4.7 Article

Understanding the evolution and performance of water markets and allocation policy: A transaction costs analysis framework

Journal

ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS
Volume 88, Issue -, Pages 195-205

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.12.010

Keywords

Transaction costs; Water allocation; Water markets; Water rights; Colorado river; Columbia river; Murray-Darling river

Funding

  1. CSIRO Water for a Healthy Country Flagship
  2. Australian-American Fulbright Commission
  3. Australian Research Council Linkage grant [LP0990429]
  4. Australian Research Council [LP0990429] Funding Source: Australian Research Council

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Water markets and associated allocation policy reforms have struggled to achieve their intended goals in many water-stressed rivers, in part due to the institutional friction imposed by transition and transaction costs. This paper elaborates a transaction costs analysis framework to examine the evolution and performance of water markets and allocation policy reforms. This analysis rests on three pillars: i) a synthesis of three theoretical traditions of institutional analysis (Williamson, North, and Ostrom) often considered independently; ii) a framework to examine the types and interactions of transaction costs in market-based water allocation over time; and iii) an illustrative analysis of three large river basins - the Colorado, Columbia and Murray-Darling - with varying levels of success in market-based water policy reforms. The resulting framework accounts for water's complexity as an economic good. This framework and the case studies lead to the identification of several policy implications including the need for: a multiphase sequencing of reform, strategic investment in institutional transition costs, and institutional choices that preserve future flexibility to adjust water rights and diversion limits to manage social and environmental externalities. (c) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available