IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/38265.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Three approaches to measuring natural resource scarcity: theory and application to groundwater

Author

Listed:
  • Koundouri, Phoebe

Abstract

Efficient pricing of a resource incorporates both marginal cost of extraction and scarcity rents. Since groundwater resources exhibit natural supply constraints, scarcity rents must be imposed on current users. Given the difficulty of establishing clear groundwater ownership rights, scarcity value frequently goes unrecognized and is difficult to estimate. This results in inefficient pricing and misallocation of the resource. This thesis builds on three different methods to develop appropriate theoretical and empirical models relevant for indirect estimation of these shadow scarcity rents, which we consider as the initial and most challenging step towards efficient groundwater management. Empirical analyses are based on economic and hydrological data from t he island of Cyprus, representative of semi-arid regions. Chapter 2 critically assesses previous theoretical and empirical attempts to derive the increase in social benefits from efficient pricing of groundwater and examines the potential for groundwater management. This potential is seriously challenged by Gisser-Sanchez's Effect (GSI): i.e. net benefits from optimally managing groundwater are insignificant for all practical purposes. Chapter 3 attempts a reexamination of GSI by developing a dynamic model of adaptation to increasing groundwater scarcity, when backstop technology is available. Both groundwater scarcity rents and management benefits are derived by simulating the optimal and competitive-commonality solutions. Results point to the absence of GSI in aquifers facing complete exhaustion in the near future. Chapter 4 proposes a refinement of revealed preference methods of valuation, by combining the hedonic and travel cost methods, and applies the refined model to derive the willingness to pay for groundwater quality. It is claimed t hat hedonic valuation of quality attributes can be misleading when the exogeneity assumption, with respect to these attributes, to sample selection is violated. Hence, the simultaneity between hedonic valuation and sample selection is modelled in the context of producer behaviour and investigated empirically in the case of land demanded for use as an input either in agricultural production or touristic development. The empirical analysis suggests that failing to correct for sample selection results in a biased valuation of groundwater quality. In chapter 5 duality theory is employed to develop the distance function methodology of deriving shadow groundwater scarcity rents. The empirical application of the model involves estimating a stochastic input distance function from which the in situ shadow price of groundwater is derived. Chapter 6 concludes the thesis by comparing and contrasting the magnitude of groundwater scarcity rents and willingness to pay for scarce groundwater quality, derived from the models put forward in this research.

