Lin Crase

Prof. Lin Crase

Professor of Economics and Head of School of Commerce, University of South Australia, Australia
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

57Years (1970-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
2 January 2009 in Psychiatric Bulletin
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
DMDarryl John Maybery
Darryl John Maybery
ARAndrea Reupert
Andrea Reupert
KPKent Patrick
Kent Patrick
MGMelinda Goodyear
Melinda Goodyear
Lin CraseLin Crase
Lin Crase
Aims and Method: To provide multiple estimates of the numbers of Australian and Victorian families and children living in families where a parent has had a mental illness. We used the Australian Bureau of Statistics Victorian Mental Health Branch service usage and data collected from 701 community participants to triangulate prevalence information.Results: According to population estimates, 23.3% of all children in Australia have a parent with a non-substance mental illness, 20.4% of mental health service users have dependent children and 14.4% of the community study participants report having at least one parent with a mental illness.Clinical Implications: The multiple prevalence estimates of the numbers of children in families with parental mental illness provide fundamental information for psychiatric policy, planning and programming.

1 February 2005 in Journal of Economic Psychology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
DMDarryl Maybery
Darryl Maybery
Lin CraseLin Crase
Lin Crase
CGChris Gullifer
Chris Gullifer

1 August 2010 in Resource and Energy Economics
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
JBJoel Byrnes
Joel Byrnes
Lin CraseLin Crase
Lin Crase
Brian DolleryBrian Dollery
Brian Dollery
RVRenato A Villano
Renato A Villano

1 September 2017 in Journal of Hydrology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
SWSarah Wheeler
Sarah Wheeler
ALAdam Loch
Adam Loch
Lin CraseLin Crase
Lin Crase
MYMichael Young
Michael Young
Rupert Quentin GraftonRupert Quentin Grafton
Rupert Quentin Grafton
Water markets are increasingly proposed as a demand-management strategy to deal with water scarcity. Water trading arrangements, on their own, are not about setting bio-physical limits to water-use. Nevertheless, water trading that mitigates scarcity constraints can assist regulators of water resources to keep water-use within limits at the lowest possible cost, and may reduce the cost of restoring water system health. While theoretically attractive, many practitioners have, at best, only a limited understanding of the practical usefulness of markets and how they might be most appropriately deployed. Using lessons learned from jurisdictions around the world where water markets have been implemented, this study attempts to fill the existing water market development gap and provide an initial framework (the water market readiness assessment (WMRA)) to describe the policy and administrative conditions/ reforms necessary to enable governments/jurisdictions to develop water trading arrangements that are efficient, equitable and within sustainable limits. Our proposed framework consists of three key steps: 1) an assessment of hydrological and institutional needs; 2) a market evaluation, including assessment of development and implementation issues; and 3) the monitoring, continuous/review and assessment of future needs; with a variety of questions needing assessment at each stage. We apply the framework to three examples: regions in Australia, the United States and Spain. These applications indicate that WMRA can provide key information for water planners to consider on the usefulness of water trading processes to better manage water scarcity; but further practical applications and tests of the framework are required to fully evaluate its effectiveness.Sarah Ann Wheeler, Adam Loch, Lin Crase, Mike Young, R. Quentin Grafto

1 September 2004 in Urban Policy and Research
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
Brian DolleryBrian Dollery
Brian Dollery
Lin CraseLin Crase
Lin Crase
Municipal amalgamations have historically accounted for a substantial reduction in the number of councils in Australia. Proponents of municipal consolidation typically argue that substantial economic benefits will inevitably flow from fewer, larger municipal councils. This article seeks to evaluate the validity of the generic case for council amalgamation in Australia.

1 September 2006 in Australian Journal of Political Science
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
Brian DolleryBrian Dollery
Brian Dollery
Lin CraseLin Crase
Lin Crase
JBJoel Byrnes
Joel Byrnes
Funding of local government systems in Australia has been falling relative to other tiers of government for the past 30 years with various adverse consequences, especially the decline of local government infrastructure. This paper seeks to explain this phenomenon by drawing on two relatively new theoretical strands in the political economy literature; the Australian theory of local government failure and the Wittman model of democratic efficiency. Three explanations are assessed: a traditional public finance perspective, Australian local government failure, and the institutional efficiency of democratic preference revelation. A secondary aim of the paper is to evaluate the implications of the Wittman model for the local government failure paradigm.