IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/isu/genstf/198101010800008442.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Optimal exploitation of common property resources: a case of groundwater mining in the Ogallala Aquifer

Author

Listed:
  • Lee, Kun Chol

Abstract

Water shortage is one of the most serious long-range problems for the United States, as has been witnessed in recent years. With rising energy costs and declining water tables, it appears that the U.S. agricultural sector faces the problem of how to efficiently allocate limited groundwater resources intertemporally and spacially;At first, theoretical aspects of common property resources are discussed. A model of production using common property resources is built. It focuses on factors determining intertemporal exploitation patterns of common property resources and on a comparison of a social optimal and a free market model. The theoretical analysis implies that, first, the lower the discount rate the larger the change of the exploitation rate, second, the greater the stock externality the greater the change of the exploitation rate, third, the steeper the slope of the yield function, the larger the change of the exploitation path, and fourth, the better the resource grade the more the resource will be exploited;Based on the theoretical analysis, the dynamic model is applied in the Southern Ogallala Aquifer. The solutions provide optimal rates of water use, irrigation acreages, farm income, net present values of farm income, and the levels of water tables for each of the 144 resource situations for years 1985-2005 under five alternative scenarios, with respect to energy and crop prices and discount rates. Comparing the social optimal solution with the free market solution, economic losses and excessive depletions of water due to commonality are estimated. The social optimal solution has a higher net farm income than the free market solution, and more water is conserved under the social optimal solution. With the free market policy, the region will lose 70 million in net farm income and 2.9 feet of its water table under the base scenario. Losses, however, depend on energy levels, crop prices, and the discount rate. Three alternative policies for achieving social optimal allocation of resources are examined. They are the flexible taxation in which the tax rate changes every five years, the fixed taxation which is constant over periods, and the quota policy. Examining the benefits side only, the experimental results for the Ogallala Aquifer prove that the flexible taxation is the best policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Lee, Kun Chol, 1981. "Optimal exploitation of common property resources: a case of groundwater mining in the Ogallala Aquifer," ISU General Staff Papers 198101010800008442, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:isu:genstf:198101010800008442
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://dr.lib.iastate.edu/server/api/core/bitstreams/5c865d67-18eb-4eee-9371-b832bddb605c/content
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Brown, Gardner, Jr, 1974. "An Optimal Program for Managing Common Property Resources with Congestion Externalities," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 82(1), pages 163-173, Jan.-Feb..
    2. Oscar R. Burt, 1964. "Optimal Resource Use Over Time with an Application to Ground Water," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 11(1), pages 80-93, September.
    3. Baumol, William J, 1972. "On Taxation and the Control of Externalities," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 62(3), pages 307-322, June.
    4. Oscar R. Burt, 1966. "Economic Control of Groundwater Reserves," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 48(3_Part_I), pages 632-647.
    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. Phoebe Koundouri, 2004. "Current Issues in the Economics of Groundwater Resource Management," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(5), pages 703-740, December.
    2. Phoebe Koundouri, 2003. "Potential for groundwater management: Gisser-Sanchez effect reconsidered," DEOS Working Papers 0307, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    3. Eli Feinerman & Keith C. Knapp, 1983. "Benefits from Groundwater Management: Magnitude, Sensitivity, and Distribution," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 65(4), pages 703-710.
    4. Xie, Yang & Zilberman, David, 2014. "The Economics of Water Project Capacities and Conservation Technologies," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 169820, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    5. Gardner Brown, 2000. "Renewable Natural Resource Management and Use Without Markets," Working Papers 0025, University of Washington, Department of Economics.
    6. Norton, George W., 1976. "Constraints To Increasing Livestock Production In Less Developed Countries: A Literature Review," Staff Papers 14043, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    7. Faye, Amy & Msangi, Siwa, 2018. "Rainfall variability and groundwater availability for irrigation in Sub-Saharan Africa: evidence from the Niayes region of Senegal," MPRA Paper 92388, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Athanasios Tsiarapas & Zisis Mallios, 2023. "Estimating the long-term impact of market power on the welfare gains from groundwater markets," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 25(3), pages 377-406, July.
    9. Woonghee Tim Huh & Chandra Kiran Krishnamurthy & Richard Weber, 2011. "Concavity and monotonicity properties in a groundwater management model," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 58(7), pages 670-675, October.
    10. Xie, Yang & Zilberman, David, 2014. "The Economics of Water Project Capacities under Optimal Water Inventory Management," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt6c24636b, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    11. Chandra Kiran B. Krishnamurthy, 2017. "Optimal Management of Groundwater Under Uncertainty: A Unified Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 67(2), pages 351-377, June.
    12. Gardner M. Brown, 2000. "Renewable Natural Resource Management and Use without Markets," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 38(4), pages 875-914, December.
    13. Kiran Krishnamurthy, Chandra, 2012. "Optimal Management of Groundwater under Uncertainty: A Unified Approach," CERE Working Papers 2012:19, CERE - the Center for Environmental and Resource Economics, revised 30 Jun 2014.
    14. Frans P. Vries & Nick Hanley, 2016. "Incentive-Based Policy Design for Pollution Control and Biodiversity Conservation: A Review," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 63(4), pages 687-702, April.
    15. Pfeiffer, Lisa & Lin, C.-Y. Cynthia, 2012. "Groundwater pumping and spatial externalities in agriculture," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 16-30.
    16. Jonathan Colmer & Ralf Martin & Mirabelle Muûls & Ulrich J. Wagner, 2020. "Does pricing carbon mitigate climate change? Firm-level evidence from the European Union emissions trading scheme," CEP Discussion Papers dp1728, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    17. Wada, Christopher A. & Pongkijvorasin, Sittidaj & Roumasset, James A. & Burnett, Kimberly M., 2023. "Solving Optimal Groundwater Problems with EXCEL," Applied Economics Teaching Resources (AETR), Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 5(3), September.
    18. YingHua He & Thierry Magnac, 2022. "Application Costs and Congestion in Matching Markets," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 132(648), pages 2918-2950.
    19. Jayson Lusk, 2011. "The market for animal welfare," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 28(4), pages 561-575, December.
    20. Blair Fix, 2019. "The Aggregation Problem: Implications for Ecological and Biophysical Economics," Biophysical Economics and Resource Quality, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 1-15, March.

    More about this item

    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:isu:genstf:198101010800008442. 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: Curtis Balmer (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deiasus.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.