Suggested Citation

  • Koundouri, Phoebe, 2000. "Three approaches to measuring natural resource scarcity: theory and application to groundwater," MPRA Paper 38265, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:38265
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/38265/1/MPRA_paper_38265.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. A. Michael Spence, 1979. "Investment Strategy and Growth in a New Market," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 10(1), pages 1-19, Spring.
    2. James J. Heckman, 1976. "The Common Structure of Statistical Models of Truncation, Sample Selection and Limited Dependent Variables and a Simple Estimator for Such Models," NBER Chapters, in: Annals of Economic and Social Measurement, Volume 5, number 4, pages 475-492, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Tsutsui, Shunichi & Mino, Kazuo, 1990. "Nonlinear strategies in dynamic duopolistic competition with sticky prices," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 136-161, October.
    4. Tsur, Yacov & Graham-Tomasi, Theodore, 1991. "The buffer value of groundwater with stochastic surface water supplies," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 201-224, November.
    5. Van Der Ploeg, F., 1987. "Inefficiency of credible strategies in oligopolistic resource markets with uncertainty," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 123-145, March.
    6. Chermak, Janie M. & Patrick, Robert H., 2001. "A Microeconometric Test of the Theory of Exhaustible Resources," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 82-103, July.
    7. Spulber, Daniel F., 1980. "Research and development of a backstop energy technology in a growing economy," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 2(4), pages 199-207, October.
    8. Young, Douglas L. & Van Kooten, G.C., 1988. "Incorporating Risk Into A Dynamic Programming Application: Flexcropping," Regional Research Projects > 1988: S-180 Annual Meeting, March 20-23, 1988, Savannah, Georgia 272781, Regional Research Projects > S-180: An Economic Analysis of Risk Management Strategies for Agricultural Production Firms.
    9. Cheung, Steven N S, 1970. "The Structure of a Contract and the Theory of a Non-exclusive Resource," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 13(1), pages 49-70, April.
    10. R. M. Solow, 1974. "Intergenerational Equity and Exhaustible Resources," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 41(5), pages 29-45.
    11. Robert M. Solow & Frederic Y. Wan, 1976. "Extraction Costs in the Theory of Exhaustible Resources," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 7(2), pages 359-370, Autumn.
    12. Weitzman, Martin L., 1974. "Free access vs private ownership as alternative systems for managing common property," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 8(2), pages 225-234, June.
    13. Ahrens, W. Ashley & Sharma, Vijaya R., 1997. "Trends in Natural Resource Commodity Prices: Deterministic or Stochastic?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 59-74, May.
    14. World Commission on Environment and Development,, 1987. "Our Common Future," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780192820808.
    15. Wirl, Franz & Dockner, Engelbert, 1995. "Leviathan governments and carbon taxes: Costs and potential benefits," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 1215-1236, June.
    16. Nick Hanley & Henk Folmer (ed.), 1998. "Game Theory and the Environment," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1083.
    17. Lewis, Tracy R, 1982. "Sufficient Conditions for Extracting Least Cost Resource First," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(4), pages 1081-1083, July.
    18. Berck, Peter & Perloff, Jeffrey M, 1984. "An Open-Access Fishery with Rational Expectations," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(2), pages 489-506, March.
    19. Halvorsen, Robert & Smith, Tim R, 1984. "On Measuring Natural Resource Scarcity," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 92(5), pages 954-964, October.
    20. Worthington, Virginia E. & Burt, Oscar R. & Brustkern, Richard L., 1985. "Optimal management of a confined groundwater system," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 229-245, September.
    21. Amemiya, Takeshi, 1984. "Tobit models: A survey," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 24(1-2), pages 3-61.
    22. Smith, Vernon L, 1969. "On Models of Commercial Fishing," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 77(2), pages 181-198, March/Apr.
    23. Robert A. Young & Hubert J. Morel-Seytoux & John T. Daubert, 1986. "Evaluating Institutional Alternatives for Managing an Interrelated Stream-Aquifer System," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 68(4), pages 787-797.
    24. Bill Provencher & Oscar Burt, 1994. "A Private Property Rights Regime for the Commons: The Case for Groundwater," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 76(4), pages 875-888.
    25. Atkinson, Scott E. & Halvorsen, Robert, 1986. "The relative efficiency of public and private firms in a regulated environment: The case of U.S. electric utilities," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 281-294, April.
    26. Aigner, Dennis & Lovell, C. A. Knox & Schmidt, Peter, 1977. "Formulation and estimation of stochastic frontier production function models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(1), pages 21-37, July.
    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. Koundouri, Phoebe & Babalos, Vassilis & Stithou, Mavra & Anastasiou, Ioannis, 2011. "A Micro-Econometric Approach to Deriving Use and Non-Use Values of in-situ Groundwater: The Vosvozis Case Study, Greece," MPRA Paper 38266, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Koundouri, Phoebe & Christou, Christina, 2006. "Dynamic adaptation to resource scarcity and backstop availability: theory and application to groundwater," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 50(2), pages 1-19, June.
    3. Phoebe Koundouri, 2009. "Groundwater And Economics: Gisser-Sanchez's Effect Reconsidered," DEOS Working Papers 0905, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    4. Phoebe Koundouri, 2004. "Current Issues in the Economics of Groundwater Resource Management," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(5), pages 703-740, December.
    5. Laukkanen, Marita & Koundouri, Phoebe, 2006. "Competition versus coopertion in groundwater extraction: A stochastic framework with heteregoneous agents," MPRA Paper 41910, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Phoebe Koundouri & Panos Pashardes, 2003. "Hedonic Price Analysis and Selectivity Bias," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 26(1), pages 45-56, September.
    7. Norton, D. & Hynes, S & Doherty, E & Buckley, C & Campbell, D & Stithou, M, 2012. "Using Benefit Transfer Techniques to Estimate the Value of achieving ’Good Ecological’ Status in Irish Water Bodies," Research Reports 210707, National University of Ireland, Galway, Socio-Economic Marine Research Unit.
    8. Phoebe Koundouri & Osiel Gonzalez Davila, 2013. "The Use of Ecosystem Services Approach in Guiding Water Valuation and Management: Inland and Coastal Waters," DEOS Working Papers 1334, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    9. Phoebe Koundouri, 2005. "Design and Implementation of an Integrated Water Management Approach," DEOS Working Papers 0501, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    10. Anastasios Xepapadeas & Phoebe Koundouri, 2004. "Introduction to special section on Groundwater Economics and Policy," DEOS Working Papers 0406, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    11. Ben Groom & Phoebe Koundouri & Celine Nauges & Alban Thomas, 2003. "Irrigation water management under risk: An application to Cyprus," DEOS Working Papers 0306, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    12. Ben Groom & Phoebe Koundouri & Timothy Swanson, 2005. "Cost-benefit analysis and efficient water allocation in Cyprus," DEOS Working Papers 0502, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    13. Phoebe Koundouri & Osiel Davila & Yannis Anastasiou & Antonios Antypas & Theodoros Mavrogiorgis & Aris Mousoulides & Marianna Mousoulidou & Katerina Vasiliou, 2013. "An Econometric Analysis of Agricultural Production, Focusing on the Shadow Price of Groundwater: Policies Towards Socio-Economic Sustainability," DEOS Working Papers 1313, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    14. Ben Groom & Phoebe Koundouri & Timothy Swanson, 2003. "The Watershed Economics Management Approach: An Application to Cyprus," DEOS Working Papers 0311, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    15. Smith, Steven M., 2018. "Economic incentives and conservation: Crowding-in social norms in a groundwater commons," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 147-174.
    16. Ben Groom & Phoebe Koundouri & Celine Nauges & Alban Thomas, 2008. "The story of the moment: risk averse cypriot farmers respond to drought management," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(3), pages 315-326.
    17. Chuan-Zhong Li & Ranjula Bali Swain, 2016. "Growth, Water Resilience, and Sustainability: A DSGE Model Applied to South Africa," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 2(04), pages 1-23, December.
    18. Phoebe Koundouri, 2001. "Watershed Economics: Proposed Methodology For Watershed Management," DEOS Working Papers 0101, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    19. Phoebe Koundouri & Anastasios Xepapadeas, 2004. "Estimating accounting prices for common pool natural resources: A distance function approach," DEOS Working Papers 0405, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    20. Phoebe Koundouri, 2003. "Potential for groundwater management: Gisser-Sanchez effect reconsidered," DEOS Working Papers 0307, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    21. Koundouri, Phoebe & Nauges, Celine, 2005. "On Production Function Estimation with Selectivity and Risk Considerations," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 30(3), pages 1-12, December.

