OCR F581 Markets in Action - 11 May 2015

I said allocative efficiency was when the market is economic efficient, is that wrong? Completely forgot the actual definition in the exam (when consumer satisfaction is maximised)

This is easily the most debatable question -the inclusion of significant made it tricky.

I personally shifted both curves, but I don't see why any shift at all would be incorrect.

Posted from TSR Mobile

I understand both aspects... the fall in supply is undoubtedly correct but it's whether biofuel crops are regarded as agricultural products, because wheat and rice are obviously not substitute goods with biofuel crops ie. one product's loss of demand is not another's gain.

The fact that it said significant makes me think you are right however, but the question was ambiguous...

Unit 2 - http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=3248415

I understand both aspects... the fall in supply is undoubtedly correct but it's whether biofuel crops are regarded as agricultural products, because wheat and rice are obviously not substitute goods with biofuel crops ie. one product's loss of demand is not another's gain.

The fact that it said significant makes me think you are right however, but the question was ambiguous...

Did it specify "agricultural products"? I don't think so.

But even if it did, you weren't expected to directly apply it to the case -you just needed to show how a change COULD happen. The question was purely hypothetical, and should be treated as such.

Posted from TSR Mobile

It was much more easier to elaborate on points if you linked to the case study, how did you do your 18marker, did you relate to the case study?

Did it specify "agricultural products"? I don't think so.

But even if it did, you weren't expected to directly apply it to the case -you just needed to show how a change COULD happen. The question was purely hincl. Merpothetical, and should be treated as such.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Yes, that's exactly what the question wanted pretty much

Yes it did specify agricultural products but as you say I think it may have been a hypothetical situation then since there is no other reason as to why the word was in there...

Moreover, for the 18 marker, I focussed a lot of my essay on how subsidies would correct market failure and so on as part of my analysis... but only dedicated a couple of lines as to how goods like biofuel crops which give rise to positive externalities give rise to market failure... ie. defined market failue, and stated that if left to free market forces, product would be underprovided with q<s.o level... is this enough? I assumed that the main bulk of the analysis was explaining how subsidies CORRECT such market failure and thoroughly analysed how this could happen... or would it be expected a diagram of underproduction in free market?

I put Income and and Substitutes. What did you put?

You know for the 'comment on the relevance of the pes calculations' what did you put in that answer?

This is why its an unofficial mark scheme. Just because we did not mention it, it does not mean that its wrong. OCR have several meetings during the marking periods and will alter their mark schemes according to how different candidates answered the questions.
Consider this a "first draft" of what the final mark scheme will look like from OCR.

Okay I understand, never seen an unofficial mark scheme so professionally done impressive!