economics research competition

Opportunity Equality for Every Student

There are the concepts of "equal result" and "equal opportunity" in economics. WEC adheres to the principle of equal opportunity for every student and is committed to avoiding students' background, education level, economics fundamentals and other factors affecting the opportunities to participate in and compete in WEC.

WEC values students' thinking mode and problem-solving ability, and provides enough academic guidance and background knowledge in the competition, rather than testing on students' previous learning and knowledge from economics courses in schools.

Participating Countries

United efforts across continents in pursuing innovative education in economics (in alphabetical order).

WHAT IS THE HIGH SCHOOL ACADEMIC RESEARCH COMPETITION?

Running through March and April, SARC is more than just a contest—it’s a guided immersion into the research process, designed for experts and newcomers alike!

You’ll enroll in immersive workshops that guide you through the research process from beginning to end and prepare you for your own research proposal.

Participants compete with the sharpest young minds around the world. 

THE HIGH SCHOOL

Academic research, competition.

SARC 2024 Winners have been announced!

RESEARCH TOPIC

SARC is unique in that participants can research any topic they want! This competition is not limited to the sciences. Your research topic can range from political science, art, and economics to engineering, history, or any other field of interest.

Researchers can choose a topic they’re passionate about, something they wish to dive deeper into, or something they want to study in university.

registrations open

registrations close

Submission of

assessment form

Participant-

exclusive bootcamps

Qualification Round

Winners announced

Video Pitch

submission deadline

Global Winners

WHAT ARE LAST YEAR'S WINNERS SAYING?

Yike Zhang, Top 10 Finalist, SARC 2023

“Participating in the High School Academic Research Competition (SARC) was a truly incredible and transformative experience for me. What made this competition stand out was its inclusive approach, which allowed participants to conduct research on any topic of their choice. Moreover, the admin team hosted informative bootcamps, gave access to academic research resources, and created a community of like-minded peers.”

Krishnaaram Muthukumaran, Top 10 Finalist, SARC 2023

“SARC was an amazing experience. The workshops conducted were invaluable in guiding me through the research journey as a beginner, from formulating a research question to crafting a proposal. The resources & workshops provided a solid foundation for understanding the research process. Connecting with equally motivated individuals worldwide made it a truly invaluable learning opportunity.”

EXCLUSIVE BOOTCAMPS

At SARC, we host participant exclusive bootcamps with experts in the field to prepare you for your research proposal and give you insight into this field.

Indigo Research is an online program that lets high school and graduate students research the topics that fascinate them. At Indigo, students build expertise, deepen their intellectual curiosity, and stand out on their college applications through advanced research. Over 300 students have worked with Indigo since 2019, and over 170 have achieved acceptance to Oxbridge and top 10 universities in the United States.

Crimson Global Academy (CGA) is an internationally accredited, world-class online private school delivering live, real-time learning to students all over the world, enabling them to earn university recognised qualifications through accelerated courses.

Crimson Education is the world's leading US, UK, EU and Postgrad admissions counselors. In 2013, it was founded by three students, including CEO Jamie Beaton who had just been accepted to 25 of the world's best universities. Our mission is to help students all over the world reach their ultimate university admissions goals.

INTERNATIONAL ECONOMICS OLYMPIAD

• Find your national competition.
• Check the Participating Countries section of this website.
• If your country is on the list, it means that we have a long-term partner there.
• If your country is not on the list, please contact us via email or the Contact Us form at the bottom of the page. We will be glad to provide the contact information of our partner in your country if we have one.
• Contact your national organizer to receive information about thenational competition.
• Study hard and win the national competition!
• Come to the IEO, meet like-minded students from around the world, and enjoy yourself!
• Make sure that your organization can hold an appropriate selection process and support the team (including finding means to cover their travel costs).
• Appoint a coordinator.
• Form a team that consists of no more than 5 contestants and 1 or 2 team leaders.
• Ensure that the contestants will all be under the age of 20 years on 30 June of the year of the Olympiad.
• Ensure that team leaders can communicate well in English and are competent in the fields tested in the IEO.
• Send the application to our official email adress, [email protected]. To learn more about the application form, please refer to the Application Guideline.
• Wait for the decision of the Executive Board.
• Check the deadline for sending in the application in the Regulations of Competition.
• Follow the same steps as for a regular application.

The Econometrics Game

What is the Econometrics Game?

The Econometrics Game is a fast-paced competition where teams of one to four undergraduate students from universities across the US (and some international ones too!) are given 12 hours with a dataset to devise and answer a question of economic importance. The competition takes place over one weekend: on Saturday, teams write a paper defending a causal claim and the assumptions behind their identification strategy. On Sunday morning, a few finalists are selected to present to a judging panel of UChicago Economics faculty. After this second judging round, we determine final placement and distribute prizes.

Why should I participate in the Econometrics Game?

Because econometrics is fun. And also there are sick prizes. The top team will receive iPads. The second place team will receive Harman/Kardon Onyx Bluetooth wireless speakers. The third place team will receive beautiful battery packs.

How can I attend?

If registration is open, you can find a button for the game below. Hotel arrangements for non-Chicago area participants will be covered, but we will not be able to cover travel expenses, except for Chicago-area participants. Please contact your department for travel funding. The modality of the competition is subject to change – we will notify all registered teams if there is a change.

Registration

Econometrics Game 2024 is currently set to take place on March 30-31, 2024.  The registration link will be announced soon.

University of Chicago

March 29-31, 2024

2024 Game Schedule and Rule Book

Past judges.

James J. Heckman

Professor In Economics

Robert Shimer

Lars Peter Hansen

Professor in Economics

Our Sponsors

Past Competitions

2023 econometrics game, 2023 econometrics game winner, past prompts and winners, contact us with questions.

Email Address

Summer II 2024 Application Deadline is June 26, 2024.  

Click here to apply.

Featured Posts

10 Paid Summer Research Programs for High School Students

8 Coding Competitions for Middle School Students

10 Paid Summer Internships for High School Students

10 Online Business Internships for High School Students

10 Economics Competitions for High School Students

In the last few decades, there’s been a steady increase in the number of economics majors.

For those looking to study economics at a top university, competing and winning economics-oriented competitions is one way to stand out. You’ll expose yourself to incredible problem-solving opportunities, network with high-caliber peers and have a shot at impressing admissions officers.

In this blog, we list out 10 economics competitions for you to consider. We’ve included investment challenges, essay writing competitions, and Olympiads.

1. Harvard Pre-Collegiate Economics Challenge (HPEC)

One of the most prestigious economics challenges in the world, Harvard's Pre-Collegiate Economics Challenge (HPEC) invites talented students from around the world to learn, engage, and analyze their knowledge of microeconomics, macroeconomics, and global economics. You can participate in teams of 1-4, in the following rounds - the written exam round, and the Quiz Bowl round.

Alongside the competition, you also have the chance to interact with professors, graduate students, and leading economists, and learn about economics and its applications in a real-world setting. The final round for HPEC is held at Harvard University, with finalists receiving an all-expense-paid trip to the University.

Note : There is a $125 registration fee for each team

Dates: April 8, 2023

Application Deadline: March 10, 2023

Location: Virtual

Prizes: Awards, prizes

Eligibility: All high school students

2. Wharton Global High School Investment Competition

Hosted by the Wharton School of Business, one of the country's most prestigious undergraduate business schools, the Global High School Investment Competition is an exciting, engaging, and rewarding challenge. As part of the competition, you are required to build a portfolio with $100,000 in virtual cash, on a simulator. You must use your financial and business analysis skills to invest and make profits.

The best part about this challenge? Winners are not chosen simply based on profits, but also on the strength of the strategies they chose to make decisions. The competition also involves a 10-week crash course on investing, business analysis, pitch creation, and portfolio building.

You participate in a team of 4-7 students from your school and send in 2 deliverables that will be shortlisted for a semifinal round. At the Global Finale, the top 10 teams pitch their ideas for funding at Wharton. Here are some free learning resources and case studies from previous years!

