DSE Econ 時事 第14週（2026年）

Ask students to draw and label supply and demand diagrams showing the effect of a per-unit subsidy for elderly passengers (before and after the reform to 'HK$2 or 80% of fare'); calculate subsidy per trip given example fares and discuss impacts on consumer/producer surplus and government expenditure.

Provide elasticity values for elderly commuting demand and ask students to estimate the change in trips and government cost when per-trip contribution rises from HK$2 to HK$3 or when the 80% rule applies; evaluate incidence between taxpayers and elderly users under different elasticities.

Construct a short essay or data-response question asking how subsidised transport affects labour supply decisions of seniors, illustrate with labour supply curves or participation rate changes, and assess distributional and efficiency trade-offs of tightening the scheme for working seniors.

Pose a normative question asking students to compare vertical and horizontal equity implications of keeping, tightening, or targeting the subsidy (e.g., means-testing, trip caps, raising qualifying age), and justify a policy recommendation using equity-efficiency trade-offs.

Ask students to explain how market signals (low enrolment) lead to school closures, illustrate with a supply-demand diagram for school places, and evaluate whether market allocation is appropriate for education, especially for SEN students (include equity considerations).

Design an exam question where students show graphically how a per‑pupil subsidy for SEN students affects the school's marginal cost/revenue and admission decisions, then evaluate whether the current subsidy design could prevent closures of small SEN‑focused schools.

Ask students to analyse the cost structure of small versus large schools: draw average cost curves showing economies/diseconomies of scale, explain implications for school closures, and assess policy options (e.g., targeted funding vs consolidation).

Give students a case‑study question to identify and distinguish private and social benefits/costs, explain the externality and equity issues, and evaluate government interventions (regulation, subsidies, exceptions) to correct market failure.

Ask students to explain how strong private property rights for IP affect incentives to create and invest (use the festival as an example) and evaluate the trade-offs of government support for IP industries (diagram optional).

Require analysis of how IP creates temporary monopoly power, illustrate welfare effects with consumer/producer surplus diagrams using limited-edition merchandise, and discuss policy responses to potential inefficiencies.

Give data or a short scenario based on the festival (prices, quantities sold, ticket sales) and ask students to calculate price elasticity of demand, interpret whether goods are price elastic or inelastic, and advise pricing strategies for organisers to maximise revenue or attendance.

Ask students to identify and explain the positive externalities from hosting the IP festival, evaluate whether government intervention (e.g., subsidies, marketing support) is justified, and suggest appropriate policy tools with cost–benefit reasoning.

Ask students to use a labour-supply diagram to show how access to free on-campus after-school care shifts labour supply for working parents; explain substitution and income effects, and evaluate short-run vs long-run impacts on household income and government spending.

Require students to draw supply and demand for after-school care and illustrate the effects of a government subsidy (or making the service free) on equilibrium price, quantity, consumer/producer surplus and government expenditure; include an evaluation of deadweight loss and targeting efficiency.

Ask students to assess the scheme from an equity perspective: explain how targeted provision affects vertical/horizontal equity, discuss possible inclusion of lower-middle-income families with co-payments, and evaluate trade-offs between equity, administrative cost and potential stigma.

Have students identify and diagram the positive externalities (MSB > MPB) caused by the programme, explain why a subsidy may be welfare-improving, and evaluate potential unintended consequences (crowding, quality variation, fiscal constraints).

Ask students to draw supply and demand diagrams showing the effect of an increase in airline costs (fuel surcharge) on price and quantity for international flights, and then explain how the market for short‑haul mainland trips might adjust (shift in demand toward mainland travel).

Give students hypothetical price and quantity changes for short‑haul and long‑haul routes and ask them to calculate and compare price elasticities of demand, then interpret revenue effects for airlines when fuel surcharges are increased.

Pose a scenario where a family has a fixed holiday budget and rising long‑haul airfares; ask students to identify the opportunity cost of choosing a mainland short break versus a longer overseas trip or a local staycation and to evaluate the decision using marginal benefit vs marginal cost reasoning.

Request that students illustrate changes in consumer and producer surplus on a diagram after a per‑unit increase in effective price (surcharge), calculate deadweight loss with given numbers, and discuss distributional winners and losers (airlines, mainland tour operators, Hong Kong consumers).

Ask students to draw demand/supply diagrams showing the original flat-subsidy scheme versus the revised 20%-of-fare rule for trips > HK$10, and calculate using data from the article (e.g. HK$10 threshold, HK$550m projected savings, reimbursement figures) the likely change in government expenditure and the incidence of subsidy between commuters and operators.

