) can create coordination problems for repairs, claims and maintenance; evaluate the economic consequences for owners and markets and assess policy options (e.g. appointment of a provisional manager) to restore effective property rights.

Require students to identify the fire as a negative externality, explain why private markets alone may under-provide safety, and evaluate corrective measures (regulation, inspections, insurance requirements, public inquiries) in terms of effectiveness and unintended consequences.

Prompt students to assess the equity implications of the subsidy and claims arrangements: distinguish horizontal vs vertical equity concerns, discuss criteria used to prioritise recipients (e.g. age), and evaluate trade-offs between equity and administrative efficiency.

Ask students to classify the investigation, building-safety oversight and subsidy-coordination services as public or private goods, justify government involvement, and evaluate funding/implementation choices (direct subsidy, provisional management) using efficiency and incentive arguments.

Ask students to draw supply and demand diagrams to show how lifting the ban (reducing regulatory costs) would affect the market for pet‑friendly dining—show change in supply (or effective availability) and analyze effects on equilibrium price and quantity; include short data from the article (20–30% drop in customers when dogs banned) to ask for qualitative comparative statics and welfare effects.

Pose a problem where students must evaluate revenue/profit implications for a café given two demand elasticities (elastic vs inelastic) after allowing dogs; use the article’s reported 20–30% fall in business when dogs were banned as a prompt to discuss elasticity, percentage change in revenue, and managerial pricing decisions.

Ask students to identify and classify positive and negative externalities from the article, then evaluate three policy options (maintain ban, permit scheme with rules/fees, zoning/segregation of pet areas) using efficiency and equity criteria; include a diagram showing marginal social cost and benefit where appropriate.

Give an essay or data response task asking students to explain how strengthening or weakening property rights/regulation (e.g., clearer permitting, liability rules) would change incentives for entrepreneurs like Uluru Cafe, and to evaluate trade‑offs between protecting public health and enabling niche business models.

Ask students to draw a labelled supply and demand diagram for bitcoin showing the price fall and increased quantity bought by retail investors; explain whether the movement is along the curve or caused by shifts, and evaluate short-run factors (expectations, entry of buyers, regulatory signals) that might shift demand or supply.

Pose an extended-response question: explain how price functions as a rationing device and a signal in this episode (use the Admiralty queues and reported losses), and assess the effectiveness of price signals in markets with high volatility and asymmetric information (refer to forums, retail sentiment and regulatory limits on leverage).

Provide data (e.g. hypothetical % price fall and % change in quantity bought by young retail investors) and ask students to calculate price elasticity of demand, interpret whether demand is elastic or inelastic, and discuss factors (age, speculative motives, access to credit, expectations) that explain elasticity differences and policy implications.

Ask students to classify bitcoin using the types-of-goods framework (private good, merit/ demerit aspects, or quasi‑money), justify their classification, and evaluate how this classification affects regulation and policy choices (e.g. stablecoin licensing, restrictions on leverage).

Ask students to draw a labour supply and demand diagram for a low‑skilled sector, show the impact of an inward shift in labour supply due to illegal workers, and evaluate short‑ and long‑run effects on equilibrium wage and employment for local workers, including distributional consequences.

Require an explanation of push and pull factors and barriers to labour mobility in this context, and ask students to assess how illegal migration (facilitated by forgery and smuggling) changes the effectiveness of labour market adjustment and the likely impacts on both sending and receiving economies.

Give data (e.g. card fee HK$3,200; dorm fee HK$1,700/month; number of workers) and ask students to calculate approximate revenue and profit for the syndicate, then evaluate how potential fines and imprisonment alter the expected payoff and deterrence using a basic expected‑value argument.

Ask students to identify and classify the externalities and equity issues, illustrate the resulting welfare loss on a diagram if relevant, and evaluate policy options (e.g. stricter enforcement, employer fines, regularisation) in terms of efficiency and equity trade‑offs.

Ask students to explain how weak protection of private property rights (e.g. ability to misuse or buy/rent bank accounts) leads to higher incidence of scams, and evaluate policy measures (criminal penalties, AML regulation, bank verification) to strengthen property rights — include diagrammatic or evaluative parts (costs/benefits and limitations).

Set a question requiring students to explain why policing and anti-fraud enforcement are public goods, draw a diagram showing potential underprovision by the market, and evaluate government provision/financing (e.g. increased enforcement vs. public awareness) to reduce scams, with reference to efficiency and equity.

Ask students to show using marginal social cost/private cost diagrams how money-laundering-related externalities justify government intervention, suggest policy instruments (penalties, monitoring, education) and critically assess their likely effectiveness and unintended consequences.

Require an evaluative question where students analyse the impact of scam prevalence on consumer surplus and market outcomes in online investment markets, and appraise policies (sentencing enhancements, AML controls, bank KYC improvements) that aim to restore market efficiency, using welfare analysis where appropriate.

Ask students to explain how well‑defined private property rights encourage innovation and investment, then evaluate the economic consequences (incentives, under/over‑investment) of unclear ownership in the MediSafe case; include a short 8–12 mark evaluative question requiring real‑world policy suggestions (e.g. stronger IP enforcement or clearer contract terms).

Set a data‑response or essay question: compare the likely incentives and profit‑sharing under different ownership structures (family/clinic ownership vs. external software firm), and analyse how each structure affects investment, quality control and consumer trust, using simple profit diagrams or payoff comparisons.

Ask students to illustrate negative externalities with a welfare diagram (private vs social costs) based on privacy harm from MediSafe, then evaluate policy options (privacy regulation, fines, awards revocation, anti‑doxxing enforcement) to internalise those externalities in a 10‑mark question.

Require a short question asking students to classify MediSafe (private good, club good or public good arguments), explain how that classification affects producers’ pricing strategies and accessibility for patients, and suggest one market or policy response to improve access or quality.

Ask students to draw and explain demand and/or supply shifts for a specified good (e.g., portable heaters or hot drinks) after the cold front, show the new equilibrium, and discuss short-run effects on price, quantity and market welfare (consumer/producer surplus changes).

Provide price and quantity data (or hypothetical demand curves) for warm clothing or electric heaters; ask students to calculate price elasticity of demand, determine whether a price rise would increase or decrease revenue, and explain implications for retailers planning stock and pricing before the cold spell. Include diagrammatic justification.

Create a short-run production scenario for an outdoor construction firm and ask students to analyse how a weather-induced drop in productivity shifts the firm’s marginal product curves, impacts marginal cost and short-run output, and influences profit-maximising employment or hours.

Pose a market labour question where a cold snap reduces labour supply for outdoor workers; ask students to show the labour supply shift, determine the new equilibrium wage and employment, and evaluate effects on firms and workers (including possible policy responses such as hazard pay).

