This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Buying Back the Living Murray: At What Price?

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
R. Quentin Grafton () (Australian National University, Asia Pacific School of Economics and Government)
Karen Hussey () (Australian National University, National Europe Centre)

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

In June 2004 the Council of Australian Governments approved the Intergovernmental Agreement on Addressing Water Overallocation and Achieving Environmental Objectives in the Murray-Darling Basin (‘IGMDB’). The IGMDB set out arrangements for a ‘Living Murray’ that includes a budget of $500 million to return 500 billion litres of water per year to the Murray River by 2009. Unfortunately, two years later and only 11 billion litres have been returned as environmental flows as a result of the initiative. In response, the Australian Government in April 2006 proposed a new scheme to purchase water entitlements from farmers who undertake water-savings measures. We examine this proposal in relation to the general economic principles for the allocation of scarce water. We contend that the latest initiative, although helpful, suffers from two fundamental problems in terms of water pricing. First, the current market price for water entitlements does not include the value of water ‘in situ’, or the benefits it generates separate from its value in consumption. Second, the constraint imposed that water users undertake infrastructure investments when selling their entitlements unnecessarily raises the cost of returning water to the Murray River. We conclude that the latest scheme to achieve the laudable goals of the ‘Living Murray’ is not cost effective and that the ratio of litres of water returned to dollars spent could be much higher if the pricing policies were changed.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. 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.

File URL: http://een.anu.edu.au/download_files/een0606.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by Australian National University, Economics and Environment Network in its series Economics and Environment Network Working Papers with number 0606.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length: 30 pages
Date of creation: Aug 2006
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:anu:eenwps:0606

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://een.anu.edu.au/

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Jack Pezzey).

Related research
Keywords: Living Murray; scarce water; water entitlements; water pricing; pricing policies;

Find related papers by JEL classification:
Q00 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - General - - - General

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References listed on IDEAS
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.:
  1. Dwyer, Gavan & Douglas, Robert & Peterson, Deborah & Chong, Joanne & Maddern, Kate, 2006. "Irrigation externalities: pricing and charges," Staff Working Papers 31923, Productivity Commission. [Downloadable!]
  2. Anonymous, 2003. "Water Rights Arrangements in Australia and Overseas," Commission Research Papers 31899, Productivity Commission. [Downloadable!]
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? Apart from a small start up grant in the 1990's, RePEc has received no funding and lives on the help of volunteers.

This page was last updated on 2009-11-15.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.