Set an exam question asking students to evaluate whether elderly commuters' demand for long-haul routes is likely to be elastic or inelastic (use qualitative factors from the article: income constraints, urgency, imperfect information, mobility issues) and to assess how elasticity affects the policy's success in reducing misuse and saving government funds.

Require students to use a welfare diagram to show changes in consumer and producer surplus after the subsidy change, identify any deadweight loss or welfare transfer to the government (using the HK$550m saving and reimbursement rise to HK$4.8bn as numerical anchors), and comment on which groups gain or lose.

Ask an evaluative 12-mark question: assess the equity implications of the new scheme for different elderly subgroups, compare targeted alternatives (sectional fares, caps removal, greater promotion, increased short-haul frequency) and recommend whether the policy should be retained or adjusted, justifying with efficiency–equity trade-offs.

Exam-style task: (i) Define positive externality and illustrate with a diagram showing private vs social benefits for R&D/education; (ii) Using the Northern Metropolis example, explain two market failures that justify government support; (iii) Evaluate two policy instruments (e.g., subsidies, grants, public provision of research infrastructure) the HK government could use to internalise these externalities, considering efficiency and equity.

Exam-style task: (i) Classify different services in the university town (e.g., degree courses, basic research facilities, public labs) as private, public or merit goods with justification; (ii) Discuss why pure market provision might under-provide these services and recommend an appropriate mix of public provision, subsidies or regulation for Hong Kong.

Exam-style task: (i) Using a labour supply and demand diagram for academic staff, show the short-run effect on wages and employment if the university town increases demand for academics; (ii) Analyse potential benefits (brain gain, higher productivity) and drawbacks (wage pressures, displacement) for local workers; (iii) Evaluate policy options to manage mobility (visa policies, training subsidies).

Exam-style task: (i) Explain how economies of scale and agglomeration can lower average costs and boost innovation for firms/universities in the Northern Metropolis (use LRAC or cost diagrams); (ii) Evaluate possible diseconomies and opportunity costs (land use, congestion, environmental costs) and propose measures HK could take to mitigate them.

Using the Hong Kong example (Queen Mary Hospital chest pain centre), discuss whether acute cardiac services should be treated as public goods or merit goods and evaluate the role of public provision and accreditation in correcting market failure.

Explain the positive externalities resulting from national accreditation of chest pain centres and assess two policy measures the Hong Kong government could use to internalise these externalities.

Given the reduction in median treatment time from 105 to 53 minutes at Queen Mary Hospital, calculate the percentage decrease and discuss how higher labour productivity in hospitals affects healthcare supply and patient outcomes; evaluate potential limits to productivity gains.

Analyse how establishing national-standard chest pain centres in Hong Kong might produce economies of scale for acute cardiac care, and evaluate possible diseconomies that policymakers should consider.

Ask students to draw a supply and demand diagram for the super‑luxury hotel market in Kowloon and analyse the short‑run impact of the Ritz‑Carlton opening on equilibrium price, quantity and consumer surplus; include discussion of capacity limits (312 rooms) and peak vs off‑peak effects.

Give hypothetical price and quantity figures and ask students to calculate price elasticity of demand for standard rooms and suites, explain whether demand is likely elastic or inelastic among wealthy tourists, and evaluate how a price change would affect total revenue and firm pricing strategy.

Ask students to explain how an excess supply of labour affects equilibrium wages for hotel staff, discuss non‑wage job attributes the Ritz‑Carlton might use to attract staff, and evaluate short‑run vs long‑run adjustments in employment in the hospitality sector.

Require students to identify the likely market structure, list key characteristics (price rigidity, product differentiation, barriers to entry), and assess how the entry of Ritz‑Carlton affects competition, possible strategic responses (non‑price competition, price signalling) and welfare.

Ask students to draw supply and demand diagrams showing the effect of a legal ban/licensing restriction and enforcement costs on the legal supply curve and the emergence of a black market; explain changes in equilibrium price, quantity and consumer/producer surplus and label illegal trade outcomes.

Set a data-based or essay question requiring evaluation of policy options (complete ban, quotas, per-unit tax, strict enforcement) to internalise external costs, asking students to use welfare analysis (social vs private marginal cost) and discuss effectiveness and enforcement challenges.

Ask students to explain how stronger enforcement and higher penalties alter incentives for economic agents, discuss the role of clear property rights and monitoring in reducing market failure, and evaluate cost-effectiveness of punitive versus preventive measures.