Dates: September 26 - April 22, 2023

Application Deadline: September 16, 2023 (based on last year's timetable)

Location: Virtual pitching rounds with a final presentation at UPenn

Prizes: Certificates, a complimentary spot in the Wharton Online Summer Program for winning teams

Eligibility: High school students residing in the US

3. The International Economics Olympiad

Aimed at furthering literacy in the subjects of finance and economics, the IEO, or International Economics Olympiad is an opportunity you should consider. The Olympiad tests students on their logical thinking, creative application, and problem-solving skills in economics and finance, along with a business case presentation.

Tip : IEO's study materials make for an excellent reference while prepping for the Olympiad.

Dates: July 26 - August 1, 2023 (based on last year's timetable)

Application Deadline: 31 May 2023 (based on last year's timetable)

Location : Virtual

Prizes: Medals, statutes, special prizes

Eligibility: The competition is open to students from all around the world, make sure to check your eligibility here !

4. World Economics Cup

An international competition aimed at fostering better engagement with economics and its development in a global society, the World Economics Cup tests students on a variety of topics across various formats. The competition is a great way to understand pure economics and solve problems using economics concepts.

You must register for the WEC as a team from a school and go through 3+ rounds of MCQs on basic concepts of micro and macroeconomics, material-based objective questions, as well as team presentations.

The WEC does not merely test students on the basis of pre-learned information, which varies from country to country, but provides enough academic guidance and background knowledge in the competition beforehand.

Dates: November 12-13, 2023 (based on last year's timetable)

Application Deadline: Applications are currently open on the WEC website

Prizes: Medals

5. The National Economics Challenge

Sponsored by the Council for Economic Education, the National Economics Challenge (NEC) sees participation from almost 10,000 students every year!

Apart from key micro and macroeconomic principles, you are also tested on your knowledge of global economics. Once you qualify for the First Round National Challenge and National Semi-Final Level after participating in the NEC in your state, your team is rewarded with a fully-funded trip to NYC, where you will challenge teams from other states.

Dates: State-wise dates vary, the National Semifinals is from April 24-28, 2023 and the National Finals is from May 20-22, 2023

Application Deadline: Varies from state to state

Location: State-wise, National Semifinals, and Finals are held in NYC

Prizes: Cash prizes of up to $1,000, awards

Eligibility: All high school students residing in the US

6. The National Personal Finance Challenge

Another prestigious event organized by the Council for Economic Education, the National Personal Finance Challenge aims to educate students on financial literacy and test their application of personal finance concepts and skills in their day-to-day lives.

The NPFC sees over 20,000 students participate every year! As part of the competitions, you will be taught about earning income, spending, saving, investing, managing credit, and managing risk. Once you qualify for state-level rounds, the National Finals will be as follows - your team will be given a fictitious family scenario, and you have to prepare and present a personal finance plan to a panel of judges.

If you're just starting out as a finance enthusiast or budding economist, feel free to check out this free toolkit offered by the CEE.

Dates: Varies from state to state, National Finals will be held on June 4-5, 2023

Application Deadline: Varies from state to state, you can access state-wise applications here

Location: Varies for state-level rounds, National Finals will be held in Cleveland, Ohio

Prizes: Cash prizes of up to $2,000 for each team member

7. InvestWrite

InvestWrite is geared at testing students' understanding of financial concepts and clearly communicating them to an audience of industry experts. As a participant, you are required to submit an essay (of not more than 1000 words) based on the Stock Market Game program, a tool to help the student learn the basics of investing and financial markets.

You are judged based on how clear your understanding of the topic is, how concisely you've delivered it, as well as how sound the critical analysis of your essay topic is. This can be a great choice for you if your strength is in written research and articulating findings on paper!

If selected, your essay is sent for a National Round and an International Round.

Dates: To be announced in January 2023

Application Deadline: Early January 2023 for Spring entries

Location: Virtual submission

Prizes: Certificates, gift cards

Eligibility: Students from Grades 9-12 can participate

8. Northwestern Economics Tournament (NET)

An annual challenge held at Northwestern University, the Northwestern Economics Tournament (NET) challenges students on their knowledge of AP level Microeconomics and Macroeconomics, economic history, current events, and modern economic research through both individual and team-based rounds.

The NET invites hundreds of bright high schoolers from around the country, and is divided into two rounds - an asynchronous, team-based Power Round, and an in-person Econ Bowl. Alongside the challenge, you will also engage with professors and students from NWU, and attend lectures. Students are encouraged to participate in the NET, regardless of their prior exposure to economics!

Dates: March 28 - April 2, 2023

Application Deadline: January 17, 2023

Location: Virtual/NWU Campus

Prizes: Cash Prizes

Eligibility: Open to all high-school students

Note : Here are some sample questions that can help you prepare for the challenge!

9. High School Fed Challenge

A highly prestigious economics competition hosted by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, the High School Fed Challenge challenges students to author research in economics and gives them a chance to get published in the Journal of Future Economists.

Students are encouraged to work as a team and focus on honing their teamwork, research, data literacy, and analytical writing. The competition is as follows - every year, participants are given a theme and must pursue research and analysis on any topic related to the theme. Submissions of their academic papers will be judged by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

The winning team will have its papers published in one of the most coveted Economics journals in the country, as well as recognition.

Dates: March 15, 2023

Application Deadline: February 15, 2023

Prizes: Publication and recognition in the Journal of Future Economists.

Eligibility: All high school students are eligible to apply

10. Global Stock Pitch Competition

Hosted by the Young Investors Society, the Global Stock Pitch Competition challenges students on their knowledge financial analysis and investment. It also provides students mentoring on these topics. In a team of two or individually, you evaluate a publicly traded firm and develop a "best stock idea", occasionally meeting with management.

Each team or student creates a report on their chosen firm with a "Buy" or "Sell" recommendation, and you then present and defend your analysis to a panel of university professors and business professionals in a written report and brief format.

All state-level winners move up to compete regionally in events for the East Coast, Midwest, West Coast, Asia, Access Initiative & International Open.

Note : All registered students will receive a lifetime subscription to TIP Finance, a collection of investment tools developed by The Investor’s Podcast Network!

Dates: May 19, 2023 - Global Stock Pitch Round, April 3, 2023 - state-wise submissions

Application Deadline: April 3, 2023

Location: State-level submissions are virtual, while the Global Stock Pitch Competition will be held at The University of Utah -Eccles School of Business

Prizes: Awards

You can also check out other competitions open to high school students, such as the Economics Poster Competition , Pirates Pitch Competition for High School Students , Capitol Hill Challenge , and University of Texas at Dallas Top Trader Competition .

If you’re interested in writing an economics research paper, consider applying to Lumiere’s Research Scholar Program . We’ve had hundreds of students work with economics researchers from places like Harvard, Stanford, and MIT. Lumiere is a selective online high school program for students that I founded with researchers at Harvard and Oxford. Last year, we had over 2100 students apply for 500 spots in the program! You can find the application form here.

Stephen is one of the founders of Lumiere and a Harvard College graduate. He founded Lumiere as a PhD student at Harvard Business School. Lumiere is a selective research program where students work 1-1 with a research mentor to develop an independent research paper.

Mobile Menu Overlay

The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW Washington, DC 20500

The Importance of Competition for the American   Economy

By Heather Boushey and Helen Knudsen

Healthy market competition is fundamental to a well-functioning U.S. economy. Basic economic theory demonstrates that when firms have to compete for customers, it leads to lower prices, higher quality goods and services, greater variety, and more innovation. [1] Competition is critical not only in product markets, but also in labor markets. [2] When firms compete to attract workers, they must increase compensation and improve working conditions.

