Panel Estimation Of Water Demand Based On An Episode Of Rate Reform
AbstractAgriculture is by far the dominant user of water in the western United States and in nearly all arid regions of the planet. Despite this fact and despite a growing push to rely on price mechanisms for rationalizing water allocation, there are few econometric studies of agricultural water demand that measure its responsiveness to price. Using a unique panel data set of water use at a disaggregated level, this paper estimates the parameters of an agricultural water demand function. The approach incorporates the notion of "jointness" in the farm production function, which postulates that producers choose inputs, outputs and technology simultaneously. Estimation results indicate that the own-price elasticity of water use is in the range [-0.415, -0.275], which includes the indirect effects of water price changes on output and technology choices. The estimation results also provide the first direct measurement of the conservation benefits of investment in precision irrigation technology. Water savings from technology adoption vary widely by crop but can be as high as 50 percent relative to gravity irrigation.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association) in its series 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO with number 20342.
Date of creation: 2004
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: 555 East Wells Street, Suite 1100, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202
Phone: (414) 918-3190
Fax: (414) 276-3349
Web page: http://www.aaea.org
More information through EDIRC
Input demand estimation; water resources; conservation technology; Resource /Energy Economics and Policy; C33; Q12; Q15;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- C33 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models; Multiple Variables - - - Models with Panel Data; Spatio-temporal Models
- Q12 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Micro Analysis of Farm Firms, Farm Households, and Farm Input Markets
- Q15 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Land Ownership and Tenure; Land Reform; Land Use; Irrigation; Agriculture and Environment
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Breusch, T S & Pagan, A R, 1980.
"The Lagrange Multiplier Test and Its Applications to Model Specification in Econometrics,"
Review of Economic Studies,
Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(1), pages 239-53, January.
- Breusch, T.S. & Pagan, A.R., . "The Lagrange multiplier test and its applications to model specification in econometrics," CORE Discussion Papers RP -412, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
- Chao Wei, 2003. "Energy, the Stock Market, and the Putty-Clay Investment Model," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(1), pages 311-323, March.
- J. A. Hausman, 1976.
"Specification Tests in Econometrics,"
185, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
- Simon Gilchrist & John C. Williams, 1998.
"Putty-clay and investment: a business cycle analysis,"
Finance and Economics Discussion Series
1998-30, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
- Simon Gilchrist & John C. Williams, 2000. "Putty-Clay and Investment: A Business Cycle Analysis," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 108(5), pages 928-960, October.
- Simon Gilchrist & John C. Williams, 1998. "Putty-Clay and Investment: A Business Cycle Analysis," NBER Working Papers 6812, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Brent Hueth & Ethan Ligon, 1999.
"Agricultural Supply Response Under Contract,"
American Journal of Agricultural Economics,
Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 81(3), pages 610-615.
- Renwick, Mary E. & Green, Richard D., 2000. "Do Residential Water Demand Side Management Policies Measure Up? An Analysis of Eight California Water Agencies," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 37-55, July.
- David Zilberman & Doug Parker, 1996. "Explaining Irrigation Technology Choices: A Microparameter Approach," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(4), pages 1064-1072.
- Bontemps, Christophe & Couture, St phane, 2002. "Irrigation water demand for the decision maker," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(04), pages 643-657, October.
- Burness, H Stuart & Quirk, James P, 1979. "Appropriative Water Rights and the Efficient Allocation of Resources," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(1), pages 25-37, March.
- Mundlak, Yair, 2003. "Economic Growth: Lessons From Two Centuries Of American Agriculture," Discussion Papers 14986, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Department of Agricultural Economics and Management.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.