Give students the data from the article (263 completed inquiries from 2020–25; backlog of 895 cases) and ask them to calculate how long it would take to clear the backlog at the current average annual completion rate; then explain how scarcity of resources causes queues and propose two resource-allocation options to reduce the backlog, evaluating the likely trade-offs.

Ask students to identify and compare the opportunity costs of (a) diverting additional staff from other Department of Health duties to clear the Medical Council backlog, and (b) hiring new staff or outsourcing parts of the process; require a short evaluative judgement on which option is preferable given budget constraints and public expectations.

Set a data-response or essay question asking students to assess how measures recommended in the article (setting target timelines, streamlining procedures, performance appraisals) could improve administrative efficiency; ask them to distinguish short-run vs long-run effects and to discuss potential unintended consequences (e.g. rushed investigations reducing quality).

Require students to explain how delayed enforcement creates negative externalities and to evaluate policy instruments (stricter enforcement, increased transparency, higher proportion of lay members) in terms of their effectiveness at reducing social costs, including possible trade-offs such as increased litigation or deterrence effects.

Ask students to (a) explain why the incident is a negative externality and illustrate using a supply/demand diagram showing private vs social costs; (b) evaluate two policy responses (e.g., outright ban on certain power banks on trains, safety standards and certification, or a per‑unit fee/insurance) in terms of efficiency and enforcement in Hong Kong.

Require students to classify 'on‑board public safety' and explain why private markets may undersupply it; then ask for an evaluative discussion of the roles of the MTR corporation and government in providing/protecting this quasi‑public good, referencing the evacuation costs and possible preventive measures.

Pose a short essay: analyse how different assignment of liability (strict liability on owner, manufacturer liability, or shared liability) would alter incentives to purchase safe products and reduce the risk of future incidents; include potential enforcement difficulties in Hong Kong.

Ask students to classify the power bank and the smoke‑free train environment using the 'types of goods' framework, then explain why the private‑good nature of the product does not prevent public costs and recommend market or regulatory solutions appropriate for Hong Kong.

Ask students to explain the negative externality, draw a diagram showing private vs social cost, and evaluate policy options to internalise the externality (e.g. regulation/inspections, liability/fines, Pigouvian tax). Require an answer recommending the most appropriate policy for Hong Kong and justify using efficiency and equity criteria.

Ask students to classify the goods/services involved (storage space on barges as private, inspections and emergency response as public) and evaluate the role of government in providing or financing these services; include a short data-based part asking how government provision solves free-rider problems and what funding options (taxes, charges on operators) might be used.

Pose a question asking students to analyse how clearer property rights and stronger liability rules could change operators’ incentives (internalise costs), reduce moral hazard, and lower the frequency of fires; include a part asking students to evaluate institutional reforms (licensing, mandatory insurance, stricter penalties) for the Hong Kong context.

Ask students to identify positive statements in the article that can be empirically tested and normative statements that reflect value judgments; then require them to propose what evidence or data would be needed to test the positive claims (e.g. frequency of fires, health complaints, inspection records).

Ask students to draw supply and demand diagrams showing the short‑run effect of introducing regulated ride‑hailing licences (quota or fixed number of licences) on fares, quantity of rides, consumer and producer surplus, and to explain welfare changes and possible substitution with taxis and private cars.

Set a question requiring analysis of the market structure for ride‑hailing/taxi services in Hong Kong: identify features (market power, barriers, product differentiation), evaluate likely competitive outcomes (prices, quality, innovation) and discuss how licensing and regulation could affect market contestability.

Ask students to explain the externalities associated with expanded ride‑hailing and tunnel capacity, illustrate graphically how private equilibrium differs from social optimum, and evaluate policy responses (Pigouvian tax, congestion pricing, subsidies for green vehicles) recommended in the blueprint.

Design an exam item asking students to analyse how imposing licensing requirements and potential licence fees for drivers shifts the labour supply curve for drivers, determine effects on equilibrium wage/earnings and employment, and discuss implications for driver welfare and service availability.

Ask students to illustrate with diagrams the private vs social benefits/costs from AV adoption in Hong Kong, quantify an aggregate welfare change given hypothetical values, and evaluate appropriate government interventions (e.g. subsidies, regulation, taxes) to correct any externalities.

Set a data-response question where students use a provided cost schedule to show how average cost changes with fleet size, explain sources of economies and possible diseconomies for AV operators, and evaluate implications for market structure and pricing of services (including entry barriers).

Ask students to analyse the likely impact on labour demand and wages for bus/minibus drivers using a labour supply and demand diagram, discuss short-run vs long-run adjustments, and evaluate policy responses (retraining, unemployment support) in Hong Kong.

Propose an essay question: classify different transport services (franchised buses, on-demand minibuses, autonomous taxis) as private or quasi-public goods, assess market failures that could arise in remote/low-demand areas, and recommend government provision or subsidy options with justification.

Ask students to identify and explain the sources of monopoly power in the crypto exchange/ETF market (e.g. network effects, regulatory barriers, platform economies), draw a diagram showing how market structure differs from perfect competition, and evaluate welfare implications and possible regulatory responses using Hong Kong examples.

Require students to illustrate negative externality from crypto risk (shift of social cost), calculate deadweight loss qualitatively, and evaluate corrective policies (taxes, regulation, licensing) with reference to Hong Kong's licensing regimes versus Mainland China's ban.

Pose a question asking how strong private property rights and legal recognition of digital assets in Hong Kong influence supply, demand and investment compared with Mainland China; ask students to analyse opportunity costs for investors choosing between jurisdictions and to evaluate policy measures that strengthen property rights.

Ask students to compare the efficiency and equity trade-offs between a market-led digital asset system and a state-backed CBDC regime, using evaluation criteria (innovation, stability, control), and to argue which model Hong Kong should align with for long-run economic benefits.

Ask students to explain and evaluate this shift using Types of Economy: identify features of a command, market and mixed economy in the space sector and assess, with reasons, whether the mixed approach improves resource allocation and innovation (use positive and normative language).

Require students to compare equity (shares) and debt (bonds) as financing methods for a hypothetical Hong Kong‑backed space start‑up, discussing risks to investors, implications for firm control and incentives, and which instrument might better suit long lead‑time projects.

Pose a question asking students to explain how well‑defined private property and contract rights in Hong Kong could affect investment incentives in space services, with evaluation of potential trade‑offs between national security restrictions and investor confidence.

Ask students to draw and explain a long‑run average cost (LRAC) curve showing economies/diseconomies of scale for launch services, identify minimum efficient scale, and evaluate how these scale features affect competition, entry and consumer welfare.

