IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/iaae12/126731.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Comparing the scope for irrigation water rights reforms in India and South Africa

Author

Listed:
  • Speelman, Stijn
  • Veettil, Prakashan Chellatan

Abstract

In many countries growing water scarcity puts pressure on the irrigation sector, as main consumptive user, to improve performance. In this context, the need for research on institutional policy options for improved water allocation and governance is more and more recognized. Exante evaluation of institutional changes, such as reforms in water rights systems, is however a challenging task. In this article two case studies are considered. Choice modelling is used to evaluate the preferences of irrigators in India and South Africa for different water rights configurations. By comparing the results of both case studies insight is gained on the effects of context specific factors. Both the information from the individual choice experiments as the comparison across cases reveals interesting information for policy makers to guide institutional reforms.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:iaae12:126731
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.126731
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/126731/files/Speelman.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.126731?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ray Challen, 2000. "Institutions, Transaction Costs and Environmental Policy," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1961.
    2. McCann, Laura & Colby, Bonnie & Easter, K. William & Kasterine, Alexander & Kuperan, K.V., 2005. "Transaction cost measurement for evaluating environmental policies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(4), pages 527-542, March.
    3. Qureshi, M. Ejaz & Shi, Tian & Qureshi, Sumaira E. & Proctor, Wendy, 2009. "Removing barriers to facilitate efficient water markets in the Murray-Darling Basin of Australia," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 96(11), pages 1641-1651, November.
    4. Unknown, 1967. "Index," 1967 Conference, August 21-30, 1967, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia 209796, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    5. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. 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(3), pages 321-340, June.
    9. 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.
    10. Brooks, Robert & Harris, Edwyna, 2008. "Efficiency gains from water markets: Empirical analysis of Watermove in Australia," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 95(4), pages 391-399, April.
    11. 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.
    12. R. H. Coase, 2013. "The Problem of Social Cost," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(4), pages 837-877.
    13. Meinzen-Dick, R. & Nkonya, L., 2005. "Understanding legal pluralism in water rights: Lessons from Africa and Asia," IWMI Books, Reports H038746, International Water Management Institute.
    14. Rasmus Heltberg, 2002. "Property Rights and Natural Resource Management in Developing Countries," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(2), pages 189-214, April.
    15. 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.
    16. Alfnes, Frode & Guttormsen, Atle G. & Steine, Gro & Kolstad, Kari, 2005. "Consumers' Willingness To Pay For The Color Of Salmon:A Choice Experiment With Real Economic Incentives," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19126, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    17. Perret, Sylvain R., 2002. "Water Policies And Smallholding Irrigation Schemes In South Africa: A History And New Institutional Challenges," Working Papers 18041, University of Pretoria, Department of Agricultural Economics, Extension and Rural Development.
    18. Unknown, 2001. "Proceedings of an International Workshop held in Bangkok, Thailand 8 – 9 June 2001: Water Policy Reform: Lessons from Asia and Australia," ACIAR Proceedings Series 135378, Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research.
    19. Irimie, Doru Leonard & Essmann, Hans Friedrich, 2009. "Forest property rights in the frame of public policies and societal change," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 95-101, March.
    20. Rosegrant, Mark W. & Schleyer, Renato Gazmuri & Yadav, Satya N., 1995. "Water policy for efficient agricultural diversification: market-based approaches," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 203-223, June.
    21. Burton, Michael & Marsh, Sally & Patterson, Josie, 2007. "Community attitudes towards water management in the Moore Catchment, Western Australia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 92(1-3), pages 157-178, January.
    22. 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.
    23. Alan Randall, 1978. "Property Institutions and Economic Behavior," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(1), pages 1-21, March.
    24. 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), pages 1-8, November.
    25. Wester, Philippus & Merrey, Douglas J. & de Lange, Marna, 2003. "Boundaries of Consent: Stakeholder Representation in River Basin Management in Mexico and South Africa," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 797-812, May.
