IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/waterr/v25y2011i6p1615-1633.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Environmental and Resource Costs Under Water Scarcity Conditions: An Estimation in the Context of the European Water Framework Directive

Author

Listed:
  • Julia Martin-Ortega

    ()

  • Giacomo Giannoccaro
  • Julio Berbel

Abstract

The European Water Framework Directive (WFD) requires the good ecological status of surface water bodies, which implies the improvement of both their physicochemical condition, as well as their flow and continuity. The WFD prescribes the assessment of environmental and resource costs and benefits associated with implementing these improvements. The recent literature focuses almost exclusively on the assessment of the economic values related to quality aspects. However, in much of southern Europe, fulfilling the WFD goals will greatly depend on maintaining sufficient water flow, as well. This study aims to fill this gap by assessing the non-market value of allocating enough water to the environment to ensure environmental services are sustained when water is scarce. The non-market value of guaranteeing water supply for secondary household uses is also estimated. Using the Guadalquivir River Basin in Spain as a case study, a choice experiment is applied with scenarios characterized by varying water flow levels and accompanying environmental impacts, and a different frequency of household water restrictions. The results show that the population derives significant benefits not only from the direct use of water, but that also holds non-use values related to the ecological status, although the latter has a considerably lower impact on consumer surplus. Additionally, we conclude that the costs of implementing the water saving measures currently included in the Program of Measures seem to be proportionate to its benefits in this case. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Suggested Citation