Pose a quantitative question asking students to calculate the per-unit tax required to internalise a given external cost per kg of shark fin, then critically discuss why taxation may fail in the presence of black markets and what complementary enforcement measures are needed.

Ask students to draw supply and demand diagrams for autism support services showing the impact of an increase in demand and/or government-provided support (e.g., subsidies or funding for training), and explain effects on equilibrium price, quantity and access; include evaluation of short‑run vs long‑run adjustments.

Pose a data‑based question asking students to analyse how improved training and reduced stigma change the effective labour supply of autistic individuals, illustrate impacts on wages and employment in a labour market diagram, and evaluate policies (e.g., targeted training, wage subsidies) to increase participation.

Require students to identify and illustrate relevant externalities using welfare diagrams, explain why free markets may underprovide inclusive services, and evaluate policy responses (subsidies, public provision, regulation, awareness campaigns) with reference to efficiency and equity trade‑offs.

Ask students to classify types of autism support services as private, public or merit goods, discuss market provision problems, and design a policy mix (public provision, subsidies, PPPs) to improve access—evaluate costs, incentives and distributional effects.

Ask students to draw and label a supply-demand diagram for a public transport route showing the original HK$2 subsidy and the change to 20% fares for trips >HK$10; calculate and explain effects on consumer surplus, producer revenue, government expenditure (use the HK$550m saving figure), and incidence of the subsidy change.

Give a short data-based or qualitative question asking students to predict how quantity demanded for long-haul short-journey routes will respond to the higher out-of-pocket price; evaluate outcomes under elastic and inelastic demand assumptions and relate this to the government’s intended HK$550m savings.

Pose an application question: using a simple labour-supply framework, analyse how an increase in commuting cost (illustrated by the change from HK$2 to 20% fares) affects take-up of part-time/low-wage jobs by those aged 60–65; include numerical examples (e.g., compute monthly extra cost given X round trips) and policy recommendations to mitigate any negative labour-supply impact.

Set a 12–15 mark evaluative question: assess the policy in terms of allocative efficiency and equity — weigh the government’s cost-saving objective against the distributional impact on low-income working elderly and propose alternative targeted measures (means-testing, trip caps, employer allowances) with justification.

Ask students to draw demand and supply diagrams for a firm or sector participating in the coupon scheme, show the effect of the HK$100 coupon (as a per-purchase voucher) on demand, and explain changes in equilibrium price and quantity and likely short-run impacts on producers.

Provide demand elasticity values for a restaurant and a pharmacy and ask students to calculate and compare the predicted change in quantity demanded given the coupon, and explain qualitatively which sector will see a larger increase in sales and why.

Give a linear supply and demand schedule and ask students to compute consumer and producer surplus before and after introducing the coupon (treated as a per-unit subsidy or lump-sum discount), showing numerical changes and commenting on welfare distribution between consumers and producers.

Set an exam-style evaluative question asking students to assess the equity and efficiency trade-offs of CLP’s targeted coupon scheme versus a universal voucher or direct cash transfer, requiring normative judgment supported by microeconomic reasoning.

Ask students to draw supply and demand diagrams for the office market showing (a) an increase in supply from new grade A completions, (b) stronger demand in Central only, and explain the resulting effects on equilibrium rent, vacancy rates and developer incentives to redevelop or sell assets.

Require an evaluative essay or data-question where students compare costs, payback periods and risk for ground-up redevelopment versus en bloc acquisition; include quantitative estimation (e.g., calculate simple payback given hypothetical costs, rental incomes and vacancy rates) and recommend which method a developer should choose under current market conditions.

Pose a short-answer or discussion question on why firms pursue compulsory acquisition, the effects on minority shareholders and market efficiency, and ask students to evaluate whether compulsory buy-outs or private purchases better protect stakeholders in the Hong Kong context.

Set a calculation/evaluation question where students assess how asset sales that reduce debt affect interest obligations, leverage ratios and potential returns; ask them to explain how high debt might change a developer’s willingness to invest in long payback projects.

Ask students to draw supply and demand diagrams for hotel rooms or event tickets during the holiday: show a rightward shift in demand, explain the new equilibrium price and quantity, and analyse how limited short-run supply (inelastic supply) affects price volatility and possible shortages.

Give numerical or qualitative data and ask students to calculate/compare price elasticities for hotels vs. festival tickets, explain revenue implications of a price increase, and discuss how elasticity informs pricing strategies (e.g., early-bird discounts, surge pricing, bundling).

