A number of states in Australia have legalised Uber operations (please see the list of states at http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-08-11/where-is-uber-legal-in-australia/7719822). The legalisation of Uber often comes with some forms of financial assistance to taxi operators, drivers, licence holders and more regulations on Uber operations (e.g. medical and police check).

EFB106 ASSESSMENT 3 REPORT Due date: 5 pm, 28 October 2016 Background: A number of states in Australia have legalised Uber operations (please see the list of states at http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-08-11/where-is-uber-legal-in-australia/7719822). The legalisation of Uber often comes with some forms of financial assistance to taxi operators, drivers, licence holders and more regulations on Uber operations (e.g. medical and police check). Recently, the Victorian Government has announced its plan to reform the taxi and ridesharing industry as outline here http://economicdevelopment.vic.gov.au/transport/legislation/ride-share. Ideally a formal social & economic cost and benefit analysis (CBA) should be conducted to assess if such a reform is expected to deliver positive net social benefits. Overall task descriptions: 1- Examine critically the publication “Economic Effects of Ridesharing in Australia” published by Deloitte Economics in 2016 (hereinafter called Deloitte Economics (2016) and is available on BlackBoard). This study is not a formal Cost and Benefit Analysis of Uber operation in Australia; however the study provides information on various estimates of costs and benefits of the ridesharing business in the Australian context. You are encouraged to critically assess the quality of those estimates. 2- Attempt to extend the Deloitte Economics (2016) study to provide more considerations which are in line with the standard framework of a social CBA. In doing this, you are encouraged to follow each and every steps of the social economic CBA framework. In each step of the framework, you need to investigate both theoretical and practical issues. More specially, the final submission needs to address the following key areas of investigations. There are four parts in this assignment: Group Component: Questions 1 and 2. Individual: Question 3 and Peer Assessment. Areas of investigation (questions to be answered) Part 1: Group components: Each group submit one main document answering two questions and one document listing all references used. Word limits (strictly applied): The main text: maximum 2,500 words and references: maximum 2 pages (font Times New Roman, font size: 12). Markers will not read beyond 2500 words. Question 1- Identify socio-economic problems in relation to the taxi and hire car industry in Victoria and provide detailed descriptions of each step of the social CBA framework in relation to the proposal of reform by the Victorian government. (Criteria 1 & 2, total 10 marks) Some hints: - Describe the socio-economic problems and the proposal of reform. - Discuss alternative solutions including those included in the reform proposal of the Victorian government. - Describe what you would do in each step of the social CBA framework for the proposal of the Victorian government. Details are required. For example, in relation to identifying impacts: you should demonstrate your understanding of groups of individuals, families and organisations affected by each components contained in the reform program (i.e. Vehicle licensing will be removed, More accountability for Network Service Providers, All drivers must be accredited, Removing the Knowledge test, Flexible fares) (you can follow the embedded url links to read further on these activities) and identify whether impacts could be positive (gains) or negative (loss). Question 2- Provide critical analysis of Deloitte Economics (2016) in relation to the costs and benefits of Uber operation in Australia (Criteria 3, total 15 marks) Some hints: - Assess if the most important (if not all relevant) impacts of the legalisation and the operation of Uber have been quantified in both physical and monetary terms in Deloitte Economics (2016). - Provide qualitative assessment on potential biases and inaccuracies in those quantifications and estimates conducted, reported and used in Deloitte Economics (2016). - Provide qualitative assessment on the quality of estimates and quantifications conducted, reported or used in in Deloitte Economics (2016): (1) the appropriateness of methodologies, (2) the appropriateness of assumptions made, (3) sensitivity of quantifications and estimates with respect to the choice of discount rates and assumptions. Professional communication (Marking Criterion 5, 5 marks) is applied for both Questions 1 and 2. Part 2: Individual components Each student needs to submit one document answering Question 3 and conduct an online peer survey. Word limits (strictly applied): The main text: maximum 800 words and references: maximum 1 pages (font Times New Roman, font size: 12). Markers will not read beyond 800 words. Question 3- Discuss the social impacts of the proposed levy of $2 per ride (Criterion 4, 5 marks) Some hints: you might attempt to answer following questions: - How will the proposed levy of $2 per ride impact various groups of consumers in society. - Do you think the proposed level is fair or not fair to some groups of consumers in the society? - Will you support this policy component? Peer review (please see more details in Marking Criterion 6, 5 marks) Additional resources: There are several relevant industry and research reports which are available on this webpage: http://taxi.vic.gov.au/taxi-reform/taxi-industry-inquiry Online submission requirement: o File 1: Final Group Report (one submission per group) excluding all references o File 2: List of references o File 3: Individual answer to Question 3 What the 'Matching' score means: The overall Matching score is an indicator of what percentage of the text in the submitted file matches existing sources. You do not need