Ask students to explain characteristics of a capitalist economy using Hong Kong as an example, then evaluate how the Basic Law’s autonomy affects resource allocation, incentives for firms, and levels of foreign direct investment (use evidence from the article).

Set a data-response question: explain how stronger property rights shift investment demand and long-run supply of firms; assess quantitatively or qualitatively the likely impact on business formation and economic growth in Hong Kong, referring to the article’s claims (e.g. +11% firms).

Design a two-part question: (a) explain how an increase in IPOs and bond issuance affects the supply of financial assets, liquidity and cost of capital for firms; (b) evaluate policy measures (e.g. market reforms, cross-border linkages) that would improve Hong Kong’s effectiveness as an international capital centre, using diagrams where appropriate.

Ask students to use a long-run average cost curve to show how expanding financial/legal clusters can produce economies of scale, then discuss potential diseconomies (congestion, rent increases) and weigh whether continued expansion can sustain lower costs in Hong Kong’s constrained space.

Ask students to explain how scarcity of land in Mid-Levels affects the supply of housing and to evaluate micro policy options (e.g. higher density development, rooftop amenities, or land rezoning) that could alter supply; include a supply curve diagram showing short-run inelastic supply and ask for the likely effect on equilibrium price and quantity.

Give data or a diagram where demand shifts right due to an amenity (adjacent park) and supply is relatively inelastic; ask students to show changes in equilibrium price and quantity, and to calculate/describe impacts on consumer and producer surplus. Optionally include a follow-up on how an increase in parking provision (supply-side change) would affect the market.

Ask students to classify listed amenities (clubhouse, 25-m pool, public park, walking routes) as private, public, club or common-pool goods, explain rationale using rivalry/excludability, and evaluate funding/management implications for developers and government (e.g. why developers provide private clubs while public parks remain government-run).

Pose an essay-style question: identify the positive externalities from adjacent parks on property demand, explain how these externalities lead to market outcomes (e.g. higher private prices than social optimum), and evaluate government interventions (subsidies, zoning, provision of public parks) to correct any inefficiency.

Ask students to compare and contrast raising capital through an IPO versus issuing convertible bonds: diagram the ownership and claims, explain dilution and conversion mechanics, and evaluate which method is preferable for a fast‑growing biotech firm (use Hansoh’s convertible bond example and Edge Medical’s IPO).

Present a diagram showing shifts in supply of new equity and demand from international investors; ask students to explain price effects, short‑term oversubscription/undersubscription, and how cornerstone investors (e.g., Temasek, ADIA) can shift demand curves or reduce demand volatility.

Have students evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of growth via (a) public listing (IPO), (b) follow‑on equity, and (c) convertible bond issuance for a Chinese biotech seeking global markets; include considerations of control, access to capital, and regulatory/trading costs.

Ask students to explain how price acts as a signal in IPO markets: using the example of a 43% conversion premium, discuss what such a premium indicates about investor expectations, risk perception and future price discovery, and assess implications for allocative efficiency.

Ask students to explain why secure property rights matter for investment, then evaluate (using a short diagram and real-world reasoning) the likely microeconomic consequences (on firm profits, investment incentives and welfare) of revoking a long-term concession and of awarding monetary compensation instead.

Set a comparison question: contrast likely behavioural incentives and outcomes when a strategic terminal is operated by a private foreign concessionaire versus a state-owned firm; ask students to assess efficiency, risk of expropriation, and implications for consumer/producer surplus and long-run investment.

Require students to identify how an exclusive concession creates monopoly power, draw and annotate a price/quantity diagram showing deadweight loss and changes to consumer/producer surplus if the concession is revoked or transferred, and evaluate policy responses (regulation, compensation, competitive tendering).

Ask students to discuss how negative or positive externalities (strategic/security considerations) can justify government intervention in privately-run infrastructure, and to evaluate trade-offs between correcting externalities and protecting private investment using short-run and long-run welfare arguments.

Ask students to draw demand and supply curves for cross‑border limo rides, show the impact of entry by Uber (via Kwoon Chung) and licensing restrictions on equilibrium price and quantity, and explain short-run effects on waiting times and availability.

Provide hypothetical demand elasticities for business travellers and leisure groups; ask students to calculate total revenue changes when fares are set at HK$2,900 vs HK$3,500 and evaluate which segment is more profitable and why.

Compose a data‑based question asking students to classify the market structure for cross‑border limousine services, list sources of market power (licenses, brand, network), and discuss how regulation (hire‑car permits) affects competition and consumer welfare.

Ask students to explain how clear property rights and licensing reduce transaction risks (e.g., invalid insurance), then evaluate costs and benefits of strict permit requirements for consumers and firms using a cost‑benefit or welfare framework.

Ask students to compare issuing shares versus bonds for a firm seeking funds: explain advantages and disadvantages of equity finance in the HK context (e.g., dilution, cost of capital, market timing) and evaluate why an overseas firm might choose an IPO in Hong Kong rather than bond issuance or listing in another market.

Provide a short case: a private firm lists in HK and raises capital by issuing new shares. Ask students to explain how the IPO could affect existing owners’ control (dilution), the firm's governance, and the trade‑offs between retaining control and accessing capital for expansion.

Give data from the article (e.g., BBSB 11,000× oversubscription). Ask students to draw a supply and demand diagram for IPO shares at the offer price, show the resulting shortage, and explain using the diagram why secondary-market prices rose sharply on debut.

Ask students to evaluate how IPO offer pricing and post-listing price discovery serve different functions (allocation vs. signalling). Use Hong Kong examples to discuss whether conservative IPO pricing benefits issuers or investors and how it affects resource allocation in capital markets.

Ask students to draw supply and demand diagrams showing the effect of the recall on the market for the specific brand and on the market for close substitutes, explain shifts, and discuss how price elasticity of demand would influence the change in price and quantity.

Require students to explain the negative externality, use a diagram to show private vs social costs and the resulting welfare loss, and evaluate the effectiveness of regulations (recall, testing, supplier controls) versus market-based solutions.

Have students identify the market structure, discuss how product differentiation and brand reputation affect pricing and recall decisions, and evaluate how an oligopolistic market might amplify or mitigate supply disruptions.

Ask students to analyse the impact of the recall on consumer surplus and producer surplus, calculate or qualitatively assess welfare changes, and suggest compensation or firm actions to restore consumer confidence.

Ask students to draw and explain how policies (e.g., relaxed immigration schemes, Greater Bay Area commuting arrangements) shift labour supply in Hong Kong; evaluate short-run and long-run effects on wages, employment and human capital accumulation, and discuss possible costs such as congestion or downward wage pressure for some groups.

Provide a policy scenario (e.g., tax incentives for skilled migrants or increased childcare support) and ask students to show graphically how labour supply changes, calculate impacts on equilibrium wage and employment qualitatively, and assess distributional consequences between skilled and unskilled workers.

