Spectrum Economics Challenge 4 – Results

Quick recap of the challenge

For Challenge 4, participants were required to conduct an economic analysis of several possible investment options and then provide advice regarding which options most warrant investment. The participants were provided with both quantitative and qualitative information. The question recommends the use of cost benefit analysis (CBA). Though, other forms of quantitative analysis can also be accepted. If the participants consider that the information provided is not sufficient to conduct a meaningful quantitative analysis, a purely qualitative assessment of the information is considered an acceptable response.

The most important aspect of the question is the recommendation of how the budget ($5 Million) should be used to improve the infrastructure of the town. Creative and innovative responses have been encouraged. These responses should also be expressed in a manner such that everyday Steemians can understand the arguments presented. Economic terminology can be used but requires adequate and clear explanation.

Here is a link to the original Challenge 4 post

Quick recap of the prizes

So here is a just a quick recap of the prizes up for grabs for this challenge.

Top post based on the logic used to support recommendations presented in the post wins 10 SBD (

@spectrumecons decides).

Second post based on the logic used to support recommendations presented in the post wins 5 SBD (

@spectrumecons decides).

Post that receives the highest number of votes during the voting round wins 5 SBD.

Participants

I would like to thank all five participants for entering and taking the time to conduct analysis and write their posts. The participants are as followers.

I would also like to thank those that took the time to read the participants entries as well as vote for our winners.

Winners

First I would to like announce the winners of the Spectrum Economics favourite post awards. I have chosen the post written by

@ojmg as my favourite post. I like that even though

@ojmg did not apply cost benefit analysis (CBA) to determine the investment recommendations, CBA was briefly discussed and

@ojmg demonstrated knowledge of the subject matter.

@ojmg addressed two very pressing needs of the town (healthcare and water). Very strong cases were made for why a hospital and dam were the most important needs to be addressed. I also like how

@ojmg identified the flaws in the survey and therefore rejected the findings.

@ojmg you have won 10 SBD, congratulations.

My second favourite post goes to

@patymm.

@patymm presented strong logical arguments to support investment recommendations of the hospital, dam, and school.

@patymm used data such as population growth as well the value of human life to support these investment recommendations.

@patymm also identified costs saved by reduced required travel to other towns. Like

@ojmg,

@patymm identified the flaw in the survey conducted and discarded the information. In addition to recommendations made,

@patymm also briefly explained why building the stadium may not be as such an important investment as the ones recommended.

@patymm you have won 5 SBD, congratulations

Now to our winner based on the number of votes. The voting was very close between Entrant 2 (

@luisveco88) and Entrant 3 (

@wireless07). Many votes came in very late and several votes were not accompanied by a brief explanation. Therefore, I am going to declare it a draw between

@luisveco88 and

@wireless07, both participants received over 30 votes. You will both receive 2.5 SBD each, congratulations. This also means that 4 out of 5 participants come away with a prize. Well done everyone.