Environmental and Resource Costs Under Water Scarcity Conditions: An Estimation in the Context of the European Water Framework Directive

Water Resources Management

Volumn 25, Issue 6, 2011, Pages 1615-1633

  Martin Ortega, Julia ^a   Giannoccaro, Giacomo ^b   Berbel, Julio ^b  

^a SCOTTISH CROP RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CÓRDOBA   (Spain)

Author keywords

Choice experiment; Environmental and resource costs; Good ecological status; Water Framework Directive; Water scarcity

Indexed keywords

CHOICE EXPERIMENTS; ECOLOGICAL STATUS; ENVIRONMENTAL AND RESOURCE COSTS; WATER FRAMEWORK DIRECTIVE; WATER SCARCITY;

COSTS; EXPERIMENTS; FLOW OF WATER; HYDRAULICS; SURFACE WATERS; WATER CONSERVATION; WATER SUPPLY;

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT;

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ESTIMATION METHOD; RESOURCE SCARCITY; RIVER BASIN; WATER MANAGEMENT; WATER PLANNING; WATER RESOURCE; WATER SUPPLY;

ANDALUCIA; GUADALQUIVIR BASIN; SPAIN;

EID: 79952736184     PISSN: 09204741     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11269-010-9764-z     Document Type: Article

References (65)

