Examining the Effects of Ecological and Political Boundaries on the Potential for Water Quality Trading: Lessons from a Southeastern Trading Framework
AbstractWater quality trading (trading) as a means to improve water quality has become an increasingly popular instrument considered by environmental policy makers. Although the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency lists more than forty current trading programs in the U.S., only a few active markets exist. The literature identifies several hurdles to trading, overcoming which requires a deeper understanding of the interaction between local environmental, legal, and economic conditions. Particular challenges include thin markets, uncertainty related to the course and fate of nutrient flows, varying degrees of political support, and high transaction costs related to market infrastructure, monitoring, and enforcement. These hindrances often arise from and contribute to the confinement of trading to tight ecological and political boundaries. This paper explores the effect of these boundaries on the potential for trading in two southeastern reservoirs and their respective watersheds. Results provide insight into the effects of the spatial expansion of markets. These findings contribute to the current dialogue that seeks to better understand barriers to trading.
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 Agricultural and Applied Economics Association in its series 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin with number 49323.
Date of creation: 2009
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
water quality trading; phosphorus trading; nutrient trading; water pollution; pollution markets; Environmental Economics and Policy; Land Economics/Use; Public Economics;
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
You can help add them by filling out this form.
reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Access and download statistics
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search).
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.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.