Set an essay/data-response question asking students to classify specific government programmes mentioned (elderly care, disaster relief after Tai Po fire) as private/public/merit goods, explain market failure arguments for public provision, and evaluate financing options (taxation, user fees, subsidies) in terms of efficiency and equity.

Give students extracts from the article and ask them to label sentences as positive or normative; then require a short evaluation of one normative policy proposal (e.g., ‘optimising executive-led governance’) using economic criteria of efficiency, equity and political economy constraints.

Ask students to explain how clear property rights and enforcement (e.g. declaration requirements, penalties) alter incentives for money changers and customers, and to analyse the likely market consequences (crime risk, insurance costs, transaction costs) if enforcement is weak.

Provide numerical data (e.g. cost of security, transaction values like HK$120,000 and HK$500,000 thresholds) and ask students to calculate average cost per transaction with and without hired security, then evaluate when hiring protection is cost‑effective and how scale affects market survival.

Ask students to identify the most likely market structure for retail money changers, justify the classification using evidence from the article (licensing, small operators, differentiated services), and discuss how regulation affects prices, consumer choice and market efficiency.

Pose a supply–demand graph question where a local shortage of yen shifts supply; ask students to show and explain the impact on exchange margins/prices, and to evaluate the opportunity cost of different responses (import cash, deposit with banks, or refuse transactions).

Ask students to explain how well-defined and enforceable private property rights (including probate procedures) influence the distribution of government transfers, and evaluate the transaction costs and market frictions that arise when ownership records do not reflect deceased owners.

Have students compare and contrast a lump-sum subsidy (as in the article) with a per-unit subsidy: illustrate graphically how each affects producer/owner behaviour, discuss incidence and incentives, and evaluate which form would be more appropriate in this disaster context.

Set a part (b) normative question asking students to discuss vertical and horizontal equity implications of the URA’s distribution method, propose redistribution or administrative changes to improve fairness, and justify their proposals using economic reasoning.

Ask students to identify and quantify (qualitatively) sources of inefficiency in the distribution process, analyse trade-offs between fraud prevention and administrative cost, and recommend policy changes that improve efficiency while limiting misuse.

Ask students to identify at least two positive statements and two normative statements from the article, explain how they differ, and discuss why mixing the two can affect policy recommendations about allowing public gatherings.

Set a data-response/essay question: explain how the shift from a one-party political system to a more democratic system could alter property rights protection and market incentives, and evaluate likely microeconomic effects on firm investment, labour mobility and market efficiency in Hong Kong.

Require students to analyse the vigil as a public good: explain non-excludability and non-rivalry in this context, illustrate the free-rider problem, and evaluate policy options (government provision, subsidies, or private organising) to ensure its provision under competing public-order concerns.

Pose a question asking students to identify positive and negative externalities from the vigil, draw a diagram showing social/private benefits or costs, and recommend microeconomic policies (e.g., permits, Pigouvian tax/subsidy, regulation) to internalise externalities while discussing trade-offs.

Ask students to draw and explain a supply/demand diagram for the insurance market showing how an increase in fraudulent claims shifts costs, creating a negative externality; evaluate possible private and government interventions (e.g., AI detection, stricter penalties) and their likely effects on welfare and equilibrium price (premiums).

Provide data (e.g., estimated total fraudulent payouts and number of policyholders) and ask students to calculate the likely percentage increase in average premiums and explain using the price mechanism why premiums would rise and how this affects demand for insurance and driving behaviour.

Set a short essay/exam question requiring students to identify types of inefficiency caused by crash-for-cash schemes, compare the efficiency costs of different anti-fraud measures (AI screening vs. higher premiums vs. stricter enforcement), and recommend the least distortionary policy using cost–benefit reasoning.

Give a numerical scenario where fraudulent claims increase expected payouts by insurers; ask students to compute changes in consumer and producer surplus before and after the increase, and to discuss distributional effects on different groups of motorists (e.g., low-income drivers, taxi drivers).

Ask students to compare profit-sharing with other wage methods (e.g. piece-rate, salaries, commission) and evaluate how profit-sharing affects employee incentives, effort and firm performance; include a brief data question asking students to calculate the new bonus (weeks of pay) given hypothetical changes in the profit-sharing pool and workforce size.

Pose a diagram question showing labour supply and demand for airline staff: analyse how an anticipated higher profit-sharing bonus shifts supply or affects labour market equilibrium (wages, employment), and discuss short-run vs long-run effects on staffing levels.

Require students to explain mechanisms by which customer-focused incentives and capital investment (e.g. cabin upgrades) raise labour productivity, illustrate with marginal/product curves or productivity calculations, and evaluate policies the airline could use to sustain productivity gains.

Ask students to draw average cost curves and explain how expansion could generate economies of scale initially but lead to diseconomies if management fails to control costs; include an evaluative part on whether large capital investment is justified given expected demand recovery.

Ask students to draw and label demand and supply diagrams to show the impact of increased demand from mainland purchasers and reduced unsold inventory on equilibrium price and quantity; explain short‑run vs long‑run effects and assess how developer discounts and new launches alter supply elasticity.

Set a quantitative part where students calculate changes in monthly mortgage payments or affordability ratios given different interest rates, and an evaluation part asking how lower interest rates affect housing demand, rental yields and the risk of overheating.

Ask pupils to explain the ‘wealth effect’: how rising stock prices and IPO proceeds can increase demand for luxury housing; provide data (e.g., IPO fundraising) and ask for a short essay evaluating whether capital‑market recovery can sustainably support housing prices.

Give students a data‑interpretation question using the inventory figures and transaction volumes: determine whether the market is in surplus or moving toward equilibrium, explain implications for developer pricing strategies, and evaluate policy responses if prices rise too fast.

Ask students to identify three positive and three normative statements from the article, assess the evidence supporting the positive claims (use Lee’s 70%/40% statistics), and explain how normative judgments influence recommended policy choices.

Give an exam question requiring a diagram showing private vs social costs/benefits of wearing seat belts on buses, explain the market failure, and evaluate policy options (mandate, ban standing, education) in terms of efficiency and likely unintended consequences.

Pose a data-response question asking students to analyse the distributional effects of the seat-belt rule on different commuter groups, propose two compensating measures (e.g., exemptions, infrastructure changes) and discuss trade-offs between equity and efficiency.

Ask students to classify transport safety aspects as private or public goods, explain implications for government policy, and evaluate why complementary investments (seat design, child restraints, recycling facilities analogy) matter for successful implementation.

Ask students to explain, with a labour‑market diagram, how outward function relocation to nearby regions (e.g. Greater Bay Area) shifts local labour demand and affects wages and unemployment in Hong Kong; evaluate short‑run and long‑run impacts and policy responses (e.g. housing subsidies) that could influence labour mobility.

