IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/csdawp/108722.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Valuing Options in Water Markets: A Laboratory Investigation

Author

Listed:
  • Hansen, Kristiana
  • Kaplan, Jonathan D.
  • Kroll, Stephan

Abstract

Risk and reliability dominate water supply discussions in the arid western United States in light of increasing demand and finite, weather-dependant supply. Thus water agencies increasingly turn to contractual mechanisms such as dry-year options to manage supply risk in advance of need. Although a few water agencies across the West have implemented dry-year options, sufficient data for conventional econometric analysis do not yet exist. We thus utilize experimental economics to analyze the effect of annual dry-year options on water markets. We consider how market structure (competitive versus monopsony power) and option contract availability affect water price and allocation within a market and find that realized gains from trade are on average higher when options can be traded, by 46% in competitive markets and by 63% in dominant buyer markets. Important for the political feasibility of such markets, we also find that gains from trade, once an options market is available, are much more evenly distributed between the single buyer and the many sellers in the case of monopsony.

Suggested Citation

  • Hansen, Kristiana & Kaplan, Jonathan D. & Kroll, Stephan, 2008. "Valuing Options in Water Markets: A Laboratory Investigation," Working Papers 108722, Colorado State University, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:csdawp:108722
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.108722
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/108722/files/wp001-08.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.108722?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alberto Garrido, 2007. "Water markets design and evidence from experimental economics," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 38(3), pages 311-330, November.
    2. Alvin E. Roth, 2009. "What Have We Learned from Market Design?," Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 9(1), pages 79-112.
    3. Easter, K William & Rosegrant, Mark W & Dinar, Ariel, 1999. "Formal and Informal Markets for Water: Institutions, Performance, and Constraints," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 14(1), pages 99-116, February.
    4. Charles N. Noussair & Charles R. Plott & Raymond G. Riezman, 2013. "An Experimental Investigation of the Patterns of International Trade," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Raymond Riezman (ed.), International Trade Agreements and Political Economy, chapter 17, pages 299-328, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    5. Howitt, Richard E. & Hansen, Kristiana, 2005. "The Evolving Western Water Markets," Choices: The Magazine of Food, Farm, and Resource Issues, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 20(1), pages 1-5.
    6. Murphy, James J. & Dinar, Ariel & Howitt, Richard E. & Rassenti, Stephen J. & Smith, Vernon L. & Weinberg, Marca, 2004. "Incorporating Instream Flow Values Into A Water Market," Working Paper Series 14525, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Department of Resource Economics.
    7. Ari M. Michelsen & Robert A. Young, 1993. "Optioning Agricultural Water Rights for Urban Water Supplies During Drought," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 75(4), pages 1010-1020.
    8. Villinski, Michele Terese, 2003. "A framework for pricing multiple-exercise option contracts for water," Faculty and Alumni Dissertations 162235, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    9. James J. Murphy & Ariel Dinar & Richard E. Howitt & Erin Mastrangelo & Stephen J. Rassenti & Vernon L. Smith, 2006. "Mechanisms for Addressing Third-Party Impacts Resulting From Voluntary Water Transfers," Chapters, in: John A. List (ed.), Using Experimental Methods in Environmental and Resource Economics, chapter 5, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. James Murphy & Ariel Dinar & Richard Howitt & Steven Rassenti & Vernon Smith, 2000. "The Design of ``Smart'' Water Market Institutions Using Laboratory Experiments," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 17(4), pages 375-394, December.
    11. Ronald G. Cummings & Charles A. Holt & Susan K. Laury, 2004. "Using laboratory experiments for policymaking: An example from the Georgia irrigation reduction auction," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(2), pages 341-363.
    12. Ashenfelter, Orley, et al, 1992. "An Experimental Comparison of Dispute Rates in Alternative Arbitration Systems," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(6), pages 1407-1433, November.
    13. Owen Phillips & Dale Menkhaus & Joseph Krogmeier, 2001. "Laboratory Behavior in Spot and Forward Auction Markets," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 4(3), pages 243-256, December.