  • Julia Martin-Ortega & Giacomo Giannoccaro & Julio Berbel, 2011. "Environmental and Resource Costs Under Water Scarcity Conditions: An Estimation in the Context of the European Water Framework Directive," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 25(6), pages 1615-1633, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:waterr:v:25:y:2011:i:6:p:1615-1633
    DOI: 10.1007/s11269-010-9764-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11269-010-9764-z
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    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. Blamey, Russell K. & Gordon, Jenny & Chapman, Ross, 1999. "Choice modelling: assessing the environmental values of water supply options," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 43(3), pages 1-21, September.
    2. Nick Hanley & Robert Wright & Vic Adamowicz, 1998. "Using Choice Experiments to Value the Environment," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 11(3), pages 413-428, April.
    3. Ferrini, Silvia & Scarpa, Riccardo, 2007. "Designs with a priori information for nonmarket valuation with choice experiments: A Monte Carlo study," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 342-363, May.
    4. Scarpa, Riccardo & Rose, John M., 2008. "Design efficiency for non-market valuation with choice modelling: how to measure it, what to report and why," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 52(3), pages 1-30.
    5. Hausman, Jerry & McFadden, Daniel, 1984. "Specification Tests for the Multinomial Logit Model," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(5), pages 1219-1240, September.
    6. 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.
    7. Roy Brouwer & Julia Martin-Ortega & RJulio Berbel, 2010. "Spatial Preference Heterogeneity: A Choice Experiment," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 86(3).
    8. Darla Hatton MacDonald & Mark Morrison & Mary Barnes, 2010. "Willingness to Pay and Willingness to Accept Compensation for Changes in Urban Water Customer Service Standards," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 24(12), pages 3145-3158, September.
    9. Ana Iglesias & Luis Garrote & Francisco Flores & Marta Moneo, 2007. "Challenges to Manage the Risk of Water Scarcity and Climate Change in the Mediterranean," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 21(5), pages 775-788, May.
    10. Rolfe, John & Bennett, Jeff & Louviere, Jordan, 2000. "Choice modelling and its potential application to tropical rainforest preservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 289-302, November.
    11. Mark Morrison & Jeff Bennett & Russell Blamey & Jordan Louviere, 2002. "Choice Modeling and Tests of Benefit Transfer," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 84(1), pages 161-170.
    12. Daniel McFadden & Kenneth Train, 2000. "Mixed MNL models for discrete response," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(5), pages 447-470.
    13. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521747387, August.
    14. M. Genius & E. Hatzaki & E. Kouromichelaki & G. Kouvakis & S. Nikiforaki & K. Tsagarakis, 2008. "Evaluating Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Improved Potable Water Quality and Quantity," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 22(12), pages 1825-1834, December.
    15. Stefanos Xenarios & Kostas Bithas, 2009. "Welfare Improvisation from the Receiving Waters of Urban Wastewater Systems in the Context of the Water Framework Directive," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 23(5), pages 981-1000, March.
    16. Rolfe, John & Bennett, Jeff, 2009. "The impact of offering two versus three alternatives in choice modelling experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(4), pages 1140-1148, February.
    17. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74, pages 132-132.
    18. Bradley Jorgensen & Geoffrey Syme & Brian Bishop & Blair Nancarrow, 1999. "Protest Responses in Contingent Valuation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 14(1), pages 131-150, July.
    19. Martin-Ortega, Julia & Berbel, Julio & Brouwer, Roy, 2009. "Valoración económica de los beneficios ambientales de no mercado derivados de la mejora de la calidad del agua: una estimación en aplicación de la Directiva Marco del Agua al Guadalquivir," Economia Agraria y Recursos Naturales, Spanish Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 9(01), pages 1-26.
    20. Whitehead, John C. & Groothuis, Peter A. & Blomquist, Glenn C., 1993. "Testing for non-response and sample selection bias in contingent valuation : Analysis of a combination phone/mail survey," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 215-220.
    21. Louviere, Jordan J & Hensher, David A, 1983. "Using Discrete Choice Models with Experimental Design Data to Forecast Consumer Demand for a Unique Cultural Event," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 10(3), pages 348-361, December.
    22. Katia Karousakis & Ekin Birol, 2006. "Investigating Household Preferences for Kerbside Recycling Services in London: A Choice Experiment Approach," Environmental Economy and Policy Research Working Papers 18.2006, University of Cambridge, Department of Land Economics, revised 2006.
    23. Fredrik Carlsson & Peter Martinsson, 2003. "Design techniques for stated preference methods in health economics," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(4), pages 281-294, April.
    24. Blamey, R. K. & Bennett, J. W. & Louviere, J. J. & Morrison, M. D. & Rolfe, J., 2000. "A test of policy labels in environmental choice modelling studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 269-286, February.
    25. R. Carballo & J. Cancela & G. Iglesias & A. Marín & X. Neira & T. Cuesta, 2009. "WFD Indicators and Definition of the Ecological Status of Rivers," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 23(11), pages 2231-2247, September.
    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. de Ayala, Amaia & Hoyos, David & Mariel, Petr, 2015. "Suitability of discrete choice experiments for landscape management under the European Landscape Convention," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 79-96.
    2. Alfonso Expósito, 2019. "Valuing Households’ Willingness to Pay for Water Transfers from the Irrigation Sector: A Case Study of the City of Seville (Southern Spain)," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 11(24), pages 1-18, December.
    3. Alcon, Francisco & Tapsuwan, Sorada & Brouwer, Roy & de Miguel, María Dolores, 2014. "A choice experiment of farmer’s acceptance and adoption of irrigation water supply management policies," 2014 International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia 183089, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. María Borrego-Marín & Carlos Gutiérrez-Martín & Julio Berbel, 2016. "Estimation of Cost Recovery Ratio for Water Services Based on the System of Environmental-Economic Accounting for Water," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 30(2), pages 767-783, January.
    5. I. Fernández García & P. Montesinos & E. Camacho Poyato & J.A. Rodríguez Díaz, 2016. "Incorporating the Irrigation Demand Simultaneity in the Optimal Operation of Pressurized Networks with Several Water Supply Points," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 30(3), pages 1085-1099, February.
    6. Silvestre García Jalón, 2020. "FlowRegEnvCost: An R Package for Assessing the Environmental Cost of River Flow Regulation," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 34(2), pages 675-684, January.
    7. María M. Borrego-Marín & Carlos Gutiérrez-Martín & Julio Berbel, 2016. "Estimation of Cost Recovery Ratio for Water Services Based on the System of Environmental-Economic Accounting for Water," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 30(2), pages 767-783, January.
    8. Satoshi Nakano & Kazuhiko Nishimura, 2014. "Marginal Value Estimation for the Attributes of the Tameikes via Choice Experiment," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 28(1), pages 65-81, January.
    9. Silvestre García de Jalón & Marta González del Tánago & Carlos Alonso & Diego García de Jalón, 2017. "The Environmental Costs of Water Flow Regulation: an Innovative Approach Based on the ‘Polluter Pays’ Principle," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 31(9), pages 2809-2822, July.
    10. Borrego-Marín, María M. & Berbel, J., 2019. "Cost-benefit analysis of irrigation modernization in Guadalquivir River Basin," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 416-423.
    11. Francisco González-Gómez & Miguel García‐Rubio & Francisco Alcalá-Olid & M. Ortega-Díaz, 2013. "Outsourcing and Efficiency in the Management of Rural Water Services," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 27(3), pages 731-747, February.
    12. Alfonso Expósito & Julio Berbel, 2017. "Why Is Water Pricing Ineffective for Deficit Irrigation Schemes? A Case Study in Southern Spain," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 31(3), pages 1047-1059, February.
    13. Klaus Glenk & Julia Martin-Ortega & Manuel Pulido-Velazquez & Jacqueline Potts, 2015. "Inferring Attribute Non-attendance from Discrete Choice Experiments: Implications for Benefit Transfer," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 60(4), pages 497-520, April.

    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:spr:waterr:v:25:y:2011:i:6:p:1615-1633. 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: (Sonal Shukla) or (Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.