IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agiwat/v287y2023ics0378377423003086.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Improving equity in demand-driven irrigation systems through a rights-preserving water allocation mechanism

Author

Listed:
  • Hassan, Wasim
  • Manzoor, Talha
  • Muhammad, Abubakr

Abstract

Allocation mechanisms for irrigation water distribution are largely categorized into demand and supply based methods. Traditional supply-based mechanisms are built on the notion of equitable distribution, where the water rights of each farmer determine their entitlement of irrigation water. However, many studies show that these mechanisms often result in inefficient utilization and wastage of surface water. On the other-hand, the development of smart, ICT driven technologies have ushered-in the age of demand based delivery, which ensures an optimal utilization of water, based on some selected objective. These allocation schemes, while rapidly being adopted in a multitude of irrigation systems worldwide have been shown to result in inequitable water distribution, and special measures need to be taken to protect vulnerable farmers in the system. In this paper, we present a demand-driven allocation scheme that incorporates an initial entitlement for each farmer to ensure equitable water allocation. The allocation mechanism has two stages: first, initial allocation of surface water based on individual water rights; second, a demand-based distribution coupled with an auction-based pricing mechanism. The initial allocation from the first stage may be adjusted in the second stage if the corresponding farmers do not require water at that point in time. After the mathematical formulation of the allocation scheme, we simulate its implementation for a selected irrigation district in the central Punjab region of Pakistan. Results from exhaustive numerical simulations show that the proposed mechanism improves performance with respect to socio-hydrological metrics such as equity, reliabili‘ty, compliance and consistency. Due to the demand-based reallocation stage of the proposed mechanism, this increase in performance does not come at the cost of degraded utilization of irrigation water as compared to a purely demand-based allocation scheme.

Suggested Citation

  • Hassan, Wasim & Manzoor, Talha & Muhammad, Abubakr, 2023. "Improving equity in demand-driven irrigation systems through a rights-preserving water allocation mechanism," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 287(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:agiwat:v:287:y:2023:i:c:s0378377423003086
    DOI: 10.1016/j.agwat.2023.108443
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378377423003086
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.agwat.2023.108443?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John Freebairn & John Quiggin, 2006. "Water rights for variable supplies ," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 50(3), pages 295-312, September.
    2. Dolores Rey & Carlos Dionisio Pérez-Blanco & Alvar Escriva-Bou & Corentin Girard & Ted I. E. Veldkamp, 2019. "Role of economic instruments in water allocation reform: lessons from Europe," International Journal of Water Resources Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(2), pages 206-239, March.
    3. Hal R. Varian & Christopher Harris, 2014. "The VCG Auction in Theory and Practice," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(5), pages 442-445, May.
    4. Yi Xiao & Keith W. Hipel & Liping Fang, 2016. "Incorporating Water Demand Management into a Cooperative Water Allocation Framework," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 30(9), pages 2997-3012, July.
    5. Edward Clarke, 1971. "Multipart pricing of public goods," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 17-33, September.
    6. Delorit, Justin D. & Parker, Dominic P. & Block, Paul J., 2019. "An agro-economic approach to framing perennial farm-scale water resources demand management for water rights markets," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 218(C), pages 68-81.
    7. Sarah Ann Wheeler & Dustin E Garrick, 2020. "A tale of two water markets in Australia: lessons for understanding participation in formal water markets," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 36(1), pages 132-153.
    8. Abbas Afshar & Fariborz Masoumi & Sam Solis, 2015. "Reliability Based Optimum Reservoir Design by Hybrid ACO-LP Algorithm," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 29(6), pages 2045-2058, April.
    9. Marianne Lefebvre & Lata Gangadharan & Sophie Thoyer, 2012. "Do Security-Differentiated Water Rights Improve the Performance of Water Markets?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 94(5), pages 1113-1135.
    10. Hassan, Wasim & Manzoor, Talha & Jaleel, Hassan & Muhammad, Abubakr, 2021. "Demand-based water allocation in irrigation systems using mechanism design: A case study from Pakistan," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 256(C).
    11. Bajaj, Akshi & Singh, S.P. & Nayak, Diptimayee, 2022. "Impact of water markets on equity and efficiency in irrigation water use: A systematic review and meta-analysis," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 259(C).
    12. William Vickrey, 1961. "Counterspeculation, Auctions, And Competitive Sealed Tenders," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 16(1), pages 8-37, March.
    13. Kaghazchi, Afsaneh & Hashemy Shahdany, S. Mehdy & Roozbahani, Abbas, 2021. "Simulation and evaluation of agricultural water distribution and delivery systems with a Hybrid Bayesian network model," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 245(C).
    14. Knapp, T. & Kovacs, K. & Huang, Q. & Henry, C. & Nayga, R. & Popp, J. & Dixon, B., 2018. "Willingness to pay for irrigation water when groundwater is scarce," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 195(C), pages 133-141.
    15. Hobbs, Benjamin F. & Rothkopf, Michael H. & Hyde, Laurel C. & O'Neill, Richard P., 2000. "Evaluation of a Truthful Revelation Auction in the Context of Energy Markets with Nonconcave Benefits," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 5-32, July.
    16. 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.
    17. Groves, Theodore, 1973. "Incentives in Teams," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 41(4), pages 617-631, July.
    18. Yao, Liming & Li, Yalan & Chen, Xudong, 2021. "A robust water-food-land nexus optimization model for sustainable agricultural development in the Yangtze River Basin," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 256(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Moudi Mahdi, 2024. "Enhancing Disparity in Water Distribution within Irrigation Systems Aimed at Improving the Conflict Domain under Alternative Perspectives: A Reliable Multi-Objective Framework," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-14, August.

