IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v70y2011i10p1756-1766.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Complementarity between water pricing, water rights and local water governance: A Bayesian analysis of choice behaviour of farmers in the Krishna river basin, India

Author

Listed:
  • Veettil, Prakashan Chellattan
  • Speelman, Stijn
  • Frija, Aymen
  • Buysse, Jeroen
  • van Huylenbroeck, Guido

Abstract

To ensure efficient water allocation and use, policy designers have adopted various strategies, including price setting, decentralising irrigation water management or improving water rights. Most of these strategies have been applied individually, without considering the complementary relationships between them. This paper uses a discrete choice model to analyse the scope for combinations of tools for irrigation water demand management and farmers' acceptance of these. In terms of local irrigation water governance, the presence or absence of collective irrigation water management, in the form of a Water Users Association, is considered. Water rights are specified in terms of the duration and quality of the entitlement and its transferability. Finally, four types of water pricing methods (area, crop, block and volumetric pricing) are considered. Using a choice experiment, we elicit the most preferred water pricing method, under different water rights situations, at different price levels and under various contexts for local irrigation water governance. Our results indicated that under conditions of improved water rights, preference for volumetric pricing increases, whilst the presence of a Water Users Association reduces this preference. Furthermore, it was found that using an appropriate combination of water demand management tools considerably increases the willingness to pay for a change in scenario.