There is evidence that in the United States, markets have become more concentrated and perhaps less competitive across a wide array of industries: four beef packers now control over 80 percent of their market, domestic air travel is now dominated by four airlines, and many Americans have only one choice of reliable broadband provider. There are a number of reasons for these trends towards greater concentration, including technological change, the increasing importance of “winner take all” markets, and more lenient government oversight over the last 40 years. [3]

When there is insufficient competition, dominant firms can use their market power to charge higher prices, offer decreased quality, and block potential competitors from entering the market—meaning entrepreneurs and small businesses cannot participate on a level playing field and new ideas cannot become new goods and services. Research has also connected market power to inequality . In an economy without adequate competition, prices and corporate profits rise, while workers’ wages decrease. This means large corporations and their shareholders gain wealth, while consumers and workers pay the cost. The pandemic has further underscored the dangers of an economy that depends on a few companies for essentials, exemplified by the supply chain problems we face when a small handful of corporations creates bottlenecks for a critical product.

This is why today, President Biden will sign an Executive Order on Promoting Competition in the American Economy. It launches a whole-of-government effort to combat growing market power in the U.S. economy by seeking to ensure that markets are competitive. Because of the scale and scope of the market power problem, the President’s Executive Order makes the promotion of competition central to the government’s mission by dedicating the entire government to reversing these trends.

Signals that indicate greater market power

Even though competition is fundamental to a thriving and fair economy, there is growing evidence that, over time, markets across the United States have become less competitive and that market power is expanding. There are two kinds of evidence that indicate that there are widespread concentration problems in the U.S. economy. First, there is evidence that market concentration, as well as profits and markups, are rising across industries. Second, market-specific studies show that consolidation has led to harmful price increases, providing one of the clearest indicators of enhanced market power.

Alongside the rise in prices, which is both an indication of a market power problem and an important consequence for consumers, economists have identified two other important consequences of rising concentration: first, there is growing evidence that it is hampering innovation; and, second, research shows that it is leading to substantial concentration in the U.S. labor market—not just markets for goods and services, which has the effect of suppressing wages.

Evidence of rising economic concentration

There are numerous studies that show increased concentration across a large number of industries in the economy. In fact, concentration has increased in over 75 percent of U.S. industries since the late 1990s. These studies show that the largest companies in the economy have grown at the expense of smaller firms. While it could be that, in some cases, concentration has grown because firms with a high market share are more efficient or more innovative than their competitors, the prevalence across so many industries and the trendlines are cause for concern.

This is underscored by a set of studies that show that the profits and markups of the largest firms—indicators that many economists point to as aggregate measures of market power across the economy—have grown over the last 30 to 40 years. In a free and open market, we would expect new companies to enter the market and compete down these profits. However, these increases in the profits of large, dominant firms coincide with a decrease in business dynamism in the U.S. economy—with fewer startups launching and less labor market fluidity.

Consequences of increased concentration

While informative, national-level, industry-wide studies give little insight into whether increased concentration and markups are a result of decreased competition; that is, they cannot tell us whether or not the concentration is problematic for the U.S. economy. As mentioned above, on the one hand, industry-wide concentration can increase when a firm becomes more efficient or more innovative or when a national firm increases its footprint. [4] Similarly, increased markups can be the result of improved technology driving down marginal costs. On the other hand, increased concentration can also be the result of anti-competitive mergers or increased barriers to entry, which could also increase markups.

In order to figure out whether the patterns of increased concentration and markups are problematic, economists must look more closely at individual markets, since market-specific studies allow a more detailed understanding of the competitive mechanisms that are leading to these patterns. To better understand these markets, economists have done deep dives into an array of industries—ranging from concrete to health care . These studies tend to focus on what happens after two (or more) firms merge. Studying mergers is especially important because a merger changes market structure in a way that is not caused by a firm improving its product or becoming more efficient. Rising consumer prices following a merger indicate that a firm has gained market power, which gives them increased price-setting capabilities and suggests that the merger harmed consumers.

There is evidence from an array of market-specific studies looking before and after mergers that strongly suggests that consolidation has led to less competition and greater market power. These studies show that as market conditions changed, prices rose, indicating that firms had the capacity to charge more since they had—in these cases—merged with their competitors:

• One review of this literature shows that of 49 such studies, 36 found merger-induced price increases. Another review finds that the average price effect in mergers studied was 7.2 percent.
• A review of hospital merger studies finds that most of the mergers led to price increases of at least 20 percent.
• A study of a large health insurer merger shows that it led to a 7 percent average premium increase.
• A study of airline mergers in the 1980s finds that prices increased between 7.2 and 29.4 percent in markets where the merging airlines competed directly.
• A study of the MillerCoors joint venture finds that it resulted in tacit coordination with Anheuser-Busch, leading to a 6 to 8 percent increase in retail beer prices.

Looking across these kinds of studies, the conclusion is that consolidation does indicate a market power problem with the consequence that consumers are facing higher prices than they would if the market was more competitive.

Other negative consequences of market concentration

There is also growing evidence that market power negatively affects innovation. There have long been questions about whether market concentration fostered or inhibited innovation. Even decades ago, Kenneth Arrow argued that concentration hindered invention: “pre-invention monopoly power acts as a strong disincentive to further innovation.” [5] Emerging evidence points to this being the case today: one study shows that firms with monopoly power are less likely to advance technological changes; another paper focuses on the channel through which less innovation occurs in the presence of market power; and another study finds that while price markups increased after a merger, there was no corresponding increase in productivity.

There are emerging concerns that this effect on innovation may be affecting the economy more generally. In his book, The Great Reversal, Thomas Philippon documents that the increase in concentration across the economy is reducing economy-wide investment. Similarly, scholars are finding that greater market power is a factor in low interest rates and high firm financial wealth, but relatively little investment. If concentration is allowed to continue, this may dampen U.S. productivity and growth, limiting the future competitiveness of the U.S. economy.

Decreased competition in labor markets

As firms become more concentrated, they are able to push wages down, exemplifying another instance where we see the growing consequences of market power. With greater market power, employers have less competition for the best workers since there are fewer other firms. Such power in the labor market can be deployed in several ways; we discuss two below.

First, consolidation in output markets not only affects consumer prices, but also wages and working conditions as the number of employers in an industry decreases. For example, as hospitals have merged, not only have consumers faced decreased choices in where to get their medical care, but nurses, doctors, and other health care employees have had less of a choice of employer. In fact, a study found that large hospital mergers led to lower wage growth for nurses, pharmacy workers, and hospital administrators.

Firms can also exert market power by limiting their employee’s ability to change jobs through noncompete agreements . These agreements prevent employees from quitting and—within a certain time period—taking a job with a different employer who may benefit from the employee’s industry-specific skills. This translates into lower pay , as the employee has limited ability to deploy their skills elsewhere. 

In all, these uncompetitive labor market conditions are quite common —with 60 percent of labor markets being highly concentrated. Importantly, researchers have documented that uncompetitive labor markets are associated with lower wages relative to what a truly competitive market would provide. A meta-analysis of labor market studies finds that firms pay their workers less than they would in a competitive labor market, with the median estimate showing that firms pay workers 58 percent of their value. New work has also found that more than one in ten U.S. workers are in labor markets where pay is reduced by at least 2 percent due to employer concentration.

Signs that policy change is necessary

There is strong evidence that one of the reasons for the current rise in market power is a shift in policy. Antitrust enforcement has become more lenient over the last 40 years, and regulators have not had sufficient resources to enforce the laws on the books.

Antitrust laws are traditionally enforced by the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). They challenge anticompetitive mergers and other anticompetitive behavior by firms, such as exclusionary practices. The DOJ also prosecutes the criminal antitrust laws that bar collusive behavior, such as price-fixing.

To enforce the law, the DOJ and the FTC publish merger guidelines that lay out when a merger is likely to be challenged. Since the guidelines were first published in 1968, enforcement practice has become increasingly lenient.  

