This project explores outcomes, in broad employment and GDP terms, should the Southern region choose to pursue opportunities to improve on the business as usual outcome of economic growth. BERL was tasked with modelling these opportunities based on the following criteria:
* Sectors that build on existing known competitive advantages in the region
* Sectors that take account of the region's significant land-based economy
* Sectors that have the potential, based on existing viable technology, to be relatively low carbon.
It was beyond the scope of this research to look in detail at all sectors of the Southern Region economy, or to predict the development of new relatively low carbon industries that have yet to gain a foothold in the Southern Region.
Regional economic development leads to economic growth and to improved community well-being. It should be approached from an evidence base, and address identified issues or needs. Further, economic development plans need to consider the future labour force in terms of training and qualifications, skills and experience, and productivity.
based on BERL's understanding of regional development, this report summarises four scenarios that focus on areas the Southern region has a competitive advantage in, and have the potential to provide economic development opportunities with relatively low carbon emissions. No region could be said to have an absolute advantage, but regions do have comparative advantages in particular sectors.
...and so it goes on...
Sunday, September 2, 2012
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
Perhaps you should post the WWF and BERL disclaimers.
Anonymous, you seem well versed in this issue - how about you post them!
Sheesh!
All work is done, and services rendered at the request of, and for the purposes of the client only. Neither BERL nor any of its employees accepts any responsibility on any grounds whatsoever, including negligence, to
any other person.
While every effort is made by BERL to ensure that the information, opinions and forecasts provided to
the client are accurate and reliable, BERL shall not be liable for any adverse consequences of the client’s
decisions made in reliance of any report provided by BERL, nor shall BERL be held to have given or implied
any warranty as to whether any report provided by BERL will assist in the performance of the client’s
functions.
And your point in posting the disclaimer?
It seems a standard sort of disclaimer for any advisory bureau.
I don't see what you are getting at but am more than happy to learn.
Anonymouse if you expect your posts to be taken seriously isn't it time you STOPPED hiding behind this non de plume.
At least gave us your first name and your back ground.... You are a regular on this blog ..always snipping at Robert and his views ..
I treat Roberts posts a lot more worthy than yours because at least with him. I can put a face to the name ..I know his background etc he doest try and hide it like you do !
Pauline - this particular Anonymous (not anonymouse :-) is Colin McIntyre and he's not trying to hide his identity, it's just that for some reason he gets bined in the 'spam' bin whenever he posts. Neither of us know why. There is another Anonymous (different tone) who wants to own that title and you might be thinking of him. Yours is the perfect example though, of the confusion and discontinuity that comes when posters are not thoughtful enough to tag their offerings with at least a pen-name, written at the end of their comments.
Golly Pauline, I don't know why you should be so upset at the printing of the Beryl disclaimer. I for one found it to very enlightening!
Perhaps RG should turn off the anon button so that you do not get so irritated in future.
By the way what were the terms of reference given to Beryl by the WWF?
Sorry Robert but I suspect Pauline was more correct than you. I must correct my tone.
For Pauline. I have had this debate before. I wont waffle on for risk of sounding "trite". (I just deleted the waffle explanation)
It appears have irritated a few with my ambiguity. It is not my intention. And I apologise for that.
As I likely to stand on my morals, I wish not to annoy people with inconsequential things I will assume a tag and endeavour to remember it's use. I hope this helps your understanding. In terms a my background. Post me your address and I will send a CV:)
Mr E
Sally asks, what are the terms of reference given to Beryl by the WWF, seemingly unaware that her husband posted them here earlier in the day :-)
Funny as.
Mr E, pleased to meet you and thank you for making life just a little easier for our readers.
Mr E. How elegant.
Why RG do you have to confuse the issue? The message I am getting is that you don't seem to understand what Terms of Reference means.
PLease tell me 'where'my husband posted the "Terms of Reference" that he requested yesterday.
3rd comment in this thread.
Or elsewhere on another thread. Why don't you post them, Sally. You seem to think it's vital we see them.
Disclaimers, whatever.
You should also remember the very sound words repeated recently at a briefing by the Westpac Chief Economist:
"Economists don't make predictions because they know, but because they are asked"
http://economicscience.net/content/JokEc
Paranormal
Post a Comment