I had another op ed piece appear in the Australian Financial Review today, Monday 9 February: “Right Incentives may Keep Sports Industry Clean” (gated link). The piece is on p.35.
In it, I continue to build the case for ‘conditional superannuation’ as a possible supplementary anti-doping policy. Even though the war against doping may never be well-and-truly won; this idea remains a nice and intuitive incentive-based mechanism, which may very well produce a significant fall in the incidence of doping in sport.
I had an opinion piece published today (Wednesday 16 October): “Incentives Needed to Curb Doping” in today’s Australian Financial Review . The article itself is on p.55, with the linked online version slightly different. This piece crystallises some thoughts I had on anti-doping policy, which I had presented earlier this year at La Trobe. In the wake of the Lance Armstrong revelations, this is fast becoming an even bigger issue than it ever was. I am currently thinking about how to convert this into a major research project worthy of consideration for funding by national competitive schemes. I welcome any thoughts/ideas.
I made a recorded presentation on 22 March (description below) for La Trobe University’s new initiative: Big FAT Ideas – kind of like a local version of the TEDs. I centred it on some thoughts I had about anti-doping policy.
It ended up getting a good media run, with a radio interview on ABC Melbourne (774 AM, with Red Symons) on the earlier that day; and in Sopie Gosper’s Weekend Australian piece: “Super Idea to Make Drug Cheats Pay for Crimes” on Saturday 24 March.
WATCH ON YouTube
Performance enhancing drugs are a part of professional sport and despite harsh penalties for those who are caught, the incentive to outsmart detection remains high. Applying economic theory to this problem might help us develop an effective disincentive to cheat by implementing a superannuation style delay on prize money.