In 1968, in a highly concentrated market (four firms having 75 percent of market share), even the merger of two small firms (each with 4 percent market share) would be challenged routinely. Today, such mergers are almost never challenged; indeed, based on guidelines released in 2010, mergers are unlikely to be challenged even if they leave only four substantial competitors in place. The increase in these thresholds reflects, in part, the agencies giving more credit to efficiencies that might arise from mergers. At the same time that these guideline thresholds have increased, the level of purchase price that requires companies to give notice of their mergers to the agencies has risen, leading to a larger number of mergers going unreviewed—even as firms strategically acquire competitors.

In part because of these changes and because of real-term reductions in funding, Federal agencies have been bringing fewer antitrust cases. In fact, the number of criminal antitrust cases brought by the DOJ from FY2018-2021 has declined to an average of 22 a year, down from an average of over 60 cases a year across the previous six years. On the civil side, from 2010 to 2019 only about 3 percent of mergers that met the filing threshold have received “second requests,” which are a more thorough review by the agencies. When mergers are challenged, they are at the extreme, where four or fewer competitors are remaining.

Government suits enforcing the laws against anticompetitive conduct have also been rare. The DOJ’s lawsuit against Google and the FTC’s lawsuit against Facebook , both filed in 2020, are the first major Federal monopolization cases since the Microsoft case in 1998. [6] As the economy evolves with technology and “winner take all” markets become more important, it will be crucial to guard against anticompetitive conduct as well. These shifts have come at the same time that judicial precedent has moved in the direction of skepticism towards antitrust enforcement.

The Executive Order on Promoting Competition in the American Economy launches an effort to solve these problems

The President’s Executive Order establishes a whole-of-government approach to push back on decades of decline in competition. The Order not only calls on the traditional antitrust agencies—the DOJ and the FTC—to enforce existing laws vigorously and to consider updating their merger guidelines, it also directs all agencies and departments to use their detailed knowledge and expertise to ensure that their work clearly supports competition in the markets they regulate—including paying close attention to labor markets. This whole-of-government approach is necessary because the antitrust agencies are limited both by resources and the current judicial interpretation of the antitrust laws. It also relies on the fact that Congress has delegated authority to police anticompetitive conduct and oversee mergers to many agencies—not just the DOJ and the FTC.

The Order therefore directs or encourages roughly a dozen agencies to engage in more than 70 specific actions that will remove barriers to entry and encourage more competition. For example, the Order encourages the Department of Health and Human Services to work with states developing drug importation programs and to consider finalizing rules allowing hearing aids to be sold over the counter at a fraction of their current price. It requires all agencies to use their procurement and spending powers to avoid entrenching monopolists and to create new business opportunities for small firms. It encourages the FTC to issue rules curtailing noncompete agreements which inhibit labor mobility, preventing workers from switching to jobs that offer better pay and benefits. And, it directs the Department of Agriculture to consider strengthening its enforcement of laws designed to prevent large meat-processing companies from taking advantage of farmers.

The U.S. economy faces a serious market power problem which results in increasing wage inequality and wealth concentration, high prices, and stagnating wages. The President’s Executive Order relies on the full range of powers granted by Congress to address it, ensuring that the economy works for all Americans.

[1] When only a single firm sells a product or service for which there is no substitute, the firm is a monopoly.

[2] When only a single firm buys a product or service, the firm is a monopsony. A monopsony can exist in labor markets, when there is only one employer in a market.

[3] “Winner take all” markets are those where a single firm tends to dominate, even if the dominant firm’s product is only slightly better than the other products, and the market may have originally been competitive.  The market becomes more concentrated when the best performers are able to capture a large share of the market, often through technological advances. Walmart is an example in that it has been able to drive many smaller firms out of the market by harnessing advances in transportation and information technology in order to lower prices. This can also happen when the market has network externalities such that a firm’s technology is more valuable when there are more users of the technology; social media platforms or search engines are examples of such markets.

[4] There are some studies that show local concentration has been declining. This can be explained by large national companies entering local markets. These studies still look at broad industries rather than product specific markets.

[5] Kenneth Arrow, “Economic Welfare and The Allocation of Resources for Invention,” in The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors , A Report of the National Bureau of Economic Research, 609-26 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1962), p. 620.

Stay Connected

We'll be in touch with the latest information on how President Biden and his administration are working for the American people, as well as ways you can get involved and help our country build back better.

Opt in to send and receive text messages from President Biden.

+1 (603) 932 7897

[email protected].

Guide to the National Economics Challenge (NEC)

• Last modified 2023-11-10
• Published on 2022-01-10

1. What is the National Economics Challenge?

The National Economics Challenge is hosted by the Council for Economic Education, a long-standing organization committed to equipping K-12 students with knowledge and tools of personal finance and economics. National Economics Challenge is the only annual economic competition for high school students. The competition tests students about their knowledge of the world economy, specifically microeconomics, macroeconomics, and international and current events. In 2019, more than 10,000 high school students participated in 45 states nationwide. 

2. How does the NEC competition work? ​

Two main divisions.

Three to four high school students form a team to participate in either of the two divisions: 

• David Ricardo: For first-time competitors with no more than one course in economics. Students can only participate in the David Ricardo division only once. 
• Adam Smith: For returning competitors, AP, IB, and honors students (as well as any returning competitors). Students can compete in this division multiple times. 

For Middle School Students:

• Milton Friedman: This division is for middle school students offered in some state-level competitions. These students don’t compete beyond the state level and the top teams win state prizes.

Competition Process

The process begins with state-level competitions. Each state sets its own rules for competitions. For example, the 2022 state-level competition in New York consists of 30 questions that must be answered in 35 minutes. Each student works individually. The team composite score is the sum of the top 3 scores on each team. 

The winning team from each state moves onto the National Semi-Finals . The top eight scoring teams will compete at the National Finals. The finals include critical thinking round and quiz bowl, where students present and answer questions from economists and financial professionals. 

At the National Finals, there are three rounds of competition within each division: Round 1 – Microeconomics, Round 2 – Macroeconomics, and Round 3 – International Economics and Current Events. Each round lasts 20 minutes, with 15 multiple-choice questions. Members will compete individually, and the team score in each round is the sum of the top three individual scores. 

The 4th round is the Critical Thinking Round where students work as a team to develop a solution and analysis to a current economic problem. Students will be judged on: completeness of response, financial analysis and insight, background knowledge, and presentation.

The 5 th and final round of the National Finals is the Quiz bowl, where students decide one spokesperson, who will present the team’s answer to the judge’s questions on a sheet of paper. There are a total of 22 questions, with discussion time around 30 seconds each. 

Each state has a different deadline for registration and state final. Please refer to the main website to learn more about the deadline for your state. The National Semifinals is from April 22-26, 2024 and the National Finals is from June 1-3, 2024

Eligibility

To participate in the competition, students must be currently enrolled in qualifying public high school, private high school, or home-based high school courses at some time during the current academic year.

In the national finals, the winning team receives medals and certificates of accomplishment, as well as cash prizes for each team member: 

1st place: $1,000 

2nd place: $500 

3rd place: $250 

4th place: $125

3. How can I study for the contest?

There are various resources for students who want to prepare for the competition:

Study Material by Council for Economic Education

The study material collection created by CEE covers various topics within economics, from microeconomics like how you pay for college to macroeconomics like globalization. The lessons normally last around 30-60 minutes, and there are 42 lessons in total. 

Sample Test

Below are the sample tests provided by CEE to test your skill and knowledge in economics. Even though the test is 10 years old, students can use this test as a foundational test for any knowledge gaps and potential areas of improvement. In addition to the archived test, students can also register an account for practice tests on Ready Assessment . 

Another sample test you can take a look at is the sample tests in microeconomics, macroeconomics, international and current events from the state of Arizona. 

David Ricardo Division

• Microeconomics Test (2011)
• Macroeconomics Test (2011)
• International and Current Events Test (2011)

Adam Smith Division

• David Ricardo Critical Thinking Round Question (2012)
• Adam Smith Critical Thinking Round Question (2012)

Aralia's Courses

National economics challenge prep.

