Efficiency and acceptance of new water allocation rules - The case of an agricultural water users association.

Water scarcity is one of the major environmental problems in Southern Europe. High levels of water stress and increasing frequency of droughts, along with a greater environmental protection, make it necessary to design water management strategies that are allocative efficient and balance supply and demand. When functioning markets cannot be developed, the allocation rules proposed in the literature of social choice have been recognized as a suitable alternative. However, the application of new water allocation rules can be impaired by a lack of acceptance and implementation problems. This paper examines these obstacles for the case of an agricultural water users association (WUA), situated in the basin of the River Ebro, in relation to the governance structure and collective decision rule of the WUA. It analyzes the extent to which the gains and losses of the farmers affect their acceptance, and examines conditions for building agreements with side payments that provide incentives for the majority of the farmers to form part of a possible agreement. The results show that the uniform and sequential rules improve the allocative efficiency under normal conditions compared to the status quo and the sequential rule even in the case of droughts. In the presence of side payments this rule is likely to be accepted and has only an insignificant impact on distributional inequality.

[1]  Sanford J. Grossman,et al.  The free-rider problem and the theory of the corporation , 1980 .

[2]  Enrique Playán,et al.  A case study for irrigation modernisation: I. Characterisation of the district and analysis of water delivery records , 2000 .

[3]  Modelling spot water markets under uncertain water supply , 2002 .

[4]  A. Garrido,et al.  Modelling water markets under uncertain water supply , 2005 .

[5]  Gilles Bergeron,et al.  Natural resource management in the hillsides of Honduras: bioeconomic modeling at the micro-watershed level , 2001 .

[6]  Dennis R. Schurmeier,et al.  Innovative Approaches to Water Allocation: The Potential for Water Markets , 1986 .

[7]  R. Heimlich,et al.  Evaluation of the economic costs and benefits of methods for reducing nutrient loads to the Gulf of Mexico: Topic 6 Report for the Integrated Assessment on Hypoxia in the Gulf of Mexico. , 1999 .

[8]  M. Jackson,et al.  Strategy-Proof Allotment Rules , 1997 .

[9]  Robert R. Hearne,et al.  Water Markets and Decentralized Water Resources Management: International Problems and Opportunities , 1995 .

[10]  A. Feldman Welfare economics and social choice theory , 1980 .

[11]  Yves Sprumont The Division Problem with Single-Peaked Preferences: A Characterization of the Uniform Allocation Rule , 1991 .

[12]  H. Bjornlund Farmer participation in markets for temporary and permanent water in southeastern Australia , 2003 .

[13]  C. Bontemps,et al.  DYNAMICS AND UNCERTAINTY IN ENVIRONMENTAL AND NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT UNDER SCARCITY: THE CASE OF IRRIGATION , 1999 .

[14]  J. Murillo,et al.  El desafío de la gestión de los recursos hídricos , 2007 .

[15]  Buying Shares and/or Votes for Corporate Control , 2012 .

[16]  R. Barros,et al.  Long-term water balances in La Violada irrigation district (Spain): I. Sequential assessment and minimization of closing errors , 2011 .

[17]  S. Megdal,et al.  OECD Principles on Water Governance , 2020 .

[18]  H. Mapp,et al.  Economic and Environmental Impacts of Limiting Nitrogen Use to Protect Water Quality: A Stochastic Regional Analysis , 1994 .

[19]  Oliver Hart,et al.  One Share/One Vote and the Market for Corporate Control , 1987 .

[20]  Samuel Lee,et al.  One Share - One Vote: The Theory , 2007 .

[21]  M. Harris,et al.  Corporate governance: Voting rights and majority rules , 1988 .

[22]  T. Estrela,et al.  Impacts of climate change on water resources in Spain , 2012 .

[23]  Yolanda Martínez Ferreros,et al.  Nitrate pollution control under soil heterogeneity , 2006 .

[24]  Yolanda Martínez,et al.  Water allocation by social choice rules: The case of sequential rules , 2008 .

[25]  M. Rosegrant,et al.  Markets for Water: Potential And Performance , 2013 .

[26]  R. Barros,et al.  Long-term water balances in La Violada Irrigation District (Spain): II. Analysis of irrigation performance , 2011 .

[27]  Janet M. Carey,et al.  Transaction costs and trading behavior in an immature water market , 2002, Environment and Development Economics.

[28]  Yolanda Martínez,et al.  Agricultural pollution control under Spanish and European environmental policies , 2004 .

[29]  S. Lecina,et al.  Irrigation modernization and water conservation in Spain: The case of Riegos del Alto Aragón , 2010 .

[30]  Terence R. Lee,et al.  LOS PRECIOS, LA PROPIEDAD Y LOS MERCADOS EN LA ASIGNACIÓN DEL AGUA , 1998 .

[31]  Renan-Ulrich Goetz,et al.  Eficiencia de las reglas de asignación de agua en el regadío: asignación a través de mercados, de la regla proporcional y de la regla uniforme , 2011 .

[32]  Yolanda Martínez,et al.  Multi-criteria modelling of irrigation water market at basin level: A Spanish case study , 2006, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[33]  Gloria E. Helfand,et al.  Regulating Nonpoint Source Pollution Under Heterogeneous Conditions , 1995 .