    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. Santiago J. Rubio Jorge & Begoña Casino, 1997. "Strategic behavior and efficiency in a groundwater pumping differential game," Working Papers. Serie EC 1997-18, Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas, S.A. (Ivie).
    2. Phoebe Koundouri, 2004. "Current Issues in the Economics of Groundwater Resource Management," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(5), pages 703-740, December.
    3. Laukkanen, Marita & Koundouri, Phoebe, 2006. "Competition versus coopertion in groundwater extraction: A stochastic framework with heteregoneous agents," MPRA Paper 41910, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Margaret E. Slade & Henry Thille, 2009. "Whither Hotelling: Tests of the Theory of Exhaustible Resources," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 1(1), pages 239-259, September.
    5. Phoebe Koundouri, 2003. "Potential for groundwater management: Gisser-Sanchez effect reconsidered," DEOS Working Papers 0307, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    6. Rubio, Santiago J. & Casino, Begona, 2001. "Competitive versus efficient extraction of a common property resource: The groundwater case," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 25(8), pages 1117-1137, August.
    7. Msangi, Siwa, 2005. "Measuring the Gains to Groundwater Management with Recursive Utility," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19212, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    8. Carraro, Carlo & Marchiori, Carmen & Sgobbi, Alessandra, 2005. "Applications of negotiation theory to water issues," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3641, The World Bank.
    9. Cees Withagen, 1998. "Untested Hypotheses in Non-Renewable Resource Economics," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 11(3), pages 623-634, April.
    10. Spiro, Daniel, 2014. "Resource prices and planning horizons," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 159-175.
    11. Ngo Long, 2011. "Dynamic Games in the Economics of Natural Resources: A Survey," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 115-148, March.
    12. Chandra Kiran B. Krishnamurthy, 2017. "Optimal Management of Groundwater Under Uncertainty: A Unified Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 67(2), pages 351-377, June.
    13. Quentin Couix, 2019. "Natural resources in the theory of production: the Georgescu-Roegen/Daly versus Solow/Stiglitz controversy," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(6), pages 1341-1378, November.
    14. Anna M. Birkenbach & Andreea L. Cojocaru & Frank Asche & Atle G. Guttormsen & Martin D. Smith, 2020. "Seasonal Harvest Patterns in Multispecies Fisheries," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 75(3), pages 631-655, March.
    15. Stahn, Hubert & Tomini, Agnes, 2021. "Externality and common-pool resources: The case of artesian aquifers," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    16. Reinelt, Peter, 2020. "Spatial-dynamic seawater intrusion and pumping cost externalities in a confined aquifer," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    17. Ellis, Christopher J., 2001. "Common Pool Equities: An Arbitrage Based Non-cooperative Solution to the Common Pool Resource Problem," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 140-155, September.
    18. Eggert, Håkan, 2006. "Fisheries Economics and 20 years with Marine Resource Economics: A Citation Analysis," Working Papers in Economics 203, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    19. Santiago Rubio & Begoña Casino, 2003. "Strategic Behavior and Efficiency in the Common Property Extraction of Groundwater," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 26(1), pages 73-87, September.
    20. Salo, Seppo & Tahvonen, Olli, 2001. "Oligopoly equilibria in nonrenewable resource markets," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 671-702, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Natural resources; scarcity; groundwater;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q5 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics
    • A13 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Relation of Economics to Social Values
    • A12 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Relation of Economics to Other Disciplines
    • 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:pra:mprapa:38265. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.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.