1. Alcon F, Pedrero F, Martin-Ortega J, Arcas N, Alarcon JJ, de Miguel M (2010) The non-market value of reclaimed waste-water for use in agriculture. Span J Agric Res 8(S2).
2. Baker B, Metcalfe P, Butler S, Gueron Y, Sheldon R, East J (2007) Report on the benefits of Water Framework Directive programmes of measures in England and Wales. DEFRA, United Kingdom.
3. Bateman IJ, Carson RT, Day B, Hanemann M, Hanley N, Hett T, Jones-Lee M, Loomes G, Mourato S, Özdemiroglu E, Pearce DW, Sugden R, Swanson J (2002) Economic valuation with stated preference techniques a manual. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.
4. Bateman IJ, Brouwer R, Ferrini S, Schaafsma M, Barton DN, Dubgaard A, Hasler B, Hime S, Liekens I, Navrud S, De Nocker L, Šceponaviciut R, Semnien D (2009) Making benefit transfers work: transferring theoretically derived, spatially explicit, value functions for the non-market benefits of water quality improvements across Europe. CSERGE working papers EDM-2009-10. Available at: http://www. uea. ac. uk/env/cserge/pub/wp/edm/edm_2009_10. htm. Cited Sept 2010.
5. Bennett JW, Blamey RK (2001) The choice modelling approach to environmental valuation. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.
6. Berbel J, Martin-Ortega J, Mesa P (2010) A cost-effectiveness analysis of water-saving measures for the Water Framework Directive: the case of the Guadalquivir River Basin in Southern Spain. Water Resour Manage. doi: 10. 1007/s11269-010-9717-6.
7. Birol E, Karousakis K, Koundouri P (2006a) Using economic valuation techniques to inform water resources management: a survey and critical appraisal of available techniques and an application. Sci Total Environ 365(1-3): 105-122.
8. Birol E, Karousakis K, Kounduri P (2006b) Using a choice experiment to account for preference heterogeneity in wetland attributes: the case of Cheimaditida wetland in Greece. Ecol Econ 60(1): 145-156.
9. Blamey R, Gordon J, Chapman R (1999) Choice modelling: assessing the environmental values of water supply options. Aust J Agr Resour Ec 43(3): 337-357.
10. Blamey RK, Bennett JW, Louviere JJ, Morrison MD, Rolfe J (2000) A test of policy labels in environmental choice modelling studies. Ecol Econ 32(2): 269-286.
11. Brouwer R, Barton D, Bateman IJ, Brander L, Georgiu S, Martin-Ortega J, Navrud S, Pulido-Velazquez M, Schaafsma M, Wagtendonk A (2009) Economic valuation of environmental and resource costs and benefits in the WFD: Technical guidelines for practitioners. Available at: www. aquamoney. org.
12. Brouwer R, Martin-Ortega J, Berbel J (2010) Spatial heterogeneity in choice experiments. Land Econ 3(86): 552-568.
13. Carballo R, Cancela JJ, Iglesias G, Marin A, Neira XX, Cuesta TS (2009) WFD indicators and definition of the ecological status of rivers. Water Resour Manage 23: 2231-2247.
14. Carlsson F, Martinsson P (2003) Design techniques for stated preference methods in health economics. Health Econ 12: 281-294.
15. Carson RT (1997) Contingent valuation surveys and tests of insensitivity to scope. In: Kopp RJ, Pommerhene W, Schwartz N (eds) Determining the value of non-marketed goods: economic, psychological and policy relevant aspects of contingent valuation methods. Kluwer, Boston, pp 127-163.
16. Carson RT, Mitchell R (1993) The value of clean water: the public's willingness to pay for boatable, fishable and swimmable quality water. Water Resour Res 29(7): 24-45.
17. Confederación Hidrográfica del Guadalquivir (2008) Esquema de Temas Importantes de la Demarcación. Available at: http://www. chguadalquivir. es/opencms/portalchg/planHidrologicoDemarcacion/participacionPublica/con sultaPublica/#apartado1. Cited Sept 2010.
18. Confederación Hidrográfica del Guadalquivir (2010a) La Demarcación. www. chguadalquivir. es. Cited Dec 2010.
19. Confederación Hidrográfica del Guadalquivir (2010b) Guadalquivir River basin management plan. Discussion document for draft program of measures annex 10 (version July 2010).
20. Dziegielewska DA, Mendelsohn R (2007) Does "No" mean "No"? A protest methodology. Environ Resour Econ 38: 71-87.
21. Del Saz-Salazar S, Hernández-Sancho F, Sala-Garrido R (2009) The social benefits of restoring water quality in the context of the Water Framework Directive: a comparison of willingness to pay and willingness to accept. Sci Total Environ 407(16): 4574-4583.
22. European Commission (2003) Economics and the environment: the implementation challenge of the 21 Water Framework Directive, WATECO: A guidance document. Brussels.
23. Ferrini S, Scarpa R (2007) Designs with a priori information for nonmarket valuation with choice experiments: a Monte Carlo study. J Environ Econ Manag 53: 342-363.
24. Genius M, Tsagarakis KP (2006) Water shortages and implied water quality: a contingent valuation study. Water Resour Res 42: W12407.