Require students to identify and diagram the welfare loss from a negative externality (e.g., congestion), propose policy responses (tax, regulation, provision of public facilities), and evaluate their effectiveness and impact on stakeholders (consumers, businesses, government).

Pose a short-run labour market question: show how a sudden increase in demand for event staff shifts labour demand, illustrate wage and employment effects given relatively inelastic short-run labour supply, and ask students to discuss implications for hiring practices (overtime, casual labour).

Ask students to use a labour supply diagram to show how hiring barriers or higher perceived costs of working (stigma, mental-health disincentives) shift labour supply and to evaluate policies (spent-conviction laws, rehabilitation programmes, wage subsidies) that could restore participation and welfare.

Set a question analysing how reduced mobility for a subgroup (ex-offenders) lowers allocative efficiency; require evaluation of policies (record-sealing, targeted training) using efficiency and labour-market adjustment arguments.

Design an essay or data-response item asking students to explain the opportunity cost of strict KPI regimes for schools, illustrate with a simple production-possibility/frontier or time-allocation diagram for teachers, and assess short-run versus long-run effects on students’ productivity and labour-market outcomes.

Pose a normative evaluation question: contrast positive and normative statements about record-sealing policies, and ask students to appraise equity versus efficiency trade-offs when granting ex-offenders employment rights or protection.

Ask students to draw and explain supply–demand diagrams for a retail market (e.g., electrical goods or hotel rooms) showing the effect of increased inbound tourism and festive spending on equilibrium price and quantity; include short-run supply constraints and ask for welfare implications (consumer/producer surplus).

Provide data or ask students to assume a percentage increase in gold prices and a given fall in quantity sold; calculate price elasticity of demand, state whether demand is elastic or inelastic, and explain why total revenue from jewellery could rise despite lower quantities sold.

Ask students to classify listed categories (jewellery, electrical goods, fuel) as normal/inferior or luxury/necessity and predict how changes in income (tourist income effect) or price would shift demand; require justification using article evidence.

Pose a market-for-labour question: show how a surge in tourists shifts labour demand for hotel/retail workers, draw the wage–employment diagram, and ask students to analyse short-run effects on wages, employment and hours worked, and possible policy responses (e.g., hiring temporary workers or overtime).

Ask students to draw supply and demand diagrams showing an increase in supply with stagnant demand, label the old and new equilibrium rent and quantity, and explain using article figures (e.g. total premium stock 99.2m sqm, net absorption +2.3m sqm, vacancy 25.4%) why rents fell and vacancy rose; include a short written explanation linking diagram to real numbers.

Provide data from the article and ask students to calculate the implied surplus (for example, estimate excess unsold/unused space using total stock and net absorption) and discuss short-term market effects and likely landlord responses to clear the surplus.

Pose an evaluation question: explain how falling rents serve as signals/incentives in this market, assess whether price cuts or non-price measures (customised asset-management, flexible leases) are more effective for landlords to improve occupancy and returns, and justify with examples from Hong Kong.

Ask students to use welfare diagrams to show how an increase in supply changes consumer and producer surplus in the office market, then evaluate policies or landlord strategies (e.g. repurposing space, offering services) that could mitigate producer surplus losses.

Explain how the concept of scarcity applies to the supply of primary-school places in this case; use a supply-demand diagram for school places and ask students to analyse short-run and long-run effects of falling enrolment and policy constraints (e.g., minimum class-size rule).

Pose a decision-making question where students calculate and compare the opportunity costs of closure versus merger (e.g., lost community service, redeployment costs, alternative uses of facilities) and evaluate which option maximises social welfare.

Ask students to illustrate how merging two small schools could lower average costs using a diagram of average cost curves, discuss possible diseconomies (e.g., management complexity, longer travel for students), and evaluate whether a merger is likely to be efficient in the Hong Kong context.

Require students to discuss why the government intervenes in primary education provision, identify the externalities and equity issues involved, and critically assess the policy of banning schools with fewer than 16 students from running subsidised classes versus alternatives (targeted subsidies, consolidation incentives).

Ask students to draw and explain a long-run average cost (LRAC) curve showing how increasing capacity to 30 million passengers could move the airport down its LRAC (economies of scale) and identify possible sources of diseconomies; include a short quantitative part (e.g., calculate average cost given fixed cost and passenger numbers before and after expansion).

Give a data-based scenario and ask students to classify the expansion type (internal growth vs merger/JV), explain advantages and disadvantages of internal expansion for a public airport, and evaluate alternative expansion methods (e.g., public–private partnership, outsourcing services) in terms of cost, control and risk.

