IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-04058999.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Willingness to pay for water and water rights definition: study among smallholder irrigators in Limpopo province, South Africa

Author

Listed:
  • S. Speelman
  • M. D’haese
  • A. Frija

    (ICARDA - International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas [Jordanie])

  • Stefano Farolfi

    (UMR G-EAU - Gestion de l'Eau, Acteurs, Usages - Cirad - Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement - Montpellier SupAgro - Centre international d'études supérieures en sciences agronomiques - AgroParisTech - CEMAGREF - Centre national du machinisme agricole, du génie rural, des eaux et forêts - IRD [Occitanie] - Institut de Recherche pour le Développement - CIHEAM-IAMM - Centre International de Hautes Etudes Agronomiques Méditerranéennes - Institut Agronomique Méditerranéen de Montpellier - CIHEAM - Centre International de Hautes Études Agronomiques Méditerranéennes, Cirad-ES - Département Environnements et Sociétés - Cirad - Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement)

  • L. D’haese

Abstract

Internationally there is growing understanding that water rights are important and that a lack of effective water rights systems creates major problems for the management of increasingly scarce water supplies. In South Africa the smallholder irrigation sector faces two major challenges. Firstly water use is inefficient and secondly government, which in the past invested huge amounts of money in the sector, targets improved cost recovery. Improving the definition of the water rights system can have a positive effect with regard to these challenges. At one hand improvements in the definition of water rights can stimulate smallholders to use water more productively, encouraging cooperation and investment; at the other hand an improved water rights system increases willingness to pay for water, allowing government to charge higher water prices and thus improve cost recovery. This study proposes contingent ranking to analyse the willingness to pay of smallholder irrigators for changes in the water rights system. Results indicate that smallholders are prepared to pay considerably higher water prices if these prices are connected with advancements in the water rights system. In a second step the sample population was stratified to evaluate the impact of smallholder characteristics on their willingness to pay. The groups. For example farmers suffering water shortages attach more importance to secure water supply. Policy makers can use such results to guide reforms in the design of water rights and to increase public support for interventions.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-04058999
    DOI: 10.2495/WRM090311
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-04058999v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-04058999v1/document
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2495/WRM090311?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. Nick Hanley & Robert Wright & Vic Adamowicz, 1998. "Using Choice Experiments to Value the Environment," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 11(3), pages 413-428, April.
    2. Nick Hanley & Susana Mourato & Robert E. Wright, 2001. "Choice Modelling Approaches: A Superior Alternative for Environmental Valuatioin?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(3), pages 435-462, July.
    3. Frija, Aymen & Chebil, Ali & Speelman, Stijn & Van Huylenbroeck, Guido, 2008. "Effect of changes in the institutional structure of irrigation water property rights on the willingness to pay of farmers for water: case of Tunisia," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 44422, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. Beggs, S. & Cardell, S. & Hausman, J., 1981. "Assessing the potential demand for electric cars," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 1-19, September.
    8. 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.
    9. Nick Hanley & Sergio Colombo & Dugald Tinch & Andrew Black & Ashar Aftab, 2006. "Estimating the benefits of water quality improvements under the Water Framework Directive: are benefits transferable?," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 33(3), pages 391-413, September.
    10. 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.
    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. 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.
    3. del Saz Salazar, Salvador & Hernandez Sancho, Francesc & Sala Garrido, Ramon, 2009. "Estimación del valor económico de la calidad del agua de un río mediante una doble aproximación: una aplicación de los principios económicos de la Directiva Marco del Agua," Economia Agraria y Recursos Naturales, Spanish Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 9(01), pages 1-27.
    4. Richard T. Carson, 2011. "Contingent Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2489.
    5. Christian A. Vossler & Maurice Doyon & Daniel Rondeau, 2012. "Truth in Consequentiality: Theory and Field Evidence on Discrete Choice Experiments," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 4(4), pages 145-171, November.
    6. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A., 2021. "The landscape of econometric discrete choice modelling research," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    7. 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.
    8. Chaikaew, Pasicha & Hodges, Alan W. & Grunwald, Sabine, 2017. "Estimating the value of ecosystem services in a mixed-use watershed: A choice experiment approach," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 228-237.
    9. Anabela Botelho & Lina Sofia Lourenço-Gomes & Lígia Costa Pinto & Sara Sousa & Marieta Valente, 2016. "Accounting for local impacts of photovoltaic farms: two stated preferences approaches," NIMA Working Papers 64, Núcleo de Investigação em Microeconomia Aplicada (NIMA), Universidade do Minho.
    10. Aude Ridier & Caroline Roussy & Karim Chaib, 2021. "Adoption of crop diversification by specialized grain farmers in south-western France: evidence from a choice-modelling experiment," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 102(3), pages 265-283, September.
    11. de Ayala, Amaia & Hoyos, David & Mariel, Petr, 2015. "Suitability of discrete choice experiments for landscape management under the European Landscape Convention," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 79-96.
    12. Molden, David & Sakthivadivel, Ramasamy & Samad, Madar & Burton, Martin, 2005. "Phases of river basin development: the need for adaptive institutions," Book Chapters,, International Water Management Institute.
    13. Richard T. Carson & Miko_aj Czajkowski, 2014. "The discrete choice experiment approach to environmental contingent valuation," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 9, pages 202-235, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    14. Domínguez-Torreiro, Marcos & Soliño, Mario, 2011. "Provided and perceived status quo in choice experiments: Implications for valuing the outputs of multifunctional rural areas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2523-2531.
    15. Bart Neuts & Peter Nijkamp & Eveline Van Leeuwen, 2012. "Crowding Externalities from Tourist Use of Urban Space," Tourism Economics, , vol. 18(3), pages 649-670, June.
    16. Araña, Jorge E. & León, Carmelo J., 2013. "Dynamic hypothetical bias in discrete choice experiments: Evidence from measuring the impact of corporate social responsibility on consumers demand," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 53-61.
    17. Chaminuka, P. & Groeneveld, R.A. & Selomane, A.O. & van Ierland, E.C., 2012. "Tourist preferences for ecotourism in rural communities adjacent to Kruger National Park: A choice experiment approach," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 168-176.
    18. Joalland, Olivier & Mahieu, Pierre-Alexandre, 2023. "Developing large-scale offshore wind power programs: A choice experiment analysis in France," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(PA).
    19. Tomás del Barrio Casto & William Nilsson & Andrés J. Picazo-Tadeo, 2013. "How wrong can you be, without noticing? Further evidence on speci?cation errors in the Conditional Logit," Working Papers 1318, Department of Applied Economics II, Universidad de Valencia.
    20. Anna Alberini & Patrizia Riganti & Alberto Longo, 2003. "Can People Value the Aesthetic and Use Services of Urban Sites? Evidence from a Survey of Belfast Residents," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 27(3), pages 193-213, November.

    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:hal:journl:hal-04058999. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.