    26. Martin Linde-Rahr, 2008. "Willingness to Pay for Forest Property Rights and the Value of Increased Property Rights Security," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 41(4), pages 465-478, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. 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), vol. 2(2), pages 1-19, August.
    2. 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.
    3. S. Speelman & M. D’haese & A. Frija & Stefano Farolfi & L. D’haese, 2009. "Willingness to pay for water and water rights definition: study among smallholder irrigators in Limpopo province, South Africa," Post-Print hal-04058999, HAL.
    4. Mohammed H. Alemu & Søren Bøye Olsen & Suzanne E. Vedel & John Kinyuru & Kennedy O. Pambo, 2016. "Integrating sensory evaluations in incentivized discrete choice experiments to assess consumer demand for cricket flour buns in Kenya," IFRO Working Paper 2016/02, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
    5. Onozaka, Yuko & Saue, Vegar Veseth & Costanigro, Marco, 2018. "The Moderating Effect of Heterogeneous Beliefs on Consumer Preferences for a New Food Technology: The Case of Modified Atmospheric Packaging," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 274068, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    6. M. Lefebvre & C. Biguzzi & E. Ginon & S. Gomez-y-Paloma & S. R. H. Langrell & S. Marette & G. Mateu & A. Sutan, 2017. "Mandatory integrated pest management in the European Union: experimental insights on consumers’ reactions," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 98(1), pages 25-54, July.
    7. Ponce Oliva, Roberto D. & Vasquez-Lavín, Felipe & San Martin, Valeska A. & Hernández, José Ignacio & Vargas, Cristian A. & Gonzalez, Pablo S. & Gelcich, Stefan, 2019. "Ocean Acidification, Consumers' Preferences, and Market Adaptation Strategies in the Mussel Aquaculture Industry," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 42-50.
    8. Papoutsi, Georgia S. & Nayga, Rodolfo M. & Lazaridis, Panagiotis & Drichoutis, Andreas C., 2015. "Fat tax, subsidy or both? The role of information and children's pester power in food choice," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 196-208.
    9. Papoutsi, Georgia & Nayga, Rodolfo & Lazaridis, Panagiotis & Drichoutis, Andreas, 2013. "Nudging parental health behavior with and without children's pestering power: Fat tax, subsidy or both?," MPRA Paper 52324, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Helen Scarborough & Jeff Bennett, 2012. "Cost–Benefit Analysis and Distributional Preferences," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 14376.
    11. Mohammed H. Alemu & Søren B. Olsen, 2017. "Can a Repeated Opt-Out Reminder remove hypothetical bias in discrete choice experiments? An application to consumer valuation of novel food products," IFRO Working Paper 2017/05, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
    12. Mohammed H. Alemu & Søren B. Olsen & Suzanne E. Vedel & John N. Kinyuru & Kennedy O. Pambo, 2017. "Can insects increase food security in developing countries? An analysis of Kenyan consumer preferences and demand for cricket flour buns," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 9(3), pages 471-484, June.
    13. Garrick, Dustin & Whitten, Stuart M. & Coggan, Anthea, 2013. "Understanding the evolution and performance of water markets and allocation policy: A transaction costs analysis framework," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 195-205.
    14. Doherty, Edel & Campbell, Danny, 2011. "Demand for improved food safety and quality: a cross-regional comparison," 85th Annual Conference, April 18-20, 2011, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 108791, Agricultural Economics Society.
    15. Kesternich, Iris & Heiss, Florian & McFadden, Daniel & Winter, Joachim, 2013. "Suit the action to the word, the word to the action: Hypothetical choices and real decisions in Medicare Part D," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 1313-1324.
    16. Frode Alfnes & Chengyan Yue & Helen H. Jensen, 2010. "Cognitive dissonance as a means of reducing hypothetical bias," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 37(2), pages 147-163, June.
    17. Su, Lianfan & Adam, Brian D. & Lusk, Jayson L. & Arthur, Frank, 2011. "A Comparison of Auction and Choice Experiment: An Application to Consumer Willingness to Pay for Rice with Improved Storage Management," 2011 Annual Meeting, July 24-26, 2011, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 103975, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    18. Irz, Xavier & Mazzocchi, Mario & Réquillart, Vincent & Soler, Louis-Georges, 2015. "Research in Food Economics: past trends and new challenges," Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement, Editions NecPlus, vol. 96(01), pages 187-237, March.
    19. Xue, Hong & Mainville, Denise Y. & You, Wen & Nayga, Rodolfo M., Jr., 2009. "Nutrition Knowledge, Sensory Characteristics and Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Pasture-Fed Beef," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49277, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    20. Villas-Boas, Sofia B & Taylor, Rebecca & Krovetz, Hannah, 2016. "Willingness to Pay for Low Water Footprint Food Choices During Drought," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt9vh3x180, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    International Development; Resource /Energy Economics and Policy;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ags:iaae12:126731. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iaaeeea.html .

    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.