The 30-hour National Economics Challenge preparation course prepares students new to Economics by introducing Micro, Macro, and International Economics theories, concepts, and vocabulary. Teaching methodology includes lectures, assignments, videos, case studies, activities, quizzes, and tests to prepare students for participation in the 2022 NEC David Ricardo Division (DR) entry-level team competition as well as advanced-level high school and undergraduate college-level courses in Economics.

Introduction to Economics

This course will help students to interpret economic news and economic data profoundly. At the same time, students will learn to form their own insights on economic issues. This course will provide a solid foundation for students who wish to study advanced economics in the future.

Economic Research

Students will use college-level economic theory and models to analyze the financial impact on the global economy. The economic tutor will provide students with the models and tools necessary to write an economic research paper. The economic research project encourages students to integrate their acquired knowledge of economic theory, phenomenon, data, and policy.

• Competitions

Aralia Education is an innovative online education platform for ambitious middle and high school students worldwide. Aralia’s instructors propel students forward by helping them build a strong foundation in traditional academic courses. They also actively engage and guide students in exploring personal interests beyond their school curriculum. With this holistic approach, Aralia ensures its students are well-prepared for college and equipped for success in their future careers.

• College Accelerator Program
• Comprehensive Introduction to High School
• Academic Empowerment Program
• Test Preparation Bootcamp
• Private Lessons
• Student Awards

Give us a call: +1 (603) 932 7897

Email us: [email protected]

Add us on WhatsApp:

• Regulation and Competition

Main navigation

Determining the appropriate amount and design of government regulation requires understanding the trade-offs between consumer protections and business innovation and productivity.  Often, the ideal level of regulation in an industry is determined by competition and market structure. SIEPR scholars produce the knowledge and analysis that informs regulations on various industries and their impact as well as how markets can best be designed to generate benefits for both consumers and producers.

Keywords: industrial organization, market design, regulation, antitrust, mergers, competition policy

People in Regulation and Competition Research

Anat Admati

Hunt Allcott

Claudia Allende Santa Cruz

Itai Ashlagi

Susan Athey

Kyle Bagwell

Laurence Baker

B. Douglas Bernheim

Jay Bhattacharya

Timothy Bresnahan

Greg Buchak

Jeremy Bulow

Jose Ignacio Cuesta

Mark Duggan

Liran Einav

Matthew Gentzkow

Judith Goldstein

Lawrence Goulder

Joseph Grundfest

Deborah Haas-Wilson

Colleen Honigsberg

Anne Joseph O'Connell

Ömer Karaduman

Daniel P. Kessler

Charles D. Kolstad

Anne O. Krueger

Mark Lemley

Jonathan Levin

Thomas MaCurdy

Neale Mahoney

Paul Milgrom

Alison Morantz

Roger G. Noll

Elena Pastorino

A. Mitchell Polinsky

Maria Polyakova

Stefan Reichelstein

Claudia Robles Garcia

Gregory Rosston

Natalia Serna

Isaac Sorkin

Alan O. Sykes

Michael Tomz

Shoshana Vasserman

Frank A. Wolak

Related publications.

• Einav, L., Finkelstein, A., & Tebaldi, P. (2024). Market Design in Regulated Health Insurance Markets: Risk Adjustment vs. Subsidies . Working Paper.
• Elliott, M., & Jackson, M. (2024). Supply Chain Disruptions, the Structure of Production Networks, and the Impact of Globalization . Working Paper.
• Economists’ Comments on State BEAD Proposals . (2023).

Related News

All eyes on ai: promoting competition.

SIEPR, the U.S. Department of Justice, and Stanford GSB co-hosted a workshop on AI to hear the views of top policymakers, industry leaders, scholars, and content creators.

June 04, 2024

• Innovation and Technology
• Research Highlight

Adrien Auclert appointed as an economic advisor to French government

Auclert, a SIEPR faculty fellow, adds macroeconomics heft to the French prime minister’s Economic Analysis Council.

May 10, 2024

• Awards & Appointments
• Taxes and Public Spending
• Global Development and Trade

Upcoming Events

2024 summer economic institute for teachers.

John A. and Cynthia Fry Gunn Building 366 Galvez Street Stanford , CA 94305 United States

Competition and the Economy: Economic Perspectives

• First Online: 25 January 2020

Cite this chapter

• Svein Olaf Thorbjørnsen 2  

196 Accesses

Economic competition is defined, and economics discussed, both generally and scientifically. Focus is then given to the elements in the competitive process: the actors, the forms of competition, and their anchoring in the real world. Regulation is also a topic considered. What then are the functions and goals of competition? Special attention is given to the question of efficiency, promoted, for example, by Pareto optimization, but also with problems such as unwished-for external effects, inefficient production of collective goods, and a waste of resources. Consideration is given to whether competition or cooperation is most effective? How competition can promote creativity, quality, and economic growth is also discussed. The three are linked, creative innovation and quality can contribute to growth, but each of them includes as well both positive and problematic aspects. The competitive distribution of resources (and of power) depends on the actors involved and on the form of competition. From the viewpoint of consumers, the goal of competition is utility; from the viewpoint of both sellers and producers, it is profit. Does competition also have a societal goal? Societal well-being seems not generally prominent in today’s competitive economic world. There are, however, in a modern, competitive economy, elements that can promote the well-being of society: consumer sovereignty and a reduced concentration of power and creativity to benefit more people. In order to identify carefully what characterizes competition as an economic instrument and what this entails in a societal context, the author contrasts Milton Friedman and John K. Galbraith. The comparison is related to the character of competition, the necessity of competition, its consequences, and competition and state regulation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Arnsperger, Christian. 1996. Competition, Consumerism and the ‘Other’. A Philosophical Investigation into the Ethics of Economic Competition. Discussion Papers (IRES - Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales 1996014) (19.12.2003). Louvain: Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES). http://ideas.repec.org/p/ctl/louvir/1996014.html (2.7.2018).

Arrow, Kenneth J., and Frank Hahn. 1971. General Competitive Analysis . Advanced Textbooks in Economics. Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Company.

Google Scholar  

Bain, Joe S. 2018. Monopoly and Competition. Britannica Academic (3.10.2018). http://academic.eb.com/levels/collegiate/article/monopoly-and-competition/106206 (15.11.2018).

Bowie, Norman E. 1999. Business Ethics: A Kantian Perspective . Oxford: Blackwell.

Brakelmann, Günter. 1988. Zur Arbeit geboren?: Beiträge zu einer christlichen Arbeitsethik . SWI-Studien. Bochum: SWI Verl.

Britton, Andrew, and Peter Sedgwick. 2003. Economic Theory and Christian Belief . Bern: Peter Lang.

Brockway, George P. 2001. The End of Economic Man: An Introduction to Humanistic Economics . New York; London: W. W. Norton & Co.

Buechner, M. Northrup. 2014. A Comment on Scarcity. The Journal of Philosophical Economics 8 (1): 1–19. Bucharest: Bucharest University of Economic Studies. https://bibsys-almaprimo.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/primo-explore/fulldisplay?docid = TN_doaj_soai_doaj_org_article_26478465d69a4d71837955fe978fccc1&context=PC&vid=MF&lang=no_NO&search_scope=default_scope&adaptor=primo_central_multiple_fe&tab=default_tab&query=any,contains,a%20comment%20on%20scarcity&sortby=rank&offset=0 (15.3.18).

Butler, Eamonn. 1985. Milton Friedman: A Guide to His Economic Thought . Aldershot: Gower Publishing.

Caillois, R. 1988. The Structure and Classification of Games. In Philosophic Inquiry in Sport , ed. William J. Morgan and Klaus V. Meier. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

Crouch, Colin, and David Marquand. 1993. Introduction. In Ethics and Markets: Co-operation and Competition Within Capitalist Economies , ed. Colin Crouch and David Marquand, 1–5. Oxford: Blackwell.

