IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rsm/murray/m06_8.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Conservation policies, environmental valuation and the optimal size of jurisdictions

Author

Listed:
  • Giovanni B. Concu

    () (Risk and Sustainable Management Group, University of Queensland)

Abstract

The size of a jurisdiction is crucial in determining the efficiency, equity or efficacy of environmental regulations. However, jurisdictions are usually taken to coincide with political boundaries even if environmental externalities may transcend them. This paper illustrates the design and implementation of a Choice Modelling experiment to determine the spatial distribution of environmental benefits of Kings Park (Western Australia). The objective is to understand if federal, state or local resources are the appropriate form of funding a conservation policy. Results indicate that there are interstate spillovers of benefits, hence justifying federal contributions to Kings Park. They also show that some benefits are homogeneously spread within Western Australia, and this is an indication that state funding is also appropriate. Other benefits are distance-dependent; some level of local/council funding is warranted

Suggested Citation

  • Giovanni B. Concu, 2006. "Conservation policies, environmental valuation and the optimal size of jurisdictions," Murray-Darling Program Working Papers WP8M06, Risk and Sustainable Management Group, University of Queensland.
  • Handle: RePEc:rsm:murray:m06_8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.uq.edu.au/rsmg/WP/WPM06_8.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mike Young & Darla Hatton MacDonald, 2000. "Interstate Water Trading: a 2-year Review," Natural Resource Management Economics 00_001, Policy and Economic Research Unit, CSIRO Land and Water, Adelaide, Australia.
    2. Easter, K William & Rosegrant, Mark W & Dinar, Ariel, 1999. "Formal and Informal Markets for Water: Institutions, Performance, and Constraints," World Bank Research Observer, World Bank Group, vol. 14(1), pages 99-116, February.
    3. J. Hirshleifer, 1975. "Speculation and Equilibrium: Information, Risk, and Markets," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 89(4), pages 519-542.
    4. Quiggin, John C., 2001. "Environmental economics and the Murray-Darling river system," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 45(1), March.
    5. Randall, Alan, 1981. "Property Entitlements And Pricing Policies For A Maturing Water Economy," Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 25(03), December.
    6. Alan Randall, 1981. "Property Entitlements And Pricing Policies For A Maturing Water Economy," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 25(3), pages 195-220, December.
    7. Robert Brooks & Edwyna Harris, 2005. "An Analysis of Watermove Water Markets," Monash Econometrics and Business Statistics Working Papers 10/05, Monash University, Department of Econometrics and Business Statistics.
    8. repec:mes:jeciss:v:30:y:1996:i:4:p:1212-1216 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    federal regulation; decentralised policies; benefits spillovers; environmental valuation; choice modelling; distance;

    JEL classification:

    • H77 - Public Economics - - State and Local Government; Intergovernmental Relations - - - Intergovernmental Relations; Federalism
    • Q51 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Valuation of Environmental Effects
    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government 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:rsm:murray:m06_8. 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: (David Adamson). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/rsmuqau.html .

    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.