Give students a short case (percentages from the article) and ask them to classify the firms’ moves as types of expansion (e.g. horizontal, vertical, foot‑printing/functional relocation); then evaluate the reasons (market access, regulatory coordination, financial incentives) and costs/benefits of each type for firm profits and Hong Kong’s economy.

Provide a diagram or data and ask students to show how AI integration can raise marginal and average labour productivity, shifting production possibilities or cost curves; then evaluate implications for wages, employment composition, and competitiveness under Hong Kong’s high cost of living.

Ask students to draw a long‑run average cost (LRAC) curve illustrating economies and diseconomies of scale and use the article context to analyse whether expanding in the Greater Bay Area is likely to lower average costs for multinationals; include an evaluative judgement about regulatory coordination and managerial complexity.

Ask students to explain with examples how Hong Kong’s proposed five‑year plan represents a move toward greater government intervention and to evaluate, using advantages and disadvantages and real‑world HK evidence, whether this shift could improve economic outcomes (use diagrammatic support where appropriate).

Set a data‑response or essay question asking students to identify how the plan could resolve the three basic economic problems in Hong Kong—provide specific policy examples from the article and evaluate potential efficiency and equity implications.

Ask students to analyse policies (e.g. education, training, immigration of professionals) that would shift Hong Kong’s labour supply curve for high‑skilled workers, show effects on wages and employment with diagrams, and evaluate likely short‑run vs long‑run outcomes.

Pose a question requiring students to assess the opportunity cost of Hong Kong prioritising tech and Greater Bay Area integration versus strengthening ties with traditional Western markets—students should identify alternative uses of resources and compare expected benefits and risks.

Ask students to identify and explain the opportunity cost to Hong Kong government of hosting APEC (e.g., staff hours, budget, police resources), and evaluate the short-run and long-run costs and benefits using a simple opportunity-cost diagram or a written analysis with given numerical budgets.

Design a data-response question asking students to classify specific items related to the event (security, venue hire, international publicity, tourist information) as public or private goods, justify each classification with characteristics, and assess whether government provision or contracting out is more efficient.

Require students to explain positive and negative externalities from the APEC meeting, illustrate the welfare effects with marginal social/private benefit/cost diagrams, and evaluate government interventions (subsidies, regulation, policing) to correct market failure.

Ask students to identify which factors of production are used in organising the meeting, explain how factor mobility and reallocation (temporary vs permanent posts) affect supply of public services, and evaluate implications for labour supply and productivity in the public sector.

Ask students to draw a supply-and-demand diagram showing the supply shock from recalled batches, label the new equilibrium, and explain qualitatively how price and quantity change; extend by asking how the magnitude of change depends on price elasticity of demand for infant formula in Hong Kong.

Set a context where supply is constrained and ask students to evaluate whether allowing price to adjust or using non-price rationing (e.g. purchase limits) is preferable in Hong Kong, discussing efficiency and equity trade-offs and likely behavioural responses.

Require students to explain why the contamination constitutes a negative externality, identify government interventions (recall, stricter inspection, supplier liability), and evaluate their effectiveness and possible unintended consequences using microeconomic reasoning.

Ask candidates to use a welfare diagram to show changes in consumer and producer surplus from the recall-induced supply shift, identify deadweight loss (if any), and discuss non‑price welfare effects such as health risks and long‑term brand damage.

Ask students to explain how an increase in graduate labour supply combined with falling vacancies affects equilibrium in the graduate labour market; use the provided numbers (vacancies, unemployment rate) to illustrate shifts and discuss short‑run vs long‑run outcomes and policy responses (e.g., retraining, internships).

Require students to draw a labour market diagram for graduates showing the effect of reduced employer demand (due to AI and weak consumer demand) on equilibrium wage and employment, and evaluate which factors (demand vs supply) best explain the observed stagnant wages and higher unemployment using data from the article.

Ask candidates to discuss how improvements in labour productivity from AI can both reduce quantity of low‑skill graduate jobs and raise output per worker; evaluate implications for different types of graduates and recommend policies (e.g., upskilling, AI literacy) to improve employability.

Pose a data‑based question asking students to assess the elasticity of demand for graduate labour: explain how close substitutes (AI) and availability of experienced hires affect wage elasticity, and evaluate how elasticity influences the scale of wage changes given the large drop in vacancies but only a 0.5% salary rise.

Use the article data to calculate percentage changes (e.g., vacancies and salary growth), then draw a labour-market diagram for graduates showing shifts in demand/supply; explain the impact on equilibrium employment and wages and evaluate short-run policy options (e.g., retraining, internships, wage subsidies).

Ask students to explain, with reference to marginal product of labour, how AI adoption could raise productivity for some tasks but reduce demand for routine graduate roles; evaluate the implications for wage differentials between skilled and routine jobs and recommend measures graduates can take to improve employability.

Set a data-led question: given initial and new vacancy numbers and salary changes, show the demand shift on a supply–demand diagram, discuss whether wages or employment adjust more and use elasticity concepts (qualitative) to explain why employers reduced hires rather than cutting salaries significantly.

Ask students to explain differences between shares and bonds, then analyse Hansoh Pharmaceutical’s zero‑coupon convertible bond: calculate the conversion premium (given conversion price and market price), discuss why a firm might choose convertibles over straight equity, and evaluate effects on existing shareholders and investors (short data-response + 10‑mark evaluation).

Set a data‑response/essay: using the article’s examples (MiniMax, Edge Medical, Busy Ming), explain how IPOs and cornerstone stakes affect ownership and control; evaluate advantages and disadvantages for founders and for public investors, including implications of A‑share/H‑share dual listings (12‑mark evaluative question).

Design a graph question: show supply of new shares (issuers) and demand from investors; ask students to illustrate and explain effects of an increase in investor demand (Europe/Middle East) and a surge in supply (450 companies) on equilibrium price and quantity, oversubscription and possible rationing; include a short extension evaluating who benefits from price discovery (8‑mark graph + 6‑mark explanation).

Ask students to draw diagrams showing the private and social costs/benefits of wearing seat belts on buses, explain market failure, and evaluate regulation vs alternatives (education campaigns, subsidies, design changes) in terms of efficiency and enforcement costs (10–12 marks).

Give a demand curve for bus journeys and ask students to show how a mandatory seat-belt requirement shifts consumer surplus and possibly quantity demanded; calculate changes in consumer surplus and deadweight loss and judge whether the policy is welfare-improving (8–10 marks).

Pose an application question asking students to list and compare opportunity costs of the rushed legislation versus alternative uses of resources, and to recommend the most cost-effective policy using marginal benefit–marginal cost reasoning (6–8 marks).