Require students to classify different airport components (runways, security, retail areas, washrooms) as public, private or club/common-pool goods, explain potential market failures (congestion, underprovision), and evaluate why government provision or regulation might be justified, including policy tools like access fees or congestion pricing.

Pose a problem where students calculate labour productivity (passengers per staff) before and after automation, explain how technology shifts the marginal product of labour and the labour demand curve, and evaluate short‑run vs long‑run implications for employment and service quality.

Ask students to explain how an increase in capital and skilled labour relocating to Hong Kong would shift the city’s production possibility frontier and analyse short-run vs long-run effects on output and prices in financial and property markets (8–10 marks).

Set a data-response or application question requiring evaluation of how increased labour mobility into Hong Kong’s financial sector would affect wages, labour supply, and the distributional effects across local vs foreign workers; include diagram(s) of labour supply/demand (6–8 marks).

Ask students to assess how differences in legal/administrative frameworks and onboarding costs for complex ownership structures influence where firms and wealth choose to domiciliate, and to discuss implications for Hong Kong’s capital markets and bond/share listings (10 marks).

Create an essay-style question: evaluate how administrative frictions and slow compliance processes create inefficiencies (e.g., higher transaction costs, misallocation of capital), and recommend policy reforms Hong Kong could implement to improve market efficiency while maintaining financial integrity (12 marks).

Ask students to explain how stronger IP protection (a form of private property rights) changes incentives for producers and the supply of IP-related goods/services; use a supply-and-demand diagram to show effects on market provision and evaluate trade-offs (enforcement costs, access, innovation).

Ask students to analyse how IP rights create monopoly power, draw monopoly diagrams to show impacts on price, output, consumer surplus and deadweight loss, and evaluate policy responses (time-limited rights, compulsory licensing, subsidies) that balance innovation incentives and allocative efficiency.

Ask students to identify and illustrate positive externalities from IP-led events (e.g., increased tourism, higher retail spending), explain why market provision may be suboptimal, and evaluate government interventions mentioned in the article (subsidies, financing sandbox, IP Academy) including opportunity costs and expected effectiveness.

Ask students to explain how scaling up IP production/marketing (e.g., touring exhibitions, merchandising) can lead to economies of scale and lower average costs, use cost curves to illustrate, and evaluate implications for market entry, competition and long‑run sustainability.

Ask students to use a LRAC diagram and the article context to explain how scaling production could lower average costs (identify sources of economies) and discuss possible diseconomies (management complexity, supply‑chain strain); evaluate if the US$300m funding is likely to shift the firm along or shift the LRAC curve.

Require students to classify these moves as international expansion and strategic/vertical partnerships, then evaluate the benefits and risks (market access, coordination costs, regulatory advantages) for the firm and for Hong Kong as a regional hub, using concrete pros/cons in a short essay.

Prompt students to compare how different owners’ objectives (profit maximisation, strategic industrial policy, long‑term capital) affect financing choices, corporate governance and potential agency issues, and ask them to assess implications for firm strategy using examples from the article.

Ask students to distinguish private and social benefits, draw a diagram showing underinvestment without public support, and evaluate policy responses (public investment by HKIC, subsidies, regulation) with reference to the article’s description of government‑linked backing.

Ask students to use a supply-and-demand diagram for therapy services to illustrate the shortage; explain causes (e.g., fixed public capacity, high demand) and evaluate short- and long-run policy responses such as increasing supply, subsidies, or rationing (15-mark evaluative question).

Set a situational data question asking students to identify and explain opportunity costs for (a) a household choosing private therapy instead of parental labour supply, and (b) government redirecting funds to expand autism services versus other health/education programmes; require a short numeric example and evaluative comment (10–12 marks).

Design a question where students draw and explain shifts in labour supply for caregivers, predict effects on wages and household income, and evaluate policies (e.g., subsidised respite care, supported employment) to restore labour supply and improve economic outcomes (12–15 marks).

Ask an evaluative question requiring students to distinguish positive and normative statements about current provision, assess equity implications of policy options (means-tested subsidies, universal expansion, vouchers), and recommend a policy with justification using equity-efficiency trade-offs (15-mark essay).

Ask students to illustrate with a diagram the divergence between private and social marginal cost for data-centre electricity use, explain why the emissions are a negative externality, and evaluate two government policies (eg PUE cap vs Pigouvian tax on electricity or mandatory disclosures) in terms of efficiency and equity.