Daly, Herman E., and Joshua Farley. 2011. Ecological Economics: Principles and Applications , 2nd ed. Washington: Island Press.

Dunn, Stephen P. 2011. The Economics of John Kenneth Galbraith: Introduction, Persuasion and Rehabilitation . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Friedman, Milton. 1970. The Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase Its Profits. New York Times Magazine (13.9.1970). New York: A.G. Sulzberger http://umich.edu/~thecore/doc/Friedman.pdf (28.11.2018).

Friedman, Milton, and Rose D. Friedman. 1962. Capitalism and Freedom . Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Friedman, Milton, and Rose D. Friedman. 1980. Free to Choose: A Personal Statement . Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.

Galbraith, John Kenneth. 1952. American Capitalism: The Concept of Countervailing Power . Cambridge, MA: The Riverside Press.

Galbraith, John Kenneth. 1968. The New Industrial State . London: Hamish Hamilton.

Galbraith, John Kenneth. 1998 [1958]. The Affluent Society , 40th anniversary ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Haugland, Sven A., and Kjell Grønhaug. 1993. Cooperative Relationships and Competitive Markets . LOS-senter notat 9324. Bergen: LOS-senteret.

Howerth, Ira Woods. 1912. Competition, Natural and Industrial. International Journal of Ethics 22: 399–419.

Article   Google Scholar  

Jevons, William Stanley. 1970 [1871]. The Theory of Political Economy. Edited with an Introduction by R.D Collison Black. The Pelican Classics. Middelsex: Penguin Books.

Kay, John. 2003. The Truth About Markets: Their Genius, Their Limits, Their Follies . London: Allen Lane/Penguin Books.

Keynes, John Maynard. 1936. The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money . London: Macmillan.

Kirzner, Israel M. 1991. The Driving Force of the Market: The Idea of ‘Competition’ in Contemporary Economic Theory and in the Austrian Theory of the Market Process. In Austrian Economics: Perspectives on the Past and Prospects for the Future , vol. 17, ed. Richard M. Ebeling, 139–160. Champions of Freedom. Hillsdale, MI: Hillsdale College Press.

Kohn, Alfie. 1992. No Contest: The Case Against Competition , Rev ed. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

Krawietz, Birgit. 2014. Falconry as a Cultural Icon of the Arab Gulf Region. In Under Construction: Logics of Urbanism in the Gulf Region , ed. Steffen Wippel, Katrin Bromber, Christian Steiner, and Birgit Krawietz, 131–146. Farnham, Surrey; Burlington, VT: Ashgate.

Kurz, Heinz D. 2016. Adam Smith on Markets, Competition and Violations of Natural Liberty. Cambridge Journal of Economics 40: 615–638.

Landreth, Harry, and David C. Colander. 2002. History of Economic Thought , 4th ed. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

Langhelle, Oluf. 1999. Sustainable Development: Exploring the Ethics of ‘Our Common Future’. International Political Science Review 20 (2): 129–149.

Lenn, D. Jeffrey. 1998. Efficient Markets. In The Blackwell Encyclopedic Dictionary of Business Ethics , ed. Patricia H. Werhane and R. Edward Freeman, 191–192. Malden, MA; Oxford: Blackwell.

Luttwak, Edward. 1999. Turbo-Capitalism: Winners and Losers in the Global Economy , 1st U.S. ed. New York: HarperCollins.

Lutz, Christopher Steven. 2016. Alasdair Chalmers MacIntyre (1929–). The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy . http://www.iep.utm.edu/mac-over/ (28.11.2018).

Lutz, Mark A., and Kenneth Lux. 1979. The Challenge of Humanistic Economics . Reading, MA: Benjamin Cummings.

MacAvoy, Thomas C. 1998. Innovation. In The Blackwell Encyclopedic Dictionary of Business Ethics , ed. Patricia H. Werhane and R. Edward Freeman, 331–332. Malden, MA; Oxford: Blackwell.

Nilsson, Jan-Evert. 2016. The Social Democratic Welfare Model: A Child of Times Past. In The Current Nordic Welfare State Model , ed. Noralv Veggeland, 21–41. New York: Nova Science Publishers.

O’Neill, Onora. 1989. Constructions of Reason: Explorations of Kant’s Practical Philosophy . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Parker, Richard. 2005. John Kenneth Galbraith: His Life, His Politics and His Economics . New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

Rich, Arthur. 1990. Marktwirtschaft, Planwirtschaft, Weltwirtschaft aus sozialethischer Sicht . Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus Gerd Mohn.

Robbins, Lionel. 1984 [1935]. An Essay on the Nature and Significance of Economic Science , 3rd ed. New York: New York University Press.

Salsman, Richard M. 2000a. ‘Pure and Perfect’ Competition? By What Standard? Capitalism Magazine (12.2.2000). http://capitalismmagazine.com/2000/02/pure-and-perfect-competition-by-what-standard/ (15.3.2018).

Salsman, Richard M. 2000b. What Does Competition Mean Under Capitalism? Capitalism Magazine (2.1.2000), http://capitalismmagazine.com/2000/01/what-does-competition-mean-under-capitalism/ (15.3.2018).

Smith, Adam. 1998 [1776]. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations . Oxford World’s Classics. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.

Sowell, Thomas. 2015. Basic Economics. A Common Sense Guide to the Economy , 5th ed. New York: Basic Books.

Torsvik, Gaute. 2003. Menneskenatur og samfunnsstruktur: ein kritisk introduksjon til økonomisk teori . Samlagets bøker for høgare utdanning. Oslo: Samlaget.

Veggeland, Noralv (ed.). 2016. The Current Nordic Welfare State Model . New York: Nova Science Publishers.

von Hayek, Friedrich A. 1948. Individualism and Economic Order . London: University of Chicago Press.

Wachtel, Paul L. 1983. The Poverty of Affluence: A Psychological Portrait of the American Way of Life . New York: Free Press.

Walras, Léon. 1977 [1874]. Elements of Pure Economics, or, The Theory of Social Wealth . Fairfield: Augustus M. Kelley Publishers.

Werhane, Patricia H. 1999. Business Ethics and the Origins of Contemporary Capitalism: Economics and Ethics in the Work of Adam Smith and Herbert Spencer. In A Companion to Business Ethics , vol. 17, ed. Robert E. Frederick, 325–341. Blackwell Companions to Philosophy. Oxford: Blackwell.

World Commission on Environment and Development. 1987. Our Common Future . Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

MF Norwegian School of Theology, Religion and Society, Oslo, Norway

Svein Olaf Thorbjørnsen

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Svein Olaf Thorbjørnsen .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Thorbjørnsen, S.O. (2019). Competition and the Economy: Economic Perspectives. In: What Happens to People in a Competitive Society. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-22133-1_5

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-22133-1_5

Published : 25 January 2020

Publisher Name : Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-22132-4

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-22133-1

eBook Packages : Religion and Philosophy Philosophy and Religion (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

National Economics Challenge Winners 2024

Jun 11, 2024 | CEE

Think fast! 

What are two actions that the Federal Reserve might take to combat inflation? 

If the average cost of producing four cars is $20,000 and the average cost of producing five cars is $22,000, what is the marginal cost of producing the fifth car? 

Racing to answer more than 20 rapid-fire questions like those in just 20 seconds per question, high school students from around the country competed near the heart of Wall Street to earn honors as best in America in the Council for Economic Education’s 2024 National Economics Challenge (NEC).  

And they made it look easy. 

Capping a school year during which nearly 8,000 students competed across the USA, teams from Mt. Hebron High School in Ellicott City, Maryland , swept the final competition in New York with first-place finishes in both of the NEC’s divisions for advanced and for first-time competitors. It’s the seventh straight NEC competition in which the Howard County public school emerged as a national champion or finalist. 