Ask students to explain the role of owners' corporations and analyse the economic justification and potential trade-offs of government appointment of an administrator (compare private enforcement vs government intervention), using costs/benefits and incentives for owners and third-party firms.

Give students data (e.g., number of households, current rent subsidy per household, timelines to 2027 vs 2035) and ask them to calculate total subsidy costs and/or compare opportunity costs of rebuilding in-situ versus temporary rehousing or redevelopment elsewhere; evaluate which option is economically preferable.

Require students to identify the negative externalities present, explain why private markets/owners might under-provide safety, and evaluate policy responses (appointment of an administrator, stricter building-management rules, subsidies) for efficiency and equity, supporting claims with pros and cons.

Ask students to evaluate how tighter regulation of private property (mandatory registration and renovation requirements) affects owners' incentives, potential compliance costs, and the trade-off between property rights and public welfare; include short-run vs long-run responses.

Require a diagram showing the short-run supply shift for subdivided flats, explain effects on rental price and quantity, and assess how provision of 4,000 transitional flats might mitigate market shortages; include a discussion of timing (four-year transition) and supply elasticity.

Ask students to identify the negative externalities, explain why the market fails to address them, and evaluate alternative policy responses (regulation, subsidies, transitional housing) in terms of efficiency and welfare—include a normative judgement.

Ask students to draw a diagram showing private marginal cost and social marginal cost from recreational use of a beach, identify the resulting welfare loss from overuse, and evaluate two government interventions (e.g., entry fee vs. quotas), discussing efficiency and practical enforcement issues in the Hong Kong context.

Request students to classify listed sites (e.g., Ham Tin Wan, Sai Kung beaches) as private, public, common or club goods, explain the problems that arise for each classification, and propose property-rights or management solutions (permit systems, user fees, designated campsite allocation), evaluating their likely success in Hong Kong.

Give students a scenario where daily arrivals rise by 6% and ask them to show the effect on equilibrium access and congestion using supply and demand diagrams; then ask them to compare non-price rationing (queues, crowd control) with price-based rationing (entry fees) in terms of allocative efficiency and equity.

Ask students to identify the negative externality, illustrate private vs social cost with a diagram, and evaluate policy responses (e.g. fixed fine, increased enforcement, or Pigovian penalty) discussing effectiveness and possible unintended consequences.

Require students to classify the items in the article as private or public goods, explain problems from mixed-use (e.g. congestion of a public safety good), and recommend institutional solutions (designated loading zones, permits, signage) with evaluation.

Pose a short essay asking how clearly defined and enforced property rights (or assignment of access rights) could reduce such behaviour; include application of the Coase theorem and compare market/private negotiation solutions versus government regulation/enforcement.

Ask students to draw a negative externality diagram showing private vs social marginal cost from keeping invasive pets, and evaluate two policy responses mentioned in the article (mandatory microchipping/traceability and tighter legal penalties or bans). Require discussion of allocative efficiency, deadweight loss and equity implications for pet owners and the public.

Ask students to use a supply-and-demand diagram to show how an increase in legal imports shifts supply and affects equilibrium price and quantity; then evaluate how a quota, per-unit tax, or import ban would change outcomes and welfare, referencing illegal smuggling as a real-world complication.

Pose a short essay question requiring explanation of how stronger property-rights tools (microchipping, registration, approved-pet lists) change incentives, reduce moral hazard and external costs, and analyse administrative costs and enforcement challenges.

Ask students to explain why policing and security for transport hubs are public goods, draw a diagram illustrating free-rider problems, and evaluate whether private provision (e.g. private security contractors) could efficiently complement public policing in Hong Kong.

Give a scenario with estimated costs of delayed services and additional police hours; ask students to identify and classify the externalities, show welfare loss on a diagram, and suggest policy responses (e.g. surveillance, fines for hoaxes) with evaluation of effectiveness and unintended consequences.

Provide a simple government budget table (policing vs health vs transport maintenance). Ask students to calculate the opportunity cost of diverting X police hours to counterterrorism checks during a holiday, and discuss trade-offs the government faces when allocating resources for rare but high-impact threats.

Ask students to draw and explain a diagram showing private versus social costs/benefits of mandatory seat‑belt use on buses, identify the externality, and evaluate government interventions (mandate, education, subsidies) including strengths and weaknesses in terms of reducing the externality and equity implications for different passenger groups.

Require students to classify the safety benefit from seat‑belt use as private or public good, explain why government involvement may be justified, and assess whether regulation, information campaigns or infrastructure investment are appropriate methods to provide safety as a public good in Hong Kong.

Prompt an evaluative essay question: analyse the economic efficiency of the seat‑belt mandate given enforcement problems and retrofitting costs for bus operators; discuss opportunity costs and propose and justify a more efficient policy mix for Hong Kong (cost‑benefit logic, MSB/MSP comparisons).

Ask students to define public goods and analyse whether fire safety services, building inspections and school drills should be publicly provided or subsidised; evaluate market failure and recommend policy options (government provision, regulation, subsidies) with justification and real-world HK examples.

Require a diagram showing social vs private costs and ask students to explain how underinvestment in fire prevention arises; evaluate policy responses (regulation, penalties, subsidies for safety equipment, public provision) and discuss their likely effectiveness and equity implications in a Hong Kong context.

Pose a short-answer or data question asking students to identify the opportunity cost of time spent on drills, discuss how to weigh expected benefits (reduced casualty risk) against lost instructional time, and recommend an optimal allocation using cost–benefit reasoning.

Ask students to use a supply-demand diagram to show how increased resignations shift the supply curve for teachers, explain short-run effects on wages and class sizes, and evaluate probable government interventions to restore supply (use data from the article for numerical support, e.g., percent change in withdrawals or number of leavers).

Design a data-response question: calculate percentage changes in departures (compare 3,551 in 2022 to 2,473 who left the sector last year) and discuss how increased mobility options change the equilibrium in the local teacher market, asking for evaluation of policies to reduce brain drain (e.g., retention bonuses, targeted contracts).

Form an essay-style question: explain the concept of opportunity cost using the article’s context, ask students to weigh costs and benefits (financial, professional, social) for a young teacher deciding whether to remain, and assess how changes in government policy or student numbers alter that opportunity cost.

Ask students to use a labour supply and demand diagram to show the short-run effect of the certification requirement on supply, wage and quantity of teachers; explain reasons for a leftward shift and evaluate likely short-run vs long-run outcomes (including transitional period and potential wage changes).

Create a data-response or short essay question asking how the 30-day exemption for daily-rated substitutes and the residency rule change incentives for teachers to accept short-term contracts or relocate, and evaluate impacts on labour allocation across types of teaching jobs.