Require students to draw a long-run average cost curve showing economies then diseconomies of scale, explain how energy and cooling constraints can shift the LRAC, and evaluate whether centralising AI computing into a single large hub is cost-effective compared with distributed smaller centres using examples from the article (liquid vs air cooling, PUE limits).

Design a question asking students to identify the market structure, list typical features and barriers to entry present in the article, and analyse how regulatory measures (PUE caps, mandatory audits) might affect competition, market power and consumer/welfare outcomes.

Ask students to calculate opportunity-cost style comparisons using the figures in the article (eg compare annual kWh of the hub vs MTR or number of households served), then discuss policy choices for allocating scarce electricity between competing uses and evaluate trade-offs.

Ask students to illustrate and explain using a labour supply diagram how a long-run fall in the number of school-age children might shift the supply of teachers, show effects on equilibrium wage and employment in the education sector, and evaluate policy options (e.g., enhanced teacher training, subsidies, recruitment of foreign teachers) to address shortages or surpluses.

Require students to use average cost curves to analyse why merging small schools could lower average cost per pupil; include an evaluation part weighing cost savings against potential diseconomies (administrative complexity, loss of local access) and non-price considerations (community impact).

Set a structured question asking students to compare issuing bonds versus using reserves or government funding to finance capital projects: explain how bond issuance affects a university's balance sheet, discuss interest/payment obligations, and evaluate risks and benefits for long-term financial sustainability.

Ask students to identify specific opportunity costs of closing low-enrolment programmes (e.g., loss of niche training vs resources freed for AI upskilling), and evaluate whether the reallocation improves overall welfare or whether important social objectives (teacher supply) may be compromised.

Ask students to draw and explain a supply-and-demand diagram showing how an increase in global fuel costs shifts the supply curve for electricity, then analyse the effect on equilibrium price and quantity and how CLP’s fuel-cost adjustment and stabilisation fund mitigate short-term consumer price rises.

Require calculation or qualitative analysis of how differing price elasticities of demand (inelastic vs elastic) would affect the incidence of higher fuel costs between consumers and producers; include a numerical example estimating welfare effects (consumer surplus loss, producer surplus change) from the announced fuel cost adjustment.

Ask students to evaluate how the scheme of control (fixed permitted return and balancing funds) changes firm behaviour compared with perfect competition or unregulated monopoly, and to discuss advantages and disadvantages of this regulatory structure when fuel prices rise.

Prompt students to explain how an international conflict can create negative externalities for energy-importing economies and to propose policy or firm-level responses (e.g., diversification of fuel sources, strategic reserves, investment in nuclear/renewables) evaluating their effectiveness and trade-offs.

Ask students to draw supply and demand diagrams to show the effect of a fall in demand for local dining (shift left) and/or a reduction in the number of suppliers (supply shift or contraction); explain short-run impacts on equilibrium price and quantity, and discuss why closures may follow.

Provide data (e.g., footfall -7% to -8%, per-person spending down ~20%, Shenzhen prices ~50% of Hong Kong) and ask students to estimate and interpret price elasticity of demand or cross-price effects; evaluate whether demand for dinner dining is price elastic and implications for revenue and pricing strategy.

Ask students to explain how economies of scale lower average costs (diagram of LRAC), assess how scale advantages affect market competition during consolidation, and evaluate welfare/efficiency implications for consumers and small independent restaurants.

Ask students to classify Maxim’s strategic moves (horizontal/market expansion, geographic expansion, product/format differentiation), and evaluate the costs and benefits of each option using given market indicators (local demand decline, stronger SE Asia growth, intense mainland competition).

Ask students to classify satellite services (e.g., basic positioning vs. commercial high‑resolution imagery) as private or public goods, explain the economic implications, and evaluate government options (direct provision, subsidies, or regulation) to correct market failures.

Set a data‑response or essay question requiring identification of positive and negative externalities from satellite and low‑altitude services, show graphically how social and private optima differ, and evaluate policy instruments (taxes, subsidies, regulation, property rights) Hong Kong could use to internalise these externalities.

Ask students to explain how agglomeration economies reduce long‑run average costs for aerospace‑related firms, draw LRAC curves to show scale economies, and evaluate whether Hong Kong’s small‑scale service focus can capture benefits or face diseconomies of scale.

Require a short essay using the production possibility frontier or factor‑allocation analysis: assess the opportunity cost for Hong Kong of prioritising aerospace services (talent, capital, university research), and recommend policies to attract the necessary factors of production.