Students from Phillips Exeter Academy (Exeter, New Hampshire), BASIS Mesa (Mesa, Arizona) and Novi High School (Novi, Michigan) finished second, third and fourth in the Adam Smith advanced division . Teams from Hunter College High School (New York, NY), Cranbrook Kingswood Upper School (Bloomfield Hills, Michigan) and Lambert High School (Suwanee, Georgia) were runners-up in the David Ricardo division. 

Members of each team were allowed to confer for only seconds before jotting down responses for expert judges to instantly review. The serious but fun competition is designed to encourage a deep understanding of economics through both a case study round and the final quiz round. 

“The analytic and problem-solving skills built by studying economics can be applied to issues of our day that are relevant to our students, today and in their futures,” said Nan J. Morrison, CEE president and chief executive officer. 

But only half the states require a course in economics, according to CEE’s 2024 Survey of the States . 

“Requiring economics and personal finance courses in all high schools gives every student the real-world skills they need to create fulfilling lives on their own terms,” Morrison added. 

“We congratulate and thank the students, teachers and our CEE affiliates around the country for making economics education available and exciting through the National Economics Challenge and each and every classroom,” she said. 

The winners of the 2024 NEC Adam Smith Division: 

First place: Mt. Hebron High School in Ellicott City, Maryland

• Praneeth Idamakanti, Nandhu Manoj Pillai, Mehin Pandya, Diego Salamanca Murphy 
• Coach: Vann Prime 

Second place: Phillips Exeter Academy in Exeter, New Hampshire

• Steven Chen, Dhruv Nagarajan, Tanay Nandan, Eli Orbach 
• Coach: Aykut Kilinc 

Third place: BASIS Mesa in Mesa, Arizona

• Elias Chang, Vinesh Kothari, Ximo Liu, Daniel Yang 
• Coach: Greg Thorson 

Fourth place: Novi High School in Novi, Michigan

• Harsh Ahire, Lalitaditya Akkaraju Arvind Salem, Ishaan Sid 
• Coach: Darcie Moss 

The top teams in this year’s NEC David Ricardo Division: 

• Joseph Jeong, Aarush Kejriwal, Vishva Rao, Nick Venginickal 

Second place: Hunter College High School in New York, NY

• Xiayang Huang, Winnie Mok, Joseph Ponda, Alexie Varah 
• Coach: Ellen Fox 

Third place: Cranbrook Kingswood Upper School in Bloomfield Hills, Michigan

• Toluwani Adebayo, Pingkang Qian, Junho Seo, Alexander Wang 
• Coach: Christopher Schotten 

Fourth place: Lambert High School in Suwanee, Georgia

• Arhan Barve, Shlok Bhatt, Shivam Gupta. Balaskanda Sivanandame 
• Coach: Rupal Gupta 

In subsequent international rounds, the Mt. Hebron teams also outscored China’s championship Shanghai Pinghe School team in their David Ricardo division and Shanghai Starriver Bilingual School in their Adam Smith division. 

All members of the winning teams are awarded cash prizes. CNBC senior economics reporter Steve Liesman asked the questions and moderated the final rounds for both divisions which were televised live and online on CNBC. 

About the Council for Economic Education

The Council for Economic Education ’s (CEE’s) mission is to equip K–12 students with the tools and knowledge of personal finance and economics so that they can make better decisions for themselves, their families, and their communities, and learn to successfully navigate in our ever-changing economy. We carry out our mission in three ways.  We advocate to require financial and economic education in every state. We provide training, tools and resources – online and live through over 180 affiliates nationwide – to more than 40,000 teachers annually who in turn bring the highest quality economics and personal finance instruction to over 4 million students. We deepen knowledge and introduce high school students to critical career capabilities through our national competitions and Invest in Girls program.

Media contact:  

CEE: [email protected]  

Student Stories

National Personal Finance Challenge Winners 2024

Capping a school year of tremendous strides in requiring personal finance classes in America’s high schools, 35 teams gathered in Cleveland at the Council for Economic Education’s annual …

2024 Diamond Gala

We had fun, learned a little, and hit a new one-night fundraising record at the Council for Economic Education’s 2024 Diamond Gala! On Friday, April 30th, we celebrated CEE’s 75th…

Why is Financial Literacy Month Important?

April is Financial Literacy Month! For the Council for Economic Education, Financial Literacy Month is a meaningful moment to share the work we do. But why should the rest of the U.S. celebrate this month?

• Search this site Search this site Site search
• Faculty and Staff
• Upcoming Events
• Past Events
• Careers in Asia-Pacific Affairs Speaker Series
• List of All CIPA Events

Research Themes

• Latest Research
• Indo-Pacific Outlook
• New Opportunities
• New Job Openings
• Indo-Pacific Affairs Internship Program
• Indo-Pacific Policy Lab
• Other UH and External Internships
• Undergraduate Scholarships & Fellowships
• Graduate Scholarships & Fellowships
• Indo-Pacific Languages
• Study Abroad
• Undergraduate Research Opportunities Program
• Visiting Experts
• Center for Chinese Studies
• Center for Japanese Studies
• Center for Korean Studies
• Center for Okinawan Studies
• Center for Pacific Islands Studies
• Center for Philippine Studies
• Center for South Asian Studies
• Center for Southeast Asian Studies
• National Foreign Language Resource Center
• Hamilton Library Asia Collection
• CIPA Email List
• Give to CIPA

Center for Indo-Pacific Affairs

The Center for Indo-Pacific Affairs is currently exploring research related to three overarching themes: emerging security challenges, regional responses to strategic competition, and the governance of the global commons.

Emerging Security Challenges

In addition to traditional security challenges, the Center for Indo-Pacific Affairs examines how economics, technology, climate change, health, and other issues impact regional stability and prosperity.

Project: Undersea Cables, Geoeconomics, and Security in the Indo-Pacific: Risks and Resilience

Submerged deep beneath the ocean, networks of undersea cables form the critical infrastructure that enables the communication and connectivity upon which societies are built. Over 95 percent of global Internet traffic relies on roughly 450 undersea cables for high-volume, high-speed transmission of information, and they transmit approximately $10 trillion in financial transactions data throughout the global economy on a daily basis. The Indo-Pacific has been the most active site of undersea cable construction for over a decade, and these undersea cables have become intertwined in emerging regional strategic technology competition, sparking fears about how they might be threatened by sabotage, manipulation, economic coercion, natural disasters, or physical attacks. To better understand the political, economic, and security dynamics surrounding this critical infrastructure, the Center for Indo-Pacific Affairs is conducting a two-year research project with experts from the US, the Indo-Pacific, Europe, and the Middle East in partnership with Keio University and Khalifa University. The first conference of the project was convened on October 26–27, 2023 in Honolulu, Hawaii. Research findings will be disseminated in the form of policy briefs and as a special issue of the peer-reviewed journal Marine Policy. This project was made possible by the support of the Japan Foundation.

Learn more:

• Conference: Undersea Cables, Geoeconomics, and Security in the Indo-Pacific, October 26–27, 2023
• Publication: Improving Public-Private Partnerships on Undersea Cables: Lessons from Australia and Its Partners in the Indo-Pacific ( Indo-Pacific Outlook , volume 1, issue 2)
• Publication: Maritime Security and Underwater Surveillance Technology: Lessons from the Cold War ( Indo-Pacific Outlook , volume 1, issue 3)
• Publication: Improving Indo-Pacific Cable Security and Resilience: Investment, Licensing, and Repair ( Indo-Pacific Outlook , volume 1, issue 4)
• Publication: Entangled: Southeast Asia and the Geopolitics of Undersea Cables ( Indo-Pacific Outlook , volume 1, issue 5)

Regional Responses to Strategic Competition

The Center for Indo-Pacific Affairs examines the complex dynamics of US-China competition on the Indo-Pacific and how regional actors are crafting their own policies in response.

