Ph.D., M.Phil, M.A., (Columbia University, NY)
B.A. (Carleton University, Ottawa)
Segal Phone: 778-782-7715
Segal Office: Segal 3335
Curriculum Vitae for Dr. Moore
Mark Moore is a Senior Lecturer at the Beedie School of Business at Simon Fraser University. He teaches Managerial Economics for the Executive MBA, Management of Technology MBA, and regular MBA programs, and for the Learning Strategies Group. He also teaches this course for the GDBA (online) program, and for the BBA program. He has supervised MBA projects for the EMBA program and for LSG. He teaches strategy for the BBA program.
Prior to coming to SFU, Mark taught business and economics at the University of British Columbia, Colgate University and Columbia University. He was also employed by the Bank of Canada in Ottawa, where he conducted research on monetary policy, international portfolio and direct investment flows, and options pricing methods; and as a consultant to Bankers Trust Company in New York, where he performed risk modelling and analysis of the loan portfolio.
Marks's current research is on the modelling and estimation of the appropriate social discount rate for use in evaluating public investments. He recently published a cost-benefit study of the consequences for consumers, government and shareholders of the privatization of Canadian National, a welfare analysis of the softwood lumber dispute, and a number of papers on social discount methods.
Specialization and Research Interests
Public policy analysis, privatization and regulation, business strategy.
"The Social Discount Rate for Canada Based on Future Growth in Consumption" with A. Barodman and A. Vining. Canadian Public Policy, Vol. 36, No. 3, 323-341 (2010).
"A Cost-Benefit Analysis of the Privatization of Canadian National Railway," with A. Boardman, C. Laurin, and A. Vining. Canadian Public Policy, Vol. 35, No. 1, 59-83 (2009).(Won the Vanderkamp prize for best article in Canadian Public Policy, 2009).
"Canadian-US Trade Policy: An Economic Analysis of the Softwood Lumber Case," (with R. Schwindt and A. Vining), American Behavioural Scientist, Vol. 47, No. 10, 1335-1357 (2004).
"Just Give Me A Number! Practical values for the Social Discount Rate," (with A. Boardman, A. Vining, D. Weimer and D. Greenberg), Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, Vol. 23, No. 4, 789-812 (2004).
"The Social Discount Rate in Canada," (with A. Boardman and D. Greenberg) in A. Vining and J.. Richards (eds.) Building the Future: Issues in Public Infrastructure in Canada, Toronto: C.D. Howe Institute, 2001, pp. 73-130.
"The Social Discount Rate in Canada" (with A. Boardman and A. Vining) presented at Discount Rates for the Evaluation of Public Private Partnerships, John Deutsch Institute for the Study of Economic Policy, Queen's University, October 3, 2008.
"Proposed Social Discount Rates for Canada Based on Future Growth" (with A. Boardman and A. Vining) presented at a conference on The Future of Strategic Evidence-Based Regulation, organised by The Policy Research Initiative, Ottawa, March 13, 2008.
"Making the Best of a Bad Situation: Canada's Policy Options in the Softwood Lumber Dispute," (with R. Schwindt and A. Vining) presented at the Western Regional Science Association 40th Annual Meeting, Palm Springs, CA, February 2001, and at the Pacific Northwest Regional Economic Conference, Victoria, BC, May 2001.
Published Article Abstracts:
"The Social Discount Rate for Canada Based on Future Growth in Consumption"
interim guidelines of the Treasury Board Secretariat (2007) recommend a
social discount rate (SDR) of 8 percent. This paper argues that this
value is based on an inappropriate methodology and is too high. Using a
consumption rate of interest and drawing on a growth model, we suggest
that if a project is intragenerational (less than 50 years) and there
is no crowding out of private investment, then analysts should use a
SDR of 3.5 percent. Impacts on investment should first be converted to
consumption equivalents using a shadow price of capital of 1.26. If the
project has intergenerational impacts (beyond 50 years), such as those
affecting climate change, we recommend a schedule of time-declining
"A Cost-Benefit Analysis of the Privatization of Canadian National Railway"
This paper uses cost-benefit analysis to estimate the welfare gains from the privatization of Canadian National Railway (CN), one of the largest rail privatizations in history. It also shows how these gains are distributed among consumers, producers and government, and between Canadians and non-Canadians. The paper uses the costs of Canadian Pacific Railway (CP) to create a more credible counterfactual than in previous privatization studies. Based on a conservative counterfactual, we estimate that CN's privatization generated welfare gains of at least billion (in 1992 dollars). However, the welfare gain is possibly as high as billion. The Canadian government captured almost half of these gains, while CN shareholders captured most of the rest.
"Canadian-US Trade Policy: An Economic Analysis of the Softwood Lumber Case"
Softwood lumber has been, and continues to be, the most contentious trade issue dividing the United States and Canada. This article examines the economic issues surrounding the dispute and considers possible resolutions to it. Specifically, the article reviews the recently expired Softwood Lumber Agreement, which restricted exports from four Canadian provinces to the United States beetween 1996 and 2001. The authors describe this voluntary export restraint agreement (VER), explain how it created windfall gains for Canadian holders of export quotas, discuss how these gains were partly dissipated, and use this analysis to consider a reformed VER. The authors also review other feasible policy alternatives. They compare the likely effects on various Canadian and U.S. interest groups of a reformed VER, an export tax, and an import tariff. They rank these policies from the point of view of each country's national welfare as well as from an aggregate North American perspective.
"Just Give Me A Number! Practical Values for the Social Discount Rate"
A major reason the quality of cost-benefit analysis (CBA) varies widely is inconsistent use of the social discount rate (SDR). This article offers guidance about the choice of the SDR. Namely, we recommend the following procedures: If the project is intra-generational (does not have effects beyond 50 years) and there is no crowding out of private investment, then discount all flows at 3.5 percent; if the project is intra-generational and there is some crowding out of investment, then weight investment flows by the shadow price of capital at 1.1 and then discount at 3.5 percent; if the project is intergenerational and there is no crowding out of investment, then use a time-declining scale of discount rates; if the project is intergenerational and investment is crowded out, then convert investment flows during the first 50 years to consumption equivalents using a shadow price of 1.1, and then discount all of these flows at 3.5 percent, and discount all flows after the 50th year using time-declining rates. We then compare current discounting practices of U.S. federal agencies with our estimates. Consistent use of the recommended rates would eliminate arbitrary choices of discount rates and would lead to better public sector decision-making.
Edit this Profile