Pose an extended-response question asking students to analyse how compulsory CPD could raise teacher productivity and classroom outcomes, using concepts of human capital investment and cost–benefit analysis (include potential trade-offs such as time costs and signalling vs genuine productivity gains).

Ask students to draw demand and supply diagrams showing the impact of increased cross‑border investment (demand shift) and limited new housing supply, then explain changes in equilibrium price and quantity and the effects on market participants (shortage/surplus and price signals).

Set a scenario where land is scarce: ask students to discuss opportunity costs of converting a hotel into student housing versus keeping it as a hotel, and evaluate which allocation might maximise social welfare given demand from different buyer groups (tourists, students, investors).

Provide data/assumptions and require students to calculate and interpret price elasticity of demand for super‑prime housing; then evaluate how elasticity affects sellers’ pricing power and the likely incidence/effectiveness of a per‑unit tax or stamp duty on luxury property transactions.

Ask students to draw a supply and demand diagram showing: (a) a rightward shift in demand that explains higher prices and higher transaction values; (b) how limited new completions versus strong demand would shift outcomes; and explain in words which non-price factors in the article caused the shift and the likely impact on equilibrium quantity and price.

Pose a data‑interpretation question: using the article, evaluate why quantity demanded can rise even as prices increase (refer to income/wealth effects, expectations, and price elasticity). Ask students to discuss whether housing is likely price elastic or inelastic in Hong Kong and the implications for revenue (total value of transactions).

Give an essay-style question: identify the likely sources of monopoly power in Hong Kong’s housing market (land scarcity, planning controls, high fixed costs, reputation/brand), assess how this power may affect prices and consumer welfare, and evaluate policy measures the government could use to increase competition or supply.

Ask students to draw supply and demand diagrams showing the effect of increased Hong Kong demand for travel to Japan on equilibrium price and quantity of tourism-related services (airline seats, hotels), and to explain short-run impacts on consumer and producer surplus.

Set a data-based question asking students to calculate price elasticity or income elasticity of demand for visits to Japan using hypothetical figures, and interpret whether tourism demand is elastic or inelastic and the implications for policy (e.g., tourism promotion or pricing by airlines).

Prompt students to explain how the negative externality from radioactive discharge justifies a government ban or restriction, using diagrams to show social vs private costs, and evaluate alternative policy responses (import ban/quota, testing standards, compensation) with welfare analysis for Hong Kong consumers and affected Japanese producers.

Ask students to explain why professional medical regulation can be treated as a public good and evaluate the case for government intervention in the Medical Council—e.g., 'Explain how the Medical Council’s oversight exhibits public-good characteristics and assess whether the proposed reforms are likely to correct under-provision of oversight (8 or 12 marks).'

Frame an application question asking students to identify the negative externalities from slow complaint handling, illustrate the welfare loss, and evaluate whether the proposed time frames, increased lay participation and independent assessors would improve allocative efficiency and equity (12-mark evaluation).

Set a policy-evaluation question: 'In the context of a mixed economy, discuss the advantages and disadvantages of increasing government-appointed members and statutory time frames for medical disciplinary bodies. Should regulation or market mechanisms play the larger role in ensuring medical quality?' (10–12 marks).

Ask students to draw supply and demand diagrams for two categories (e.g. jewellery and apparel): show a rightward demand shift for jewellery due to tourists and a leftward/unchanged shift for apparel due to cross‑border spending and e‑commerce; explain impacts on equilibrium price and quantity and evaluate which factors could shift supply as well (10–12 marker with diagram and short evaluation).

Provide percentage changes and a short dataset; ask students to estimate and interpret price‑elasticity or income‑elasticity for selected categories, explain why jewellery demand may be relatively inelastic compared with apparel, and evaluate how elasticity affects the effectiveness of policies or marketing strategies (calculation + explanation, 10 marks).

Require students to classify listed categories (jewellery, electrical goods, fuel, apparel, bakery) into durable/non‑durable and luxury/necessity, then explain how income changes (from tourism or local incomes) and substitution to online platforms would affect demand for each type; ask for evaluative comments on policy or business responses (8–10 marker).

Ask students to explain how secure and enforceable transfer mechanisms (escrow accounts vs direct bank transfers) affect the protection of private property rights, and evaluate the likely consequences for buyer confidence and market transactions (use a short essay: explain, illustrate with examples, and evaluate).

Give a data‑based or diagram question asking students to identify the previous market structure for escrow services (e.g., limited competition/quasi‑monopoly due to legal requirements), explain how opening transfers to banks increases competition, and analyse effects on fees, consumer surplus and welfare (include a supply/demand or price‑output diagram).

Set a problem requiring students to discuss how lower transaction costs and faster settlements affect market liquidity, time costs for buyers/sellers and overall welfare; ask for both short‑run gains and potential long‑run trade‑offs (policy evaluation question).

Ask students to classify fire-safety measures in multi-storey housing (e.g. alarms, hoses, common-area maintenance) as public, private or club goods, explain the implications for provision and free-rider problems, and evaluate the effectiveness of requiring owners’ corporations or the government to provide these services.

Require students to draw and explain a diagram showing private maintenance decision vs social optimum, identify sources of negative externalities in the article, and evaluate policy responses (regulation, inspections, fines, mandatory independent consultants) for efficiency and feasibility in the Hong Kong context.

Prompt an essay-style question asking how clearer property-right definitions and enforcement (e.g. mandatory declarations of interest, stronger owners’ corporation rules) could change incentives for maintenance, reduce moral hazard, and weigh these reforms against potential costs to residents.

Ask students to illustrate and quantify (diagrammatically) the welfare loss from an unregulated negative externality in building renovation, then evaluate two policy responses (regulation/standards vs liability/fines), discussing efficiency gains and equity implications for affected residents.

Require students to explain why fire-safety regulation can be treated as a public-good problem, assess the role of government provision versus private management in ensuring safe housing, and evaluate the trade-offs of increased regulation on costs and housing supply.

Set a case-style question asking students to analyse how unclear/poorly enforced property rights and contract oversight might lead to cost-cutting by contractors, describe the incentive effects, and recommend institutional reforms (e.g., stronger liability rules, monitoring) while considering implementation costs.

Ask students to explain how weak or uncertain private property rights can change firms’ incentives to invest (use diagrams showing investment decline), and evaluate short- and long-run effects on supply of port services, foreign direct investment inflows, and social welfare (AO3 evaluation on trade-offs and policy responses).

Set a data-response or essay question where students discuss how changes in ownership rights (forced reversal of concessions or cancellations) affect firm objectives (profit maximisation vs. litigation costs), the feasibility of selling assets (refer to CK Hutchison’s stalled sale), and implications for stakeholder returns and corporate strategy.

