IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/oxford/v36y2020i1p108-131..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Water rights reform and water marketing: Australia vs the US West

Author

Listed:
  • Michael Hanemann
  • Michael Young

Abstract

We consider the connection between water marketing and the modification of property rights to water in Australia, highlighting the Australian’s distinctiveness through a contrast with water rights in the western US (especially California). Australia started out the same as California, but in the 1880s it abandoned California’s system and adopted a new approach, ending the common law property right to water and creating a statutory right that could be modified by administrative fiat. This shifted the arena for dispute resolution from courts to parliaments. It eliminated the seniority inherent in appropriative water rights and it sidelined issues of third-party impacts. Another difference was the tight control of irrigation institutions by state governments and the national government’s willingness to intervene in state and local water management. Australian water reform was wrapped in politics. When there were successes, this is because the politics were managed adroitly; when political challenges proved insurmountable, reform stalled.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael Hanemann & Michael Young, 2020. "Water rights reform and water marketing: Australia vs the US West," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 36(1), pages 108-131.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:oxford:v:36:y:2020:i:1:p:108-131.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/oxrep/grz037
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:oxford:v:36:y:2020:i:1:p:108-131.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/oxrep .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.