    14. Shanley, James & Grossman, Philip J., 2007. "Paradise to parking lots: Creation versus maintenance of a public good," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 523-536, August.
    15. Godby, Robert W. & Mestelman, Stuart & Muller, R. Andrew & Welland, J. Douglas, 1997. "Emissions Trading with Shares and Coupons when Control over Discharges Is Uncertain," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 359-381, March.
    16. Klaus Abbink & Bettina Rockenbach, 2006. "Option pricing by students and professional traders: a behavioural investigation," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(6), pages 497-510.
    17. Dale J. Menkhaus & Owen R. Phillips & Chris T. Bastian, 2003. "Impacts of Alternative Trading Institutions and Methods of Delivery on Laboratory Market Outcomes," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(5), pages 1323-1329.
    18. Cason, Timothy N. & Gangadharan, Lata & Duke, Charlotte, 2003. "Market power in tradable emission markets: a laboratory testbed for emission trading in Port Phillip Bay, Victoria," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 469-491, October.
    19. Rosegrant, Mark W. & Binswanger, Hans P., 1994. "Markets in tradable water rights: Potential for efficiency gains in developing country water resource allocation," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 22(11), pages 1613-1625, November.
    20. Cason, Timothy N., 2010. "What Can Laboratory Experiments Teach Us About Emissions Permit Market Design?," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 39(2), pages 151-161, April.
    21. John A. List (ed.), 2006. "Using Experimental Methods in Environmental and Resource Economics," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 4180.
    22. Marianne Lefebvre & Lata Gangadharan & Sophie Thoyer, 2012. "Do Security-Differentiated Water Rights Improve the Performance of Water Markets?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 94(5), pages 1113-1135.
    23. Gary D. Libecap, 2010. "Water Rights and Markets in the U.S. Semi Arid West: Efficiency and Equity Issues," ICER Working Papers 30-2010, ICER - International Centre for Economic Research.
    24. Kluger, Brian D & Wyatt, Steve B, 1995. "Options and Efficiency: Some Experimental Evidence," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 5(2), pages 179-201, June.
    25. Robert A. Young, 1986. "Why Are There So Few Transactions among Water Users?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 68(5), pages 1143-1151.
    26. Marianne LEFEBVRE & Lata GANGADHARAN & Sophie THOYER, 2011. "Do Security-differentiated Water Rights Improve Efficiency?," Working Papers 11-14, LAMETA, Universtiy of Montpellier, revised Jun 2012.
    27. Andrew Muller, R. & Mestelman, Stuart & Spraggon, John & Godby, Rob, 2002. "Can Double Auctions Control Monopoly and Monopsony Power in Emissions Trading Markets?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 70-92, July.
    28. Ruffle, Bradley J., 2005. "Tax and subsidy incidence equivalence theories: experimental evidence from competitive markets," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(8), pages 1519-1542, August.
    29. Hanan G. Jacoby & Rinku Murgai & Saeed Ur Rehman, 2004. "Monopoly Power and Distribution in Fragmented Markets: The Case of Groundwater," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 71(3), pages 783-808.
    30. Bjornlund, Henning & McKay, Jennifer, 2002. "Aspects of water markets for developing countries: experiences from Australia, Chile, and the US," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(4), pages 769-795, October.
    31. Jamie Brown-Kruse & Steven R Elliot & Rob Godby, 1995. "Strategic Manipulation of Pollution Permit Markets: An Experimental Approach," Department of Economics Working Papers 1995-03, McMaster University.
    32. Joel R. Hamilton & Norman K. Whittlesey & Philip Halverson, 1989. "Interruptible Water Markets in the Pacific Northwest," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 71(1), pages 63-75.
    33. Urs Fischbacher, 2007. "z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 10(2), pages 171-178, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Françeska Tomori & Erik Ansink & Harold Houba & Nick Hagerty & Charles Bos, 2021. "Market power in California's water market," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 21-011/VIII, Tinbergen Institute.
    2. Tomori, Françeska & Ansink, Erik & Houba, Harold & Hagerty, Nick & Bos, Charles, 2021. "Market power in California’s water market," Working Papers 2072/534854, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Department of Economics.
    3. Alistair Munro & Marieta Valente, 2016. "Green Goods: Are They Good or Bad News for the Environment? Evidence from a Laboratory Experiment on Impure Public Goods," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 65(2), pages 317-335, October.