Provide a scenario-based question asking students to identify the likely market structure for canal terminal operations, draw and explain pricing and output decisions under monopoly/oligopoly, and evaluate welfare effects of market power versus benefits of large-scale specialised investment (tie in government regulation and concession contracts).

Ask students to draw labelled supply and demand diagrams showing (a) a leftward shift in demand from the health scare and (b) a simultaneous leftward supply shift from temporary restaurant suspensions/inspections; then explain effects on equilibrium price and quantity and calculate changes in consumer and producer surplus given supplied linear functions or numbers.

Set a data-based or essay question requiring a diagram with marginal private benefit/cost and marginal social benefit/cost to show welfare loss, then evaluate government interventions (public advisories, mandatory inspections/temporary bans, compensation to affected firms) for internalising the externality and compare efficiency and distributional consequences.

Require a short-answer or case-analysis question asking students to discuss whether and how prices of oysters/restaurants would adjust after the outbreak, why firms might use non-price responses (temporarily removing items, deep-cleaning, advertising safety) and the likely short-run impact on consumer surplus and producer profit.

Ask students to draw demand and supply diagrams showing (a) the leftward shift in supply for recalled brands and (b) the increase in demand for substitute formulas; then explain effects on equilibrium price/quantity, consumer and producer surplus, and short-run availability—include consideration of price elasticity and likely outcomes for different elasticities.

Set an evaluation question: explain how the contamination is a negative externality, describe suitable government responses (recalls, testing, information provision, liability rules), and assess the equity implications—which households are most harmed and how policy can mitigate unequal effects.

Ask students to analyse how brand reputation creates market power in the infant-formula market, then evaluate how safety scares and regulatory action might alter barriers to entry, consumer switching, and long-run competition; include policy evaluation (labelling, stricter standards) and diagrammatic support where relevant.

Give a short data-response question: using the article figures, explain how weak enforcement of property rights can reduce market participation and welfare; evaluate two policy measures (police crackdowns and platform account removals) in restoring property rights, using efficiency and equity criteria.

Ask students to (a) calculate percentage changes in case numbers and losses from the article, and (b) draw and explain a supply-demand diagram showing how ‘fake low prices’ and increased perceived transaction risk shift demand or add an implicit transaction cost, analysing the impact on consumer surplus and market quantity.

Frame an essay-style question: identify the negative externalities caused by widespread online scams in Hong Kong, illustrate them with the article’s facts (e.g. younger buyers, platform removals), and evaluate corrective policies (public education campaigns, stricter platform regulation, and criminal penalties) for their likely effectiveness and trade-offs.

Ask students to evaluate how weakened property rights (using this case) affect incentives to invest in firms, showing short-run and long-run effects on supply and market entry; include a diagram of investment decline and discuss policy implications for Hong Kong’s business environment.

Set a part (a)/(b) question: (a) explain how criminal convictions of a firm can affect its balance sheet, access to capital and production capacity; (b) using the Apple Daily example, analyse likely effects on shareholders, creditors and potential firm restructuring or liquidation.

Ask students to distinguish private vs public goods and then use a welfare diagram to show how the loss of a news provider can create under-provision of information, leading to welfare loss; evaluate possible government or market responses to restore information provision.

Ask students to draw and explain supply and demand diagrams for hotel rooms (or train/bus seats) showing the demand shift, identify short-run shortage or price effects, and discuss factors that determine how much price and quantity change (include non-price rationing like sold-out trains).

Prompt a data-based or conceptual question requiring students to evaluate the price elasticity of demand for mainland visitors during Lunar New Year (likely inelastic short-run), and analyse whether hotels should raise prices to increase revenue — include calculations or implications for revenue and producer surplus under different elasticity assumptions.

Require students to explain with a labour market diagram how a temporary demand increase affects wages and employment in the short run, discuss constraints (labour mobility, hours, use of part-time/temporary staff), and evaluate policy or managerial responses (overtime pay, hiring casual workers, cross-border labour).

Ask students to explain negative externalities using the article, draw a diagram showing private vs social costs of accepting controversial funding, and evaluate two policy measures (e.g., donor disclosure requirements, institutional vetting) to correct the externality.

Pose a question comparing lump-sum grants versus salaried/residency payments for an academic: explain incentive effects, moral hazard and impact on labour supply and productivity; include a short evaluation of which method better aligns incentives for reliable research outcomes.

Ask students to classify the island and academic research as private or public goods, explain implications for funding (private provision vs public support), and discuss why private funding of public-good research can lead to underprovision or capture.

Ask students to draw a supply and demand diagram for dog-friendly dining places, show the effect of introducing a binding quota, identify changes in consumer and producer surplus and deadweight loss, and evaluate the efficiency and equity of allocating slots by lottery versus market-based alternatives (e.g., licensing fees).

Require students to classify and illustrate the externalities with diagrams (private vs social marginal costs/benefits), propose and compare policy responses (regulation, zoning, quotas, fines, separation of areas), and evaluate which policy best addresses the externality problem in Hong Kong’s context.

Pose a short-answer/quantitative question where students calculate a restaurant’s profit-maximizing choice given estimates of additional demand from pet-owners, marginal revenue and marginal cost of accommodating dogs, and discuss short-run versus long-run decisions and implications for market entry/exit in Hong Kong.

Ask students to illustrate and explain the negative externality with a supply-and-demand diagram, show the divergence between private and social costs, and evaluate policy options (product certification, fines, bans, taxes, or regulation) for correcting the externality, discussing efficiency and possible unintended consequences.

Pose a question applying the Coase theorem: explain how clearly defined property rights in private housing estates could lead to bargaining solutions to reduce incidents, then evaluate practical barriers (transaction costs, enforcement) and recommend whether administrative rules or estate notices are preferable before new legislation.

Give numerical elasticity values and ask students to calculate the expected percentage change in quantity demanded after certification increases costs by a given percentage; then ask for policy implications if demand is (a) price elastic and (b) price inelastic (impact on safety outcomes and on incomes of delivery riders).

Ask students to explain why the government might provide newborn screening (using public-goods/merit good arguments), and to evaluate whether this service fits the criteria for public provision compared with private provision (use cost/benefit and market-failure reasoning).

Require analysis of the positive externalities from screening, drawing a diagram to show social vs private benefit and discussing policy options (universal provision, means-testing, vouchers) in terms of efficiency and equity; include an evaluative conclusion recommending a policy for Hong Kong.

Set a numerical or diagrammatic question where students show the effect of a government subsidy for screening on supply/demand, calculate changes in consumer/producer surplus and discuss who bears the fiscal cost and how subsidy design (e.g. targeting private hospitals) affects incentives and capacity utilisation.

Exam-style question: 'Explain how Hong Kong’s IPO market and