Project: The Future of Security and Economic Competition in the Indo-Pacific

International security and political economy have become increasingly commingled—and in no region more than the Indo-Pacific. While the policy debate rages on concerning how coupled or decoupled Washington and Beijing are or should be, the security and economic context in the Indo-Pacific continues to shift, driven by government policy, military spending, and private sector investment. Engaging with this reality, the Center for Indo-Pacific Affairs, the Berkeley APEC Study Center , and the Berkeley Risk and Security Lab convened a workshop in Honolulu, Hawaii on December 14–15, 2023. Research findings will be disseminated in the form of policy essays in various journals.

• Workshop: The Future of Security and Economic Competition in the Indo-Pacific

Governance of the Global Commons

The Center for Indo-Pacific Affairs analyzes the evolving rules-based international order and how Indo-Pacific state and non-state actors are shaping the governance of the maritime, outer space, and cyber domains.

Project: Avoiding and Exploiting the Tragedy of the Commons in the Maritime Domain

The security implications of territorial disputes have received a tremendous amount of attention, but less consideration has been given to the central role that fishing plays in the politics, economics, and security of the maritime domain. This project examines the ways that political, economic, and security drivers have led to a fishing crisis in the fashion of a “tragedy of the commons” and how states have responded to try to solve this problem, and, in some cases, to exploit it.

• Publication: Avoiding and Exploiting the Tragedy of the Commons: Fishing, Crime, and Conflict in the South China Sea

Project: The Pluralization of Outer Space and Implications for Governance

An expanding number of state and non-state actors are now engaging in outer space, which is often characterized as increasingly congested, contested, and competitive. This project examines established and emerging space actors in the Indo-Pacific region who are shaping the future of governance in this rapidly evolving domain.

• Publication: Accelerating Asia-Pacific Space Economics Through Regional Partnerships ( Indo-Pacific Outlook , volume 1, issue 1)
• Webinar: Accelerating Asia-Pacific Space Economics Through Regional Partnerships, September 5, 2023
• Event: Inaugural Space Diplomacy Symposium (organized in partnership with the University of Washington), November 29, 2023

Project: Emerging Threats to Cybersecurity and the Potential for Cooperation

The cyber domain is deeply intertwined with economics and security, and it is also increasingly challenged by threats from state and non-state actors. This project examines the evolution of institutions, rules, and norms for cyber governance with specific attention to the roles of actors in the Indo-Pacific region.

The Center for Indo-Pacific Affairs welcomes collaboration with colleagues at UH Mānoa and across the University of Hawai‘i system, as well as with external partners. If you are interested in collaborating with the Center for Indo-Pacific Affairs on a research project, contact [email protected] .

In addition to research specifically being done through the Center for Indo-Pacific Affairs, many experts across the University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa are individually engaged in research relevant to the Indo-Pacific region, many of whom are affiliated with the UH Mānoa School of Pacific and Asian Studies .

The alarm bells are ringing: Competition is the solution to Canada’s productivity crisis

Commissioner of Competition Matthew Boswell speaks at Canada's Competition Summit hosted by the Competition Bureau Canada in Ottawa on Oct. 5, 2023. Sean Kilpatrick/The Canadian Press

Matthew Boswell is Commissioner of Competition with Competition Bureau Canada.

The alarm bells are ringing.

Our economy is becoming less productive. That means Canadians are missing out on higher wages and an overall better standard of living.

The situation is urgent. The Bank of Canada has said as much, with senior deputy governor Carolyn Rogers recently saying, “It’s an emergency – it’s time to break the glass.”

How do we turn the tide? One word: competition.

Canada needs a national economic policy focused on promoting competition .

The evidence is clear: Competition is the key to unlocking our productivity and growing our economy. This is borne out in study after study showing the impact increased competition can have on economic performance.

Without meaningful competition, companies grow complacent. For consumers, that complacency means higher prices and poorer service. For our economy , it means less investment, less innovation and less opportunity for new ideas and business models to flourish. Over time, this weighs on our overall economic performance.

Last year, the bureau published a study that tracked the steady decline in competitive intensity in Canada’s economy between 2000 and 2020. The results are unequivocal – Canada has a competition problem.

Thankfully, Canadians are speaking out and demanding more competition. And Parliament has taken notice.

In the past two years, we have seen sweeping, positive changes to strengthen the Competition Act. These changes will enable stronger law enforcement against anti-competitive mergers, abuses of market power, price-fixing cartels and companies that mislead consumers.

But stronger enforcement is only one side of the competition coin; the other is a regulatory environment that discourages complacency.

Too often in Canada, laws, policies and regulations create barriers – which are outdated and no longer serve the public interest – to competition, including from neighbouring provinces . They usually serve the interests of established businesses that benefit from – and lobby heavily for – such barriers.

The uncomfortable truth is that Canada imposes far more public restraints on competition than most other countries. In fact, Canada ranks near the bottom in the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development’s PMR Index , a globally recognized indicator that measures regulatory barriers to competition.

Unless governments – at all levels – truly prioritize competition in our economy, we will not achieve our economic potential as a country.

This isn’t a question of tinkering around the edges. It’s past time for governments to make bold, unwavering and long-term economic policy decisions rooted in competition.

So what would this look like? As Commissioner of Competition, I have three ideas of where to start.

First, let’s take inspiration from approaches that have worked in other countries.

We could begin by reviewing our existing regulations through a competition lens. Australia did this in the 1990s and it led to the most significant and successful economic reforms in its history, amounting to a permanent increase of at least 2.5 per cent in Australia’s GDP, or around 5,000 Australian dollars a household per year.

The Australian experience can also serve as a model for getting provincial buy-in on difficult reforms. The Australian government agreed to make payments to the states and territories conditional on their implementation of competition reforms. The transfers paid for themselves by growing the economy and allowed states and territories to share in the gains.

Second, we need to set clear, measurable and ambitious targets for change. What gets measured gets done.

Imagine if every minister in Canada had a commitment to competition in their mandate. The White House Competition Council is doing this, and it’s working. Imagine if we set an ambitious goal to make our regulatory regime one of the most competition-friendly in the OECD instead of one of the least. Imagine if no major sectors of our economy were off limits when it came to improving competition.

Third, we need to invest in our institutions and research.

Publicly funded research on competition is sorely lacking in Canada. Why not create Canada Research Chairs in competition? And why not open up more of our data to researchers, as Statistics Canada did with its Canadian Internal Trade Data and Information Hub ? What if we provided competition impact assessment training that would empower our regulators to push back against those who lobby for policies that restrict competition?

These ideas are just the tip of the iceberg. There are many ways of promoting competition. But this is a discussion we need to be having in order to turn the tide on Canada’s productivity crisis.

If we heed the alarm bells and move to tear down barriers to competition today, we can generate unprecedented returns now and for future generations.

Report an editorial error

Report a technical issue

Editorial code of conduct

Interact with The Globe

Information

• Author Services

Initiatives

You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.

All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .

Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.

Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.

Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.

Original Submission Date Received: .

• Active Journals
• Find a Journal
• Proceedings Series
• For Authors
• For Reviewers
• For Editors
• For Librarians
• For Publishers
• For Societies
• For Conference Organizers
• Open Access Policy
• Institutional Open Access Program
• Special Issues Guidelines
• Editorial Process
• Research and Publication Ethics
• Article Processing Charges
• Testimonials
• Preprints.org
• SciProfiles
• Encyclopedia

Article Menu

• Subscribe SciFeed
• Recommended Articles
• Google Scholar
• on Google Scholar
• Table of Contents

Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.

Please let us know what you think of our products and services.

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

JSmol Viewer

Research on price formation based on resource optimization allocation, share and cite.

Feng, Y.; Liu, S. Research on Price Formation Based on Resource Optimization Allocation. Sustainability 2024 , 16 , 5129. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16125129

Feng Y, Liu S. Research on Price Formation Based on Resource Optimization Allocation. Sustainability . 2024; 16(12):5129. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16125129

Feng, Yan, and Shulin Liu. 2024. "Research on Price Formation Based on Resource Optimization Allocation" Sustainability 16, no. 12: 5129. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16125129

Article Metrics

Article access statistics, further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals