Economics · Year 12

Active learning ideas

Competition Policy and Regulation

Active learning turns abstract policy tools into concrete decisions students must defend, mirroring how regulators and firms actually operate. By stepping into roles, analyzing cases, and testing outcomes, students move from passive note-taking to active reasoning about market power and remedies.

• National Curriculum Attainment Targets
• A-Level: Economics - Competition Policy
• A-Level: Economics - Government Intervention in Markets

• 35–50 min
• Pairs → Whole Class
• 4 activities

Activity 01

• Case Study Analysis
• 45 min · Small Groups

Role-Play: CMA Merger Hearing

Divide class into CMA panel, firm lawyers, and consumer reps. Groups prepare 5-minute cases on a mock supermarket merger using provided data. Panel questions and votes on approval or remedies. Debrief links decisions to policy goals.

Explain the rationale behind government competition policy.

Facilitation Tip

In the CMA Merger Hearing role-play, assign clear roles (CMA panel, merging firms, consumer advocates) and require each to prepare a two-minute opening statement using evidence from provided merger documents.

What to look for

Present students with a hypothetical scenario: 'A large online retailer has acquired its main competitor in the UK. What are two potential concerns the CMA might have, and what are two tools they could use to address these concerns?' Facilitate a class discussion on their responses.

• Analyze
• Evaluate
• Create
• Decision-Making
• Self-Management

Activity 02

• Case Study Analysis
• 50 min · Small Groups

Case Study Carousel: Anti-Competitive Practices

Set up stations with UK cases like fuel surcharges or online marketplaces. Small groups spend 10 minutes per station noting tools used and outcomes, then rotate. Class shares findings in a whole-group summary.

Analyze the tools used by competition authorities to prevent anti-competitive practices.

Facilitation Tip

During the Case Study Carousel, rotate groups every 10 minutes so students compare anti-competitive practices across industries, noting which CMA tools apply to each scenario.

What to look for

Ask students to write down the definition of 'natural monopoly' in their own words and provide one example of a UK industry that exhibits characteristics of a natural monopoly. Review responses for understanding of the core concept.

• Analyze
• Evaluate
• Create
• Decision-Making
• Self-Management

Activity 03

• Case Study Analysis
• 40 min · Pairs

Debate Pairs: Natural Monopoly Regulation

Pairs research and argue for or against price cap effectiveness using rail or water examples. Switch sides midway for rebuttals. Vote and discuss evaluation criteria as a class.

Evaluate the effectiveness of regulating natural monopolies.

Facilitation Tip

For the Debate Pairs on natural monopoly regulation, give students 5 minutes to prepare arguments using data on economies of scale before pairing them against each other.

What to look for

On an exit ticket, ask students to briefly explain one benefit and one drawback of government regulation of monopolies. Collect and review to gauge understanding of the policy trade-offs.

• Analyze
• Evaluate
• Create
• Decision-Making
• Self-Management

Activity 04

• Case Study Analysis
• 35 min · Pairs

Market Simulation: Monopoly vs Competition

Individuals or pairs bid in a simulated market first as monopoly, then with rivals added. Track prices and profits on worksheets. Compare results to discuss intervention needs.

Explain the rationale behind government competition policy.

Facilitation Tip

In the Market Simulation, set a strict 15-minute timer for firms to set prices and output, then have students graph outcomes to compare monopoly versus competitive scenarios.

What to look for

Present students with a hypothetical scenario: 'A large online retailer has acquired its main competitor in the UK. What are two potential concerns the CMA might have, and what are two tools they could use to address these concerns?' Facilitate a class discussion on their responses.

• Analyze
• Evaluate
• Create
• Decision-Making
• Self-Management

A few notes on teaching this unit

Teachers should anchor theory in lived regulatory practice, using the CMA’s real cases and tools to show how policy responds to market failures. Avoid overgeneralizing remedies; instead, emphasize that competition policy is iterative, data-driven, and context-specific. Research shows students grasp complex interventions better when they experience the tensions between efficiency, equity, and enforcement in real time.

Successful learning looks like students confidently distinguishing between structural and behavioral remedies, weighing trade-offs of regulation, and applying CMA tools to real cases. They should articulate why some monopolies require regulation while others need intervention, backed by evidence from simulations and debates.

---

Watch Out for These Misconceptions

• During the Market Simulation, watch for students assuming all monopolies harm consumers equally.

  Use the simulation’s outcomes to highlight that price and output changes differ by market structure; then contrast this with natural monopolies where economies of scale justify regulation rather than breakup.

• During the Case Study Carousel, watch for students assuming competition policy only involves splitting firms.

  Have groups compare their case cards to identify which CMA actions used fines or conduct rules instead, then present findings to the class to clarify tool diversity.

• During the Debate Pairs on natural monopoly regulation, watch for students assuming regulation always succeeds without costs.

  Prompt students to cite evidence from their debate prep on how price caps may reduce innovation incentives; use this to redirect their focus to trade-offs in policy evaluation.

---

Methods used in this brief

• Case Study Analysis