IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this book

Australian’s Urban Water Sector


  • Commission, Productivity

    () (Productivity Commission)


The Productivity Commission’s inquiry report — Australia’s Urban Water Sector — was released in October 2011. In recent times, the urban water sector has faced drought, growing populations and ageing assets. Governments have largely responded with prolonged and severe water restrictions and investments in desalination capacity. The costs to consumers and the community have been large. Water restrictions are likely to have cost in excess of a billion dollars per year (nationally) from the lost value of consumption alone. Inefficient supply augmentation in Melbourne and Perth, for example, could cost consumers and communities up to $4.2 billion over 20 years. Large government grants for infrastructure may have led to perverse outcomes. Conflicting objectives and unclear roles and responsibilities of governments, water utilities and regulators have led to inefficient allocation of water resources, misdirected investment, undue reliance on water restrictions and costly water conservation programs. Therefore, the largest gains are likely to come initially from establishing clear objectives, improving the performance of institutions with respect to roles and responsibilities, governance, regulation, competitive procurement of supply, and pricing, rather than trying to create a competitive market as in the electricity sector. To implement the recommended universal reforms, governments should: clarify that the overarching objective for policy in the sector is the efficient provision of water, wastewater and stormwater services so as to maximise net benefits to the community; ◦ensure that procurement, pricing and regulatory frameworks are aligned with the overarching objective and assigned to the appropriate organisation; put in place best practice arrangements for policy making, regulatory agencies, and water utilities; and put in place performance monitoring of utilities and monitor progress on reform.

Suggested Citation

  • Commission, Productivity, 2011. "Australian’s Urban Water Sector," Inquiry Reports, Productivity Commission, Government of Australia, volume 2, number 55.
  • Handle: RePEc:ris:prodir:0055

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    File Function: Publication website
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. R. H. Coase, 2013. "The Problem of Social Cost," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(4), pages 837-877.
    2. Telser,Lester G., 1987. "A Theory of Efficient Cooperation and Competition," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521306195, March.
    3. Bittlingmayer, George, 1985. "Did Antitrust Policy Cause the Great Merger Wave?," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 28(1), pages 77-118, April.
    4. D. K. Ryoo & H. A. Thanopoulou, 1999. "Liner alliances in the globalization era: a strategic tool for Asian container carriers," Maritime Policy & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(4), pages 349-367, October.
    5. Mukesh Eswaran, 1997. "Cartel Unity over the Business Cycle," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 30(3), pages 644-672, August.
    6. B. Douglas Bernheim, 1984. "Strategic Deterrence of Sequential Entry into an Industry," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 15(1), pages 1-11, Spring.
    7. Brueckner, Jan K., 2001. "The economics of international codesharing: an analysis of airline alliances," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(10), pages 1475-1498, December.
    8. Jim Engle-Warnick & Bradley Ruffle, 2002. "Buyer Countervailing Power versus Monopoly Power: Evidence from Experimental Posted-Offer Markets," Economics Papers 2002-W14, Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
    9. Xavier Vives, 2001. "Oligopoly Pricing: Old Ideas and New Tools," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 026272040x, January.
    10. Alejandro Micco & Natalia Pérez, 2002. "Determinants of Maritime Transport Costs," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 3700, Inter-American Development Bank.
    11. Hercules E Haralambides & Pierre Cariou & Marco Benacchio, 2002. "Costs, Benefits and Pricing of Dedicated Container Terminals," Maritime Economics & Logistics, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association of Maritime Economists (IAME), vol. 4(1), pages 21-34, March.
    12. R. G. McLellan, 1997. "Bigger vessels: How big is too big?," Maritime Policy & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(2), pages 193-211, January.
    13. Mike Fusillo, 2003. "Excess Capacity and Entry Deterrence: The Case of Ocean Liner Shipping Markets," Maritime Economics & Logistics, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association of Maritime Economists (IAME), vol. 5(2), pages 100-115, June.
    14. James D. Dana & Jr., 1998. "Advance-Purchase Discounts and Price Discrimination in Competitive Markets," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 106(2), pages 395-422, April.
    15. Carsten Fink & Aaditya Mattoo & Ileana Cristina Neagu, 2002. "Trade in International Maritime Services: How Much Does Policy Matter?," World Bank Economic Review, World Bank Group, vol. 16(1), pages 81-108, June.
    16. Andriamananjara, Soamiely & Arce, Hugh M. & Ferrantino, Michael J., 2004. "Transshipment in the United States," Working Papers 15871, United States International Trade Commission, Office of Economics.
    17. A. Michael Spence, 1977. "Entry, Capacity, Investment and Oligopolistic Pricing," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 8(2), pages 534-544, Autumn.
    18. Jansson, Jan Owen & Shneerson, Dan, 1978. "Economies of Scale of General Cargo Ships," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 60(2), pages 287-293, May.
    19. Brian Slack & Claude Comtois & Robert McCalla, 2002. "Strategic alliances in the container shipping industry: a global perspective," Maritime Policy & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(1), pages 65-76, January.
    20. McWilliams, Abagail & Keith, Kristen, 1994. "The genesis of the trusts : Rationalization in empty core markets," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 245-267, June.
    21. Notteboom Theo E., 2004. "Container Shipping And Ports: An Overview," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 3(2), pages 1-21, June.
    22. Sjostrom, William, 1989. "Collusion in Ocean Shipping: A Test of Monopoly and Empty Core Model s," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 97(5), pages 1160-1179, October.
    23. Lee Darin, 2003. "An Assessment of Some Recent Criticisms of the U.S. Airline Industry," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 2(1), pages 1-9, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


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

    Cited by:

    1. Byrnes, Joel, 2013. "A short institutional and regulatory history of the Australian urban water sector," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 11-19.
    2. Grafton, R. Quentin & Chu, Long & Kompas, Tom, 2015. "Optimal water tariffs and supply augmentation for cost-of-service regulated water utilities," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 54-62.
    3. Sahin, Oz & Stewart, Rodney A. & Giurco, Damien & Porter, Michael G., 2017. "Renewable hydropower generation as a co-benefit of balanced urban water portfolio management and flood risk mitigation," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 68(P2), pages 1076-1087.
    4. Mirrlees-Black, Jonathan, 2014. "Reflections on RPI-X regulation in OECD countries," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 197-202.

    More about this item


    urban water; drinking water; waste water; water utilities; COAG; National Water Initiative; water reform framework; water security; water policy; water catchments; water resource planning; water supply services; water management practices;

    JEL classification:

    • Q00 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - General - - - General
    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General


    Access and download statistics


    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:ris:prodir:0055. 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: (MAPS). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

    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.