IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/aareaj/343083.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Estimating non-market values of protecting groundwater in a constrained environment

Author

Listed:
  • Lan, Le
  • Iftekhar, Md Sayed
  • Schilizzi, Steven
  • Fogarty, James

Abstract

In groundwater-constrained areas, reallocating groundwater away from agriculture to achieve environmental outcomes has become a popular top-down regulatory approach. However, little attention has been paid to understanding public preferences for such policies. Using a choice experiment, we explore community preferences for different components of a groundwater allocation management program affecting agriculture in a severely water-constrained but highly groundwater-dependent environment, Western Australia. We find strong community preferences for a substantial reallocation away from agriculture, with compensation based on ecological benefits, regular monitoring through meters and a medium-level penalty for those that over-extract. The estimated non-market value to implement a groundwater management program comprising the preferred structure is up to AU$61 million per year. This result demonstrates the value of considering community preferences when designing groundwater management policies.

Suggested Citation

  • Lan, Le & Iftekhar, Md Sayed & Schilizzi, Steven & Fogarty, James, 2024. "Estimating non-market values of protecting groundwater in a constrained environment," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 68(02), January.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aareaj:343083
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.343083
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/343083/files/Estimating%20non-market%20values.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.343083?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. F Alpizar & F Carlsson & P Martinsson, 2003. "Using Choice Experiments for Non-Market Valuation," Economic Issues Journal Articles, Economic Issues, vol. 8(1), pages 83-110, March.
    2. Adamson, David & Loch, Adam, 2018. "Achieving environmental flows where buyback is constrained," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 62(01), January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Rocío del Pilar Moreno-Sánchez & Jorge H. Maldonado & Camilo Andrés Gutiérrez & Melissa Rubio, 2013. "Valoración de Áreas Marinas Protegidas desde la perspectiva de los usuarios de recursos: conciliando enfoques cuantitativos individuales con enfoques cualitativos colectivos," Documentos CEDE 11936, Universidad de los Andes, Facultad de Economía, CEDE.
    2. Adam Finn & Stuart McFadyen & Colin Hoskins, 2003. "Valuing the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 27(3), pages 177-192, November.
    3. Nguyen, Thanh Cong & Le, Hoa Thu & Nguyen, Hang Dieu & Ngo, Mai Thanh & Nguyen, Hong Quang, 2021. "Examining ordering effects and strategic behaviour in a discrete choice experiment," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 394-413.
    4. Asrat, Sinafikeh & Yesuf, Mahmud & Carlsson, Fredrik & Wale, Edilegnaw, 2009. "Farmers’ Preferences for Crop Variety Traits: Lessons for On-Farm Conservation and Technology Adoption," RFF Working Paper Series dp-09-15-efd, Resources for the Future.
    5. Carlsson, Fredrik & Kataria, Mitesh & Lampi, Elina & Löfgren, Åsa & Sterner, Thomas, 2011. "Is fairness blind?--The effect of framing on preferences for effort-sharing rules," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(8), pages 1529-1535, June.
    6. Fredrik Carlsson & Mitesh Kataria & Elina Lampi, 2011. "Do EPA Administrators Recommend Environmental Policies That Citizens Want?," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 87(1), pages 60-74.
    7. Fredrik Carlsson & Mitesh Kataria, 2008. "Assessing Management Options for Weed Control with Demanders and Non-Demanders in a Choice Experiment," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 84(3), pages 517-528.
    8. repec:ehu:biltok:5583 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Eggert, Håkan & Kataria, Mitesh & Lampi, Elina, 2018. "Difference in Preferences or Multiple Preference Orderings? Comparing Choices of Environmental Bureaucrats, Recreational Anglers, and the Public," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 131-141.
    10. Fredrik Carlsson & Dinky Daruvala & Henrik Jaldell, 2010. "Value of Statistical Life and Cause of Accident: A Choice Experiment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(6), pages 975-986, June.
    11. Carole Ropars-Collet & Mélody Leplat & Philippe Le Goffe & Marie Lesueur, 2015. "La pêche professionnelle est-elle un facteur d’attractivité récréative sur le littoral ?," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 66(4), pages 729-754.
    12. Fredrik Carlsson & Jorge García & Åsa Löfgren, 2010. "Conformity and the Demand for Environmental Goods," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 47(3), pages 407-421, November.
    13. Fredrik Carlsson & Peter Frykblom & Carl-Johan Lagerkvist, 2004. "Consumer Benefits of Labels and Bans on GMO Foods: An Emprical Analysis Using Choice Experiments," Working Papers 04-02, Department of Economics, Appalachian State University.
    14. Jegnie, Alemken & Hailu, Atakelty & Burton, Michael P., 2017. "Boat-based and other recreational fishing in Western Australia: Analysis of site choice, access values and bag limit effects," Working Papers 257167, University of Western Australia, School of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    15. Joseph Cook & Dale Whittington & Do Gia Canh & F. Reed Johnson & Andrew Nyamete, 2007. "Reliability Of Stated Preferences For Cholera And Typhoid Vaccines With Time To Think In Hue, Vietnam," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 45(1), pages 100-114, January.
    16. Högberg, Martina, 2007. "Eco-driving? A discrete choice experiment on valuation of car attributes," Working Papers 2007:13, Swedish National Road & Transport Research Institute (VTI).
    17. Carlsson, Fredrik & Martinsson, Peter, 2008. "Does it matter when a power outage occurs? -- A choice experiment study on the willingness to pay to avoid power outages," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 1232-1245, May.
    18. Nganje, William E. & Hearne, Robert R. & Orth, Michael & Gustafson, Cole R., 2004. "Using Choice Experiments To Elicit Farmers Preferences? For Crop And Health Insurance," 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO 20357, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    19. Rai, Rajesh Kumar & Scarborough, Helen, 2012. "Estimating the public benefits of mitigating damages caused by invasive plant species in a subsistence economy," 2012 Conference (56th), February 7-10, 2012, Fremantle, Australia 124421, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    20. Chen, Junhong & Ortega, David L. & Wang, Hong Holly, 2018. "Does Animal Welfare Matter to Consumers in Emerging Countries? Evidence from China," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 274069, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    21. Lydia Chikumbi & Milan Scasny, 2022. "Does 'price framing' influence empirical estimates in Discrete Choice Experiments: The case study for the South African wine industry," ERSA Working Paper Series, Economic Research Southern Africa, vol. 0.

    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:aareaj:343083. 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/aaresea.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.