to aim for a score of 0%. SafeAssign have given the following indication as to how overall Matching scores might be used. Please note this is a guide only. - Scores below 15%: These papers typically include some quotes and a few common phrases or blocks of text that match other documents. These papers typically do not require further analysis, as there is no evidence of the possibility of plagiarism in these papers. - Scores between 15 and 40%: These papers include extensive quoted or paraphrased material or they may include plagiarism. These papers should be reviewed to determine if the matching content is properly attributed. - Scores over 40%: There is a very high probability that text in this paper was copied from other sources. These papers include quoted or paraphrased text in excess and should be reviewed for plagiarism. • Late submission will NOT be marked. THE MARKING CRITERIA SHEET 7 6 5 4 <4 Marks Group Component Question 1: Knowledge and Technological Skills (KS 1.1 Demonstrate and apply integrated discipline (including technical) knowledge): 1 Excellent description of problems that the relevant reports have, demonstrating an excellent understanding of the issue and integration of relevant discipline knowledge Good description of problems the relevant reports, demonstrating a sound understanding of the issue and integration of relevant discipline knowledge An adequate description of the problems, though description is superficial or integration of relevant discipline knowledge is lacking in parts Limited description of the problems, which demonstrates only a basic understanding of the issue; Minimal integration of relevant discipline knowledge Description is incorrect or demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding; No or inappropriate integration of relevant discipline knowledge / 5 Group Component Question 1: Higher Order Thinking Skills (HO 2.1 Investigate real world business issues and situations through the effective analysis, evaluation and synthesis of theory and practice): 2 Excellent qualitative description of each steps in the social economic BCA process that needs to be done in the context of the case study. Good qualitative description of each steps in the social economic BCA process that needs to be done in the context of the case study. Appropriate qualitative description of each steps in the social economic BCA process that needs to be done in the context of the case study. Minor errors in description of each steps in the social economic BCA process that needs to be done in the context of the case study. Major errors in description of each steps in the social economic BCA process that needs to be done in the context of the case study. / 5 Group Component Question 2: Order Thinking Skills (HO 2.2: Exercise independent judgment and initiative in adapting and applying knowledge and skills for effective planning, problem solving and decision making in diverse contexts): 3 Excellent qualitative assessment of all costs and benefits estimated and reported in the Deloitte Economics (2016) study; Conclusions are directly supported by analysis and demonstrate excellent application of theory Good qualitative assessment of all costs and benefits estimated and reported in the Deloitte Economics (2016) study; Conclusions are directly supported by analysis with appropriate application of theory Good qualitative assessment of all costs and benefits estimated and reported in the Deloitte Economics (2016) with minor errors; Conclusions are provided but only loosely link to the analysis conducted and underlying theory Appropriate qualitative assessment of all costs and benefits estimated and reported in the Deloitte Economics (2016) study with a major error; Conclusions are provided but with minimal application of supporting theory or links to the analysis Major errors in the qualitative assessment; Conclusions are not provided or do not link to analysis; No or inappropriate application of theory / 15 Group Component Question 1 & 2: Communicate body of analysis clearly and professionally (PC 3.1 Use information literacy skills, and communicate effectively and professionally in written forms) 4 Analysis is communicated logically and coherently; Meaning is conveyed fluently and clearly using language appropriate to task Analysis is communicated logically and mostly coherently; Language is generally fluent and clear, appropriate to task Some parts of the analysis are communicated logically, though with occasional lapses in coherency; Writes fluently and with some awareness of task Elements of the analysis are present but lack logical organisation; Meaning is generally apparent, but not coherently expressed, with limited awareness of task Meaning is frequently confusing; Lacks clarity and coherency and/or awareness of task /5 Individual Component Question 3: Social, Ethical and Global Understanding (SE 5.2 Demonstrate and apply knowledge of socially responsibility behaviour in analysing and addressing business issues in national and international business contexts): 5 Excellent qualitative assessment of the social impacts of the proposed policy component. Good qualitative assessment of the social impacts of the proposed policy component. Appropriate qualitative assessment of the social impacts of the proposed policy component. Contains few appropriate qualitative assessment of the social impacts of the proposed policy component. Errors in qualitative assessment of the social impacts of the proposed policy component. /5 Individual Component: Teamwork and Self (TS 4.2 Apply teamwork knowledge and skills for effective collaboration across diverse purposes and contexts): 6 Students will assess their team peers on how effectively they performed in the team, and on their contribution to the team product, using an online survey (conducted separately from the report submission). Each student will assess every member of their own team. Students’ scores on this criterion will reflect the average rating reported about them by their team peers. /5