Western municipal water conservation policy: The case of disaggregated demand

Water Resources Research

Volumn 41, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 1-9

  Burness, Stuart ^a   Chermak, Janie ^a   Krause, Kate ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DATA ACQUISITION; DATA REDUCTION; ELASTICITY; MUNICIPAL ENGINEERING; PUBLIC POLICY;

HOUSEHOLD PRODUCTION FUNCTION APPROACH; IN SITU TECHNOLOGY; WATER UTILIZATION; WESTERN MUNICIPAL WATER CONSERVATION POLICY;

WATER CONSERVATION;

POLICY ANALYSIS; WATER DEMAND; WATER MANAGEMENT; WATER SUPPLY; WATER USE;

EID: 17844376797     PISSN: 00431397     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1029/2004WR003596     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Becker, G. (1965), A theory of the allocation of time, Econ. J., 75, 473-517.
2. Brill, T., and S. Burness (1994), Planning versus competitive rates of groundwater pumping, Water Resour. Res., 30, 1873-1880.
3. Brookshire, D., S. Burness, J. Chermak, and K. Krause (2002), Western urban water demand, Nat. Resour. J., 42(4), 873-898.
4. Burness, S., and T. Brill (2001), The role for policy in common pool groundwater use, Resour. Energy Econ., 23, 19-40.
5. Burness, H. S., and J. P. Quirk (1980), Water law, water transfer and economic efficiency: The Colorado River, J. Law Econ., 23, 111-134.
6. Burness, S., and S. Stewart (2001), Some economic aspects of sustainability: A case study of Albuquerque, working paper, Univ. of N. M., Albuquerque.
7. Burt, O. R. (1964), The economics of conjunctive use of ground and surface water, Hilgardia, 36(2), 31-109.
8. Chermak, J. M., and K. Krause (2001), The impact of heterogeneous consumer response on water conservation goals, Tech. Completion Rep. 315, N. M. Water Resour. Res. Inst., Las Cruces.
9. Chermak, J. M., and R. H. Patrick (2002), Comparing tests of the theory of natural resources, Resour. Energy Econ., 24, 301-325.
10. Deaton, A., and J. Muellbauer (1980), Economics and Consumer Behavior, Cambridge Univ. Press, New York.
11. Espey, M., J. Espey, and D. Shaw (1997), Price elasticity of residential water demand: A meta analysis, Water Resour. Res., 33, 1369-1374.
12. Gisser, M., and D. A. Sanchez (1980), Competition versus optimal control in groundwater pumping, Water Resour. Res., 16(4), 638-642.
13. Gisser, M., R. Johnson, and M. Werner (1981), The definition of a surface water right and transferability, J. Law Econ., 24, 273-288.
14. Gray, L. C. (1914), Rent under the assumption of exhaustibility, Q. J. Econ., 28, 466-498.
15. Hewitt, J. A., and W. M. Hanneman (1995). A discrete/continuous choice approach to residential water demand under block rate pricing, Land Econ., 71, 173-192.
16. Howe, C. W., and F. P. Lineaweaver Jr. (1967), The impact of price on residential water demand and its relation to system design and price structure, Water Resour. Res., 3, 13-32.
17. Laffont, J., and J. Tirole (1993). A Theory of Incentives in Procurement and Regulation, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
18. Little, J. (2002), The role of user cost in conservation policy, SAHRA working paper, Univ. of N. M., Albuquerque.
19. Nieswiadomy, M. L., and D. J. Molina (1989), Comparing residential water demand estimates under decreasing and increasing block rates using household data, Land Econ., 65, 280-289.
20. Patrick, R. (2000), Incentives for public utility conservation and pollution control with unknown costs, working paper, Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N. J.
21. Scott, A. T. (1967), The theory of the mine under conditions of uncertainty, in Extractive Resources and Taxation, edited by M. Gaffney, pp. 25-64, Univ. of Wis. Press, Madison.