Ask students to draw supply and demand diagrams for (a) short‑haul flights and (b) high‑speed rail, showing how an increase in airline fuel surcharges affects equilibrium price and quantity for flights and the resulting shift in demand for rail; explain welfare effects (consumer surplus, producer surplus) and identify winners and losers.

Require students to compare price elasticity of demand for short‑haul flights versus high‑speed rail (qualitatively or with given elasticities), explain how elasticity affects revenue and the pass‑through/incidence of surcharges, and evaluate which mode sees a larger change in quantity demanded when prices rise.

Set a scenario where a student must choose between a HK–Guangzhou train (HK$500, 2‑3 hours) and a short‑haul flight (HK$1,500 including surcharge, 1 hour plus airport time); ask them to calculate and discuss the opportunity cost of each choice, incorporating time costs and non‑monetary factors like safety and convenience.

Ask students to define private property rights in the context of personal data, explain how the breach represents a failure of property-rights enforcement, and evaluate policy measures (e.g. encryption, contractual limits on contractors, fines, monitoring) to strengthen rights — include an exam-style mark scheme weighing costs and enforcement challenges.

Require a diagram and explanation showing negative externalities from a data breach, ask students to identify private vs social costs, and evaluate policy interventions (regulation, audits, penalties, public provision of monitoring) to internalise externalities — include calculation-style parts using hypothetical costs per patient.

Set a structured question: explain how repeated data breaches can lead to efficiency losses in healthcare provision; ask students to analyse trade-offs between spending on cybersecurity vs direct healthcare, and draft a short evaluation recommending optimal resource allocation using cost–benefit reasoning.

Ask students to use a supply-and-demand diagram to show the effect of replacing a flat HK$2 rebate with a 20% fare contribution above HK$10: illustrate the subsidy change, show how government expenditure per trip differs, and explain winners and losers (elderly travellers, government, bus operator). Include a quantitative part where students calculate government savings given assumed trip distributions or a simplified numerical example.

Ask students to evaluate how demand elasticity among elderly passengers affects the policy’s effectiveness in reducing short ‘long-haul’ trips and in achieving budget savings; provide alternative elasticity values (inelastic vs elastic) and require prediction of changes in ridership and subsidy spending, supported by calculations and a short justification.

Set an evaluation question: assess the equity implications of moving from a flat HK$2 concession to a percentage-based subsidy, weighing horizontal and vertical equity, potential exclusion of vulnerable subgroups (e.g., those making frequent short trips), and propose compensating measures. Ask for a reasoned policy recommendation with trade-offs between equity and fiscal sustainability.

Ask students to draw supply and demand diagrams showing (a) the effect of an increase in fuel surcharge on the supply curve for air travel/tour packages and equilibrium quantity of travellers, and (b) the simultaneous demand increase for HSR to mainland cities — explain price and quantity changes and compare welfare effects.

Provide data or scenarios and ask students to calculate and interpret price elasticity of demand for long‑haul flights versus HSR, then evaluate how a fuel surcharge affects total revenue for airlines and for HSR operators and discuss policy implications (e.g., taxes, subsidies, fare controls).

Compose a question where students explain the opportunity cost of choosing a mainland HSR trip over a long‑haul tour during a five‑day break, incorporating constraints of time, increased monetary costs due to surcharges, and perceived safety risks; ask for evaluation of how changing the length of the holiday (4 vs 5 days) alters opportunity costs and destination choice.

Ask students to draw and label private and social marginal cost curves for taxi trips, show resulting welfare loss/gain from unregulated access, calculate deadweight loss or externality per trip given hypothetical values, and evaluate corrective policies (e.g. regulation, congestion charge, quotas) in the context of Discovery Bay.

Pose a short essay or structured question applying the Coase theorem: analyse how different assignments of property rights (developer versus residents) affect bargaining outcomes and efficiency, discuss the role of transaction costs and government regulation, and recommend a policy solution for Discovery Bay.

Ask pupils to classify Discovery Bay facilities using the goods matrix, explain how increased taxi access shifts rivalry/excludability, and evaluate implications for provision and funding (e.g. membership fees, access charges or zoning) with reference to equity and efficiency.

Ask students to draw supply and demand diagrams showing the effects of a legal sales ban and added enforcement costs on equilibrium, and explain how quantity traded, legal price, and black‑market activity change; include welfare implications (consumer/producer surplus and deadweight loss).

