IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/agreko/8015.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Towards more inclusive long-term bulk water resource management

Author

Listed:
  • de Lange, Willem J.
  • Kleynhans, Theo E.

Abstract

Fresh water resources provide a platform for complex and often emotional issues to develop, particularly in resource scarcity situations. Bulk water infrastructure contains elements of a public good and proved vulnerable to failures in market and government driven allocation strategies. Common to both are uncaptured costs and benefits due to shortcomings in cost quantification techniques. Natural ecosystems stands to lose the most since ecosystem services are often not quantifiable in monetary terms and therefore neglected in allocation decision-making. This paper took on the challenge of expanding current decision-support in order to promote more inclusive long-term water management. A case-study approach with the focus on a choice related problem regarding different long-term bulk water resource management options was applied in the Western Cape province. The paper incorporated components of economic valuation theory, a public survey and a modified Delphi expert panel technique. Both spatial and temporal dimensions of the decision-making context were expanded. Two surveys were completed to accommodate these expansions. The first focused on public preference in water allocation management and the relative merit of accommodating public preference in highly specialised decision-making such as long-term water allocation decision-making. The second survey utilized a modified Delphi technique in which an expert panel indicated the relative merit of two alternative long-term allocation strategies. A willingness to pay for 'greener' water was observed and may be used to motivate a paradigm shift from management's perspective to consider, without fear of harming their own political position, 'greener' water supply options more seriously even if these options imply higher direct costs to public.

Suggested Citation

  • de Lange, Willem J. & Kleynhans, Theo E., 2007. "Towards more inclusive long-term bulk water resource management," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 46(3), pages 1-27, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:agreko:8015
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.8015
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/8015/files/46040371.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.8015?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. Alvarez-Farizo, Begona & Hanley, Nick, 2002. "Using conjoint analysis to quantify public preferences over the environmental impacts of wind farms. An example from Spain," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 107-116, January.
    2. Curtis, Ian A., 2004. "Valuing ecosystem goods and services: a new approach using a surrogate market and the combination of a multiple criteria analysis and a Delphi panel to assign weights to the attributes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(3-4), pages 163-194, October.
    3. Fishelson, Gideon, 1994. "The water market in Israel: An example for increasing the supply," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(4), pages 321-334, November.
    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. Abdullah, Sabah & Mariel, Petr, 2010. "Choice experiment study on the willingness to pay to improve electricity services," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 4570-4581, August.
    2. Nibedita Mukherjee & Jean Huge & Farid Dahdouh-Guebas & Nico Koedam, 2014. "Ecosystem service valuations of mangrove ecosystems to inform decision making and future valuation exercises," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/217963, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    3. Campbell, Robert M. & Venn, Tyron J. & Anderson, Nathaniel M., 2016. "Social preferences toward energy generation with woody biomass from public forests in Montana, USA," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 58-67.
    4. Rodríguez-Ortega, T. & Olaizola, A.M. & Bernués, A., 2018. "A novel management-based system of payments for ecosystem services for targeted agri-environmental policy," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PA), pages 74-84.
    5. Kim, Yeonbae, 2005. "Estimation of consumer preferences on new telecommunications services: IMT-2000 service in Korea," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 73-84, January.
    6. Ladenburg, Jacob & Dubgaard, Alex, 2007. "Willingness to pay for reduced visual disamenities from offshore wind farms in Denmark," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(8), pages 4059-4071, August.
    7. Drechsler, Martin & Ohl, Cornelia & Meyerhoff, Jürgen & Eichhorn, Marcus & Monsees, Jan, 2010. "A modelling approach for allocating land-use in space to maximise social welfare - exemplified on the problem of wind power generation," UFZ Discussion Papers 6/2010, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    8. Sagebiel, Julian & Müller, Jakob R. & Rommel, Jens, 2013. "Are Consumers Willing to Pay More for Electricity from Cooperatives? Results from an Online Choice Experiment in Germany," MPRA Paper 52385, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Sangha, Kamaljit K & Evans, Jay & Edwards, Andrew & Russell-Smith, Jeremy & Fisher, Rohan & Yates, Cameron & Costanza, Robert, 2021. "Assessing the value of ecosystem services delivered by prescribed fire management in Australian tropical savannas," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 51(C).
    10. Zorić, Jelena & Hrovatin, Nevenka, 2012. "Household willingness to pay for green electricity in Slovenia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 180-187.
    11. Langer, Katharina & Decker, Thomas & Menrad, Klaus, 2017. "Public participation in wind energy projects located in Germany: Which form of participation is the key to acceptance?," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 63-73.
    12. Bergmann, Ariel & Colombo, Sergio & Hanley, Nick, 2008. "Rural versus urban preferences for renewable energy developments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(3), pages 616-625, April.
    13. Reddy, Sheila M.W. & McDonald, Robert I. & S. Maas, Alexander & Rogers, Anthony & Girvetz, Evan H. & North, Jeffrey & Molnar, Jennifer & Finley, Tim & Leathers, Gená & L. DiMuro, Johnathan, 2015. "Finding solutions to water scarcity: Incorporating ecosystem service values into business planning at The Dow Chemical Company’s Freeport, TX facility," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 12(C), pages 94-107.
    14. Motz, Alessandra, 2021. "Consumer acceptance of the energy transition in Switzerland: The role of attitudes explained through a hybrid discrete choice model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    15. García, Jorge H. & Cherry, Todd L. & Kallbekken, Steffen & Torvanger, Asbjørn, 2016. "Willingness to accept local wind energy development: Does the compensation mechanism matter?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 165-173.
    16. Bishop, Ian D. & Miller, David R., 2007. "Visual assessment of off-shore wind turbines: The influence of distance, contrast, movement and social variables," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 814-831.
    17. le Maitre, Julia & Ryan, Geraldine & Power, Bernadette & O'Connor, Ellen, 2023. "Empowering onshore wind energy: A national choice experiment on financial benefits and citizen participation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    18. Nibedita Mukherjee & William J Sutherland & Lynn Dicks & Jean Hugé & Nico Koedam & Farid Dahdouh-Guebas, 2014. "Ecosystem Service Valuations of Mangrove Ecosystems to Inform Decision Making and Future Valuation Exercises," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(9), pages 1-9, September.
    19. Brennan, Noreen & van Rensburg, Thomas M., 2020. "Public preferences for wind farms involving electricity trade and citizen engagement in Ireland," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    20. Brennan, Noreen & Van Rensburg, Thomas M, 2016. "Wind farm externalities and public preferences for community consultation in Ireland: A discrete choice experiments approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 355-365.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Resource /Energy Economics and Policy;

    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:agreko:8015. 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/aeasaea.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.