    4. Craig D. Broadbent & David S. Brookshire & Don Coursey & Vince Tidwell, 2017. "Futures Contracts in Water Leasing: An Experimental Analysis Using Basin Characteristics of the Rio Grande, NM," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(3), pages 569-594, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Koji Kotani & Kenta Tanaka & Shunsuke Managi, 2019. "Which performs better under trader settings, double auction or uniform price auction?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(1), pages 247-267, March.
    2. Noussair, C.N. & van Soest, D.P., 2014. "Economic Experiments and Environmental Policy : A Review," Other publications TiSEM 5ccc4032-fc1e-453c-9a96-a, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    3. Higashida, Keisaku & Tanaka, Kenta & Managi, Shunsuke, 2019. "The efficiency of conservation banking schemes with inter-regionally tradable credits and the role of mediators," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 175-186.
    4. Bodo Sturm & Joachim Weimann, 2006. "Experiments in Environmental Economics and Some Close Relatives," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(3), pages 419-457, July.
    5. Katerina Sherstyuk & Krit Phankitnirundorn & Michael J. Roberts, 2021. "Randomized double auctions: gains from trade, trader roles, and price discovery," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(4), pages 1325-1364, December.
    6. Raffensperger, John F., 2011. "Matching users' rights to available groundwater," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(6), pages 1041-1050, April.
    7. Timilsina, Raja Rajendra & Kotani, Koji, 2017. "Evaluating the potential of marketable permits in a framed field experiment: Forest conservation in Nepal," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(PA), pages 25-37.
    8. Kai-Uwe Kuhn & Neslihan Uler, 2019. "Behavioral sources of the demand for carbon offsets: an experimental study," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(3), pages 676-704, September.
    9. John F. Raffensperger & Mark W. Milke & E. Grant Read, 2009. "A Deterministic Smart Market Model for Groundwater," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 57(6), pages 1333-1346, December.
    10. Ansink, Erik & Houba, Harold, 2012. "Market power in water markets," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 237-252.
    11. Phillips, Owen R. & Nagler, Amy M. & Menkhaus, Dale J. & Huang, Shanshan & Bastian, Christopher T., 2014. "Trading partner choice and bargaining culture in negotiations," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 178-190.
    12. Tanaka, Kenta & Matsukawa, Isamu & Managi, Shunsuke, 2020. "An experimental investigation of bilateral oligopoly in emissions trading markets," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    13. Smith, Steven M., 2021. "The relative economic merits of alternative water right systems," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    14. Bodo Sturm, 2008. "Market Power in Emissions Trading Markets Ruled by a Multiple Unit Double Auction: Further Experimental Evidence," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 40(4), pages 467-487, August.
    15. Molden, David & Sakthivadivel, Ramasamy & Samad, Madar & Burton, Martin, 2005. "Phases of river basin development: the need for adaptive institutions," Book Chapters,, International Water Management Institute.
    16. Yakunina, Alla V. & Menkhaus, Dale J. & Phillips, Owen R. & Esipov, Victor E., 2003. "Non-performance risk and transaction costs in laboratory forward and spot markets," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 257-274, June.
    17. Hansen, Kristiana, 2010. "Water Markets and Water Rights Markets in the Western United States," Western Economics Forum, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 9(2), pages 1-10.
    18. Tisdell, John G. & Grainger, Corinne, 2008. "An Experimental Economic Analysis of Carbon Trading Options for Australia," 2008 Conference, August 28-29, 2008, Nelson, New Zealand 96661, New Zealand Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    19. Kaplan, Jonathan D. & Howitt, Richard E. & Kroll, Stephan, 2012. "Private Provision of a Stochastic Common Property Resource," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 124855, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    20. C. Duke & L. Gangadharan, 2005. "Salinity in Water Markets : An ExperimentalInvestigation of the Sunraysia Salinity Levy, Victoria," Department of Economics - Working Papers Series 950, The University of Melbourne.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Resource /Energy Economics and Policy;

    JEL classification:

    • D23 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Organizational Behavior; Transaction Costs; Property Rights
    • L22 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Firm Organization and Market Structure
    • Q25 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Water

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ags:csdawp:108722. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dacsuus.html .

    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.