Have students evaluate the effectiveness of bans and fixed penalties versus alternative interventions (taxes, education, age restrictions) in correcting the externality, using marginal social cost/benefit reasoning and a cost‑benefit style judgment.

Request a short essay classifying these products (private/public, merit/demerit) and explain why governments might prefer outright bans or packaging rules rather than market solutions; ask for advantages and disadvantages in terms of welfare and enforcement.

Ask students to draw supply and demand diagrams showing (a) the effect of higher demand from increased tourist trips on equilibrium price and quantity of taxi rides, and (b) the impact of mandatory e-payment acceptance (reducing transaction frictions) on demand; include short evaluation of distributional effects between drivers and passengers.

Require students to classify the market for digital taxi-payment platforms (e.g., oligopoly or monopolistic competition), identify barriers to entry and network effects, and evaluate how platform competition or dominance affects drivers, consumers and pricing of transaction services.

Present a diagram with a per-transaction fee and ask students to show changes in consumer surplus, producer surplus and government/platform revenue; ask them to evaluate welfare implications and who bears the burden of the fee in the taxi market.

Exam-style question: 'Using a diagram, explain how private decisions by estate managers and contractors can create a negative externality in the provision of building safety; show the resulting welfare loss and evaluate two policy interventions (e.g. tighter enforcement, mandatory inspections or strict liability) that the Hong Kong government could use to correct the market failure.' (marks for analysis, diagram and evaluation).

Exam-style question: 'Assess how clearer assignment of property rights and contract terms between owners, the management firm and contractors could change incentives for fire-safety investment in an estate like Wang Fuk Court. Recommend and justify two contractual or institutional changes that would improve outcomes.' (focus on incentive effects and policy recommendation).

Short-answer or data response: 'Classify different fire-safety measures (alarms, gated access, private apartment sprinklers) as private or public goods and explain the provision problem in a large estate renovation. Suggest who should provide and finance each measure and justify your choices.' (tests classification, application and justification).

Ask students to identify and classify the expansion (e.g., diversification) and evaluate the advantages and disadvantages for the firm using cost–benefit reasoning; include a 6‑mark question requiring reference to firm objectives, risk, and examples of outcomes (use a short pros/cons table or bullet points).

Frame a 10‑mark question requiring students to calculate or explain opportunity costs of funding the R&D versus investing in the core HKTVmall business (e.g., marketing or platform improvements), and to discuss how opportunity cost affects managerial decision‑making under scarcity. Provide a short data vignette (amount invested, expected return ranges) for quantitative reasoning.

Design an evaluation question (12 marks) asking students to explain the negative externalities, illustrate private vs social costs with a diagram, and recommend policy or firm responses (regulation, CSR, fines, voluntary labelling) to internalise the externality; ask them to assess effectiveness and limitations of each measure.

Ask students to draw supply and demand diagrams showing the effect of a negative international supply shock on equilibrium price and quantity in Hong Kong petrol markets; extend the question to show how illicit supply (unregulated sellers) might shift/augment supply or operate as a parallel market and discuss impacts on consumer surplus, producer surplus and market efficiency. Use the given local price ranges to calculate and comment on percentage price changes.

Set a question requiring students to illustrate the effect of a per‑unit petrol levy on price and quantity (tax wedge), calculate tax revenue and deadweight loss under legal sales, then ask how illegal sales (untaxed transactions) alter measured tax revenue and welfare; evaluate policy options (higher penalties vs tax adjustment) and their likely effects on legal supply and black-market activity.

Require students to identify the negative externality, draw private marginal cost vs social marginal cost curves, and quantify potential welfare loss; ask them to evaluate regulatory responses mentioned (increased fines, seizure powers, criminalising purchasers) in terms of efficiency and equity and explain which policy instruments (command-and-control, Pigouvian tax, subsidies for safe disposal) would be most appropriate and why.

Ask students to explain how a rise in global interest rates (or delayed rate cuts) changes mortgage payments and shifts demand for housing; include a numerical part calculating monthly mortgage payments before and after a specified rate change and a short explanation of how developers' borrowing costs and destocking incentives respond.

Require students to draw supply and demand diagrams showing an increase in supply from developers and explain short-run vs long-run price effects given strong demand; include a data-based question using the article's figures (units launched, prices, discounts) to evaluate whether prices are likely to fall, stay stable, or recover.

Have students estimate and compare price elasticity for end-users and investors using hypothetical price changes and the article's 70% end-user, 30% investor split; ask them to interpret how elasticity affects revenue when developers offer discounts and whether discounts are an effective destocking tool.