Suggested Citation

  • Veettil, Prakashan Chellattan & Speelman, Stijn & Frija, Aymen & Buysse, Jeroen & van Huylenbroeck, Guido, 2011. "Complementarity between water pricing, water rights and local water governance: A Bayesian analysis of choice behaviour of farmers in the Krishna river basin, India," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(10), pages 1756-1766, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:70:y:2011:i:10:p:1756-1766
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092180091100187X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Frija, Aymen & Chebil, Ali & Speelman, Stijn & Van Huylenbroeck, Guido, 2008. "Effect of changes in the institutional structure of irrigation water property rights on the willingness to pay of farmers for water: case of Tunisia," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 44422, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Tsur, Yacov & Dinar, Ariel, 1997. "The Relative Efficiency and Implementation Costs of Alternative Methods for Pricing Irrigation Water," World Bank Economic Review, World Bank Group, vol. 11(2), pages 243-262, May.
    3. Ziv Bar-Shira & Israel Finkelshtain & Avi Simhon, 2006. "Block-Rate versus Uniform Water Pricing in Agriculture: An Empirical Analysis," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(4), pages 986-999.
    4. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555, March.
    5. Nick Hanley & Robert Wright & Gary Koop, 2002. "Modelling Recreation Demand Using Choice Experiments: Climbing in Scotland," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 22(3), pages 449-466, July.
    6. McCulloch, Robert E. & Polson, Nicholas G. & Rossi, Peter E., 2000. "A Bayesian analysis of the multinomial probit model with fully identified parameters," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 99(1), pages 173-193, November.
    7. Evy Mettepenningen & Ann Verspecht & Guido Van Huylenbroeck, 2009. "Measuring private transaction costs of European agri-environmental schemes," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 52(5), pages 649-667.
    8. Berbel, J. & Gomez-Limon, J. A., 2000. "The impact of water-pricing policy in Spain: an analysis of three irrigated areas," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 219-238, March.
    9. Barton, David N. & Bergland, Olvar, 2010. "Valuing irrigation water using a choice experiment: an ‘individual status quo’ modelling of farm specific water scarcity," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(03), pages 321-340, June.
    10. Rosen, Sherwin, 1974. "Hedonic Prices and Implicit Markets: Product Differentiation in Pure Competition," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 82(1), pages 34-55, Jan.-Feb..
    11. Joan Pujol & Meri Raggi & Davide Viaggi, 2006. "The potential impact of markets for irrigation water in Italy and Spain: a comparison of two study areas ," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 50(3), pages 361-380, September.
    12. Hanley, Nick & Mourato, Susana & Wright, Robert E, 2001. " Choice Modelling Approaches: A Superior Alternative for Environmental Valuation?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(3), pages 435-462, July.
    13. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74, pages 132-132.
    14. Speelman, Stijn & Frija, Aymen & Buysse, Jeroen & Van Huylenbroeck, Guido, 2010. "The Importance of Water Property Rights: Lessons from South Africa and Tunisia," 2010 AAAE Third Conference/AEASA 48th Conference, September 19-23, 2010, Cape Town, South Africa 95954, African Association of Agricultural Economists (AAAE);Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA).
    15. McCulloch, Robert & Rossi, Peter E., 1994. "An exact likelihood analysis of the multinomial probit model," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 64(1-2), pages 207-240.
    16. Jayson L. Lusk & Ted C. Schroeder, 2004. "Are Choice Experiments Incentive Compatible? A Test with Quality Differentiated Beef Steaks," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(2), pages 467-482.
    17. Chokri Dridi & Madhu Khanna, 2005. "Irrigation Technology Adoption and Gains from Water Trading under Asymmetric Information," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(2), pages 289-301.
    18. Lin Crase & Brian Dollery, 2006. "Water rights: a comparison of the impacts of urban and irrigation reforms in Australia," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 50(3), pages 451-462, September.
    19. Ray, I., 2007. "Get the prices right: a model of water prices and irrigation efficiency in Maharashtra, India," IWMI Books, Reports H040603, International Water Management Institute.
    20. Louviere,Jordan J. & Hensher,David A. & Swait,Joffre D., 2000. "Stated Choice Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521788304, April.
    21. Imai, Kosuke & van Dyk, David A., 2005. "A Bayesian analysis of the multinomial probit model using marginal data augmentation," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 124(2), pages 311-334, February.
    22. Chung-Ki Lee & Seung-Jun Kwak, 2007. "Valuing drinking water quality improvement using a Bayesian analysis of the multinomial probit model," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(4), pages 255-259.
    23. Molle, Francois & Berkoff, J., 2007. "Water pricing in irrigation: mapping the debate in the light of experience," IWMI Books, Reports H040601, International Water Management Institute.
    24. Speelman, Stijn & Farolfi, Stefano & Frija, Aymen & D'Haese, Marijke & D'Haese, Luc, 2010. "The impact of the water rights system on smallholder irrigators' willingness to pay for water in Limpopo province, South Africa," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(04), pages 465-483, August.
    25. Shiferaw, Bekele & Reddy, V. Ratna & Wani, Suhas P., 2008. "Watershed externalities, shifting cropping patterns and groundwater depletion in Indian semi-arid villages: The effect of alternative water pricing policies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 327-340, September.
    26. Gro Steine & Kari Kolstad, 2006. "Consumers' Willingness to Pay for the Color of Salmon: A Choice Experiment with Real Economic Incentives," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(4), pages 1050-1061.
    27. Varela-Ortega, Consuelo & M. Sumpsi, Jose & Garrido, Alberto & Blanco, Maria & Iglesias, Eva, 1998. "Water pricing policies, public decision making and farmers' response: implications for water policy," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 19(1-2), pages 193-202, September.
    28. Alfnes, Frode & Guttormsen, Atle G. & Steine, Gro & Kolstad, Kari, 2006. "Ajae Appendix: Consumers’ Willingness To Pay For The Color Of Salmon: A Choice Experiment With Real Economic Incentives," American Journal of Agricultural Economics Appendices, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(4), November.
    29. Yeonbae Kim & Tai-Yoo Kim & Eunnyeong Heo, 2003. "Bayesian estimation of multinomial probit models of work trip choice," Transportation, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 351-365, August.
    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. Rui Fragoso & Carlos Marques, 2013. "The Economic Impact of Alternative Water Pricing Policies in Alentejo Region," CEFAGE-UE Working Papers 2013_02, University of Evora, CEFAGE-UE (Portugal).
    2. Speelman, Stijn & Veettil, Prakashan Chellattan, 2013. "Heterogeneous preferences for water rights reforms among smallholder irrigators in South Africa," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), issue 2, August.
    3. Ochieng, Dennis O. & Veettil, Prakashan C. & Qaim, Matin, 2017. "Farmers’ preferences for supermarket contracts in Kenya," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 100-111.
    4. Speelman, Stijn & Veettil, Prakashan Chellatan, 2012. "Comparing the scope for irrigation water rights reforms in India and South Africa," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 126731, International Association of Agricultural Economists.

    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:eee:ecolec:v:70:y:2011:i:10:p:1756-1766. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.