    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. Hassan, Wasim & Manzoor, Talha & Jaleel, Hassan & Muhammad, Abubakr, 2021. "Demand-based water allocation in irrigation systems using mechanism design: A case study from Pakistan," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 256(C).
    2. Patrick Hummel, 2018. "Hybrid mechanisms for Vickrey–Clarke–Groves and generalized second-price bids," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 47(1), pages 331-350, March.
    3. Zhou, Yu & Serizawa, Shigehiro, 2023. "Multi-object auction design beyond quasi-linearity: Leading examples," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 210-228.
    4. Yu Ning & Su Xiu Xu & George Q. Huang & Xudong Lin, 2021. "Optimal digital product auctions with unlimited supply and rebidding behavior," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 307(1), pages 399-416, December.
    5. Ramesh Johari & John N. Tsitsiklis, 2011. "Parameterized Supply Function Bidding: Equilibrium and Efficiency," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 59(5), pages 1079-1089, October.
    6. Michael H. Rothkopf, 2007. "Thirteen Reasons Why the Vickrey-Clarke-Groves Process Is Not Practical," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 55(2), pages 191-197, April.
    7. Margarida V. B. Santos & Isabel Mota & Pedro Campos, 2023. "Analysis of online position auctions for search engine marketing," Journal of Marketing Analytics, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(3), pages 409-425, September.
    8. Tatsuki Homma & Ryosuke Iba & Junyi Shen & Takuma Wakayama & Hirofumi Yamamura & Takehiko Yamato, 2022. "The pivotal mechanism versus the voluntary contribution mechanism: an experimental comparison," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 58(3), pages 429-505, April.
    9. Sven de Vries & Rakesh V. Vohra, 2003. "Combinatorial Auctions: A Survey," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 15(3), pages 284-309, August.
    10. Mitridati, Lesia & Kazempour, Jalal & Pinson, Pierre, 2021. "Design and game-Theoretic analysis of community-Based market mechanisms in heat and electricity systems," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    11. Yan, Haomin, 2021. "Position auctions with multi-unit demands," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 179-193.
    12. Aleksandar Pekev{c} & Michael H. Rothkopf, 2003. "Combinatorial Auction Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(11), pages 1485-1503, November.
    13. Amin Sayedi & Kinshuk Jerath & Marjan Baghaie, 2018. "Exclusive Placement in Online Advertising," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 37(6), pages 970-986, November.
    14. Karthik Kannan & Rajib L. Saha & Warut Khern-am-nuai, 2022. "Identifying Perverse Incentives in Buyer Profiling on Online Trading Platforms," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(2), pages 464-475, June.
    15. Tafreshian, Amirmahdi & Masoud, Neda, 2022. "A truthful subsidy scheme for a peer-to-peer ridesharing market with incomplete information," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 130-161.
    16. Shrestha, Ratna K., 2017. "Menus of price-quantity contracts for inducing the truth in environmental regulation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 1-7.
    17. Mishra, Debasis & Parkes, David C., 2007. "Ascending price Vickrey auctions for general valuations," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 132(1), pages 335-366, January.
    18. Christoph Engel & Luigi Mittone & Azzurra Morreale, 2024. "Outcomes or participation? Experimentally testing competing sources of legitimacy for taxation," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 62(2), pages 563-583, April.
    19. Mizukami, Hideki & Saijo, Tatsuyoshi & Wakayama, Takuma, 2003. "Strategy-Proof Sharing," Working Papers 1170, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
    20. William H. Sandholm, 2005. "Negative Externalities and Evolutionary Implementation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 72(3), pages 885-915.

    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:eee:agiwat:v:287:y:2023:i:c:s0378377423003086. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/agwat .

    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.