IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jagaec/v2y1970i01p139-145_00.html

A Proposed Procedure for Distributing Assessments Among Beneficiaries of Small Watershed Projects

Author

Listed:
  • Lacewell, Ronald D.
  • Eidman, Vernon R.

Abstract

Conservancy districts can plan and apply land treatment and structural measures to reduce flooding and associated damages. The Conservancy District Act permits conservancy districts to appraise benefits and levy assessments to pay the cost of installing, operating, and maintaining works of flood protection not included in legislative appropriations. We are concerned with the method whereby these specified costs are distributed among flood plain farmers. The assessment criterion is: Each beneficiary shall be assessed in relation to the proportion of benefits received. That is, flood plain farmers are to pay the proportion of specified flood protection costs that equal the proportion of total benefits received. The objective of assessing is consistent and equitable, but there is yet to be developed a method for computing assessments which meet this norm or objective.

Suggested Citation

  • Lacewell, Ronald D. & Eidman, Vernon R., 1970. "A Proposed Procedure for Distributing Assessments Among Beneficiaries of Small Watershed Projects," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(1), pages 139-145, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:jagaec:v:2:y:1970:i:01:p:139-145_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0081305200009948/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Pauline Bremond & Frédéric Grelot & Anne-Laurence Agenais, 2013. "Review Article: "Flood damage assessment on agricultural areas: review and analysis of existing methods"," Working Papers hal-00783552, HAL.

    More about this item

    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:cup:jagaec:v:2:y:1970:i:01:p:139-145_00. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/aae .

    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.