Valuing Options in Water Markets: A Laboratory Investigation
Risk and reliability dominate water supply discussions in the arid western United States in light of increasing demand and finite, weather-dependant supply. Thus water agencies increasingly turn to contractual mechanisms such as dry-year options to manage supply risk in advance of need. Although a few water agencies across the West have implemented dry-year options, sufficient data for conventional econometric analysis do not yet exist. We thus utilize experimental economics to analyze the effect of annual dry-year options on water markets. We consider how market structure (competitive versus monopsony power) and option contract availability affect water price and allocation within a market and find that realized gains from trade are on average higher when options can be traded, by 46% in competitive markets and by 63% in dominant buyer markets. Important for the political feasibility of such markets, we also find that gains from trade, once an options market is available, are much more evenly distributed between the single buyer and the many sellers in the case of monopsony.
|Date of creation:||Dec 2008|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Clark B-320, Fort Collins, CO 80523|
Web page: http://dare.colostate.edu/
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Howitt, Richard E. & Hansen, Kristiana, 2005. "The Evolving Western Water Markets," Choices, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 20(1).
- Alvin E. Roth, 2007.
"What Have We Learned From Market Design?,"
NBER Working Papers
13530, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Alvin E. Roth, 2009. "What Have We Learned from Market Design?," Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 9(1), pages 79 - 112.
- Alvin E. Roth, 2009. "What Have We Learned from Market Design?," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 9, pages 79-112 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Alvin E. Roth, 2008. "What Have We Learned from Market Design?," Innovations: Technology, Governance, Globalization, MIT Press, vol. 3(1), pages 119-147, January.
- AlvinE. Roth, 2008. "What Have We Learned from Market Design?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(527), pages 285-310, 03.
- James J. Murphy & Ariel Dinar & Richard E. Howitt & Erin Mastrangelo & Stephen J. Rassenti & Vernon L. Smith, 2006.
"Mechanisms for Addressing Third-Party Impacts Resulting From Voluntary Water Transfers,"
in: Using Experimental Methods in Environmental and Resource Economics, chapter 5
Edward Elgar Publishing.
- Murphy, James J. & Dinar, Ariel & Howitt, Richard E. & Mastrangelo, Erin & Rassenti, Stephen J. & Smith, Vernon L., 2002. "Mechanisms For Addressing Third-Party Impacts Resulting From Voluntary Water Transfers," 2002 Annual meeting, July 28-31, Long Beach, CA 19812, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
- Forsythe, Robert & Palfrey, Thomas R & Plott, Charles R, 1982.
"Asset Valuation in an Experimental Market,"
Econometric Society, vol. 50(3), pages 537-67, May.
- Andrew Muller, R. & Mestelman, Stuart & Spraggon, John & Godby, Rob, 2002. "Can Double Auctions Control Monopoly and Monopsony Power in Emissions Trading Markets?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 70-92, July.
- Ruffle, Bradley J., 2005. "Tax and subsidy incidence equivalence theories: experimental evidence from competitive markets," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(8), pages 1519-1542, August.
- Urs Fischbacher, 2007. "z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 10(2), pages 171-178, June.
- Hanan G. Jacoby & Rinku Murgai & Saeed Ur Rehman, 2004.
"Monopoly Power and Distribution in Fragmented Markets: The Case of Groundwater,"
Review of Economic Studies,
Oxford University Press, vol. 71(3), pages 783-808.
- Jacoby, Hanan G. & Murgai, Rinku & Rehman, Saeed Ur, 2001. "Monopoly power and distribution in fragmented markets : the case of groundwater," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2628, The World Bank.
- Ronald G. Cummings & Charles A. Holt & Susan K. Laury, 2004. "Using laboratory experiments for policymaking: An example from the Georgia irrigation reduction auction," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(2), pages 341-363.
- Klaus Abbink & Bettina Rockenbach, 2005.
"Option Pricing by Students and Professional Traders: A Behavioural Investigation,"
2005-12, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
- Klaus Abbink & Bettina Rockenbach, 2006. "Option pricing by students and professional traders: a behavioural investigation," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(6), pages 497-510.
- Klaus Abbink & Bettina Rockenbach, 2005. "Option Pricing by Students and Professional Traders: A Behavioural Investigation," Discussion Papers 2005-12, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
- Shanley, James & Grossman, Philip J., 2007. "Paradise to parking lots: Creation versus maintenance of a public good," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 523-536, August.
- Dale J. Menkhaus & Owen R. Phillips & Chris T. Bastian, 2003. "Impacts of Alternative Trading Institutions and Methods of Delivery on Laboratory Market Outcomes," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(5), pages 1323-1329.
- Alberto Garrido, 2007. "Water markets design and evidence from experimental economics," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 38(3), pages 311-330, November.
- Marianne LEFEBVRE & Lata GANGADHARAN & Sophie THOYER, 2011. "Do Security-differentiated Water Rights Improve Efficiency?," Working Papers 11-14, LAMETA, Universtiy of Montpellier, revised Jun 2012.
- Sunder, S., 1992. "Experimental Asset Markets: A Survey," GSIA Working Papers 1992-19, Carnegie Mellon University, Tepper School of Business.
- James Murphy & Ariel Dinar & Richard Howitt & Steven Rassenti & Vernon Smith, 2000. "The Design of ``Smart'' Water Market Institutions Using Laboratory Experiments," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 17(4), pages 375-394, December.
- Stuart Mestelman & Andrew Muller, 1997.
"Emissions Trading with Shares and Coupons when Control over Discharges is Uncertain,"
McMaster Experimental Economics Laboratory Publications
1997-01, McMaster University.
- Godby, Robert W. & Mestelman, Stuart & Muller, R. Andrew & Welland, J. Douglas, 1997. "Emissions Trading with Shares and Coupons when Control over Discharges Is Uncertain," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 359-381, March.
- Ellen Hanak, 2003. "Who Should Be Allowed to Sell Water in California? Third-Party Issues and the Water Market," PPIC Research Reports, Public Policy Institute of California, number wtrmkt.
- Jamie Brown-Kruse & Steven R Elliot & Rob Godby, 1995. "Strategic Manipulation of Pollution Permit Markets: An Experimental Approach," Department of Economics Working Papers 1995-03, McMaster University.
- Villinski, Michele Terese, 2003. "A framework for pricing multiple-exercise option contracts for water," Doctoral Dissertations 162235, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
- Bjornlund, Henning & McKay, Jennifer, 2002. "Aspects of water markets for developing countries: experiences from Australia, Chile, and the US," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(04), pages 769-795, October.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:csdawp:108722. 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: (AgEcon Search)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.