25. Genius M, Hatzaki E, Kouromichelaki EM, Kouvakis G, Nikiforaki S, Tsagarakis KP (2008) Evaluating consumer's willingness to pay for improved potable water quality and quantity. Water Res Manag 22: 1825-1834.
26. Greene WH (2003) Econometric analysis. Prentice Hall, New Jersey.
27. Gutiérrez C, Martin-Ortega J, Berbel J (2009) Situación y tendencias del uso agrícola del agua en la cuenca del Guadalquivir. Revista de Estudios Agrosociales y Pesqueros 220(4): 163-176.
28. Haider W, Rasid H (2002) Eliciting public preferences for municipal water supply options. Environ Impact Asses 22: 337-360.
29. Hanley N, Wright R, Adamowicz V (1998) Using choice experiments to value the environment. Environ Resour Econ 11(3-4): 413-428.
30. Hanley N, Mourato S, Wright R (2001) Choice modelling approaches: a superior alternative for environmental valuation? J Econ Surv 15(3): 435-462.
31. Hanley N, Wright R, Álvarez-Farizo B (2006) Estimating the economic value of improvements in river ecology using choice experiments: an application to the Water Framework Directive. J Environ Manag 78: 183-193.
32. Hatton McDonald D, Morrison MD, Barnes MB (2010) Willingness to pay and willingness to accept compensation for changes in urban water customer standards. Water Resour Manage 24: 3145-3158.
33. Hausman J, McFadden D (1984) Specification tests for the multinomial logit model. Econometrica 52(5): 1219-1240.
34. Hensher D, Rose J, Greene W (2005a) Applied choice analysis: a primer. Cambridge University Press, UK.
35. Hensher D, Shore N, Train K (2005b) Households' willingness to pay for water service attributes. Environ Resource Econ 32(4): 509-531.
36. Huntingford C, Jones RG, Prudhomme C, Lamb R, Gash JHC, Jones DA (2003) Regional climate-model predictions of extreme rainfall for a changing climate. Q J Roy Meteor Soc 129: 1607-1621.
37. Iglesias A, Estrela T, Gallart F (2005) Impactos sobre los recursos hídricos. In: Moreno J (ed) Evaluación preliminar de los impactos en España por el efecto del cambio climático. Ministerio de Medio Ambiente, Madrid, pp 303-352.
38. Iglesias A, Garrote L, Flores F, Moneo M (2007) Challenges to manage the risk of water scarcity and climate change in the Mediterranean. Water Resour Manage 21: 775-788.
39. IPCC (2007) Working group I fourth assessment report the physical science basis. Geneva.
40. Jorgensen BS, Syme GJ, Bishop BJ, Nancarrow BE (1999) Protest responses in contingent valuation. Environ Resour Econ 14(1): 131-150.
41. Karousakis K, Birol E (2008) Investigating household preferences for kerbside recycling services in London: a choice experiment approach. J Environ Manage 88(4): 1099-1108.
42. Kontogianni A, Langford IH, Papandreou A, Skourtos MS (2003) Social preferences for improving water quality: an economic analysis of benefits from wastewater treatment. Water Resour Manage 17: 317-336.
43. Koss P, Khawaja S (2001) The value of water supply reliability in California: a contingent valuation study. Water Policy 3(2): 165-174.
44. Lancaster KJ (1966) A new approach to consumer theory. J Polit Econ 74(2): 132-157.
45. Louviere J, Hensher DA (1983) Using discrete choice models with experimental design data to forecast consumer demand for a unique cultural event. J Consum Res 10(3): 348-361.
46. Martin-Ortega J (2010) Los beneficios ambientales de las aguas del Guadalquivir: Un análisis económico. Fundación Pública Centro de Estudios Andaluces ISBN: 978-84-692-9577-9. Available at: http://www. centrodeestudiosandaluces. es/. Cited Sept 2010.
47. Martin-Ortega J, Berbel J (2010) Using multi-criteria analysis to explore non-market monetary values of water quality changes in the context of the Water Framework Directive. Sci Total Environ 408: 3990-3997.
48. Martin-Ortega J, Gutierrez C, Berbel J (2008) Caracterización de los usos del agua en el Guadalquivir en aplicacíon de la Directiva Marco del Agua. Rev Estud Reg 81: 45-76.
49. Martin-Ortega J, Berbel J, Brouwer R (2009) Valoración económica de los beneficios ambientales no de mercado derivados de la mejora de la calidad del agua: una estimación en aplicación de la Directiva Marco del Agua al Guadalquivir. Revista de Economía Agraria y de los Recursos Naturales 9(1): 65-89.
50. McFadden D, Train K (2000) Mixed MNL models for discrete response. J Appl Econom 15: 447-470.
51. Mesa P, Martín-Ortega J, Berbel J (2008). Análisis multi-criterio de preferencias sociales en gestión hídrica bajo la Directiva Marco del Agua. Revista de Economía Agraria y de los Recursos Naturales 8(2): 105-126.
52. Mesa-Jurado AM, Berbel J, Orgaz F (2010) Estimating marginal value of water for irrigated olive grove with the production function method. Span J Agric Res 8(S2).
53. Mitchell R, Carson N (1989) Using surveys to value public goods: The contingent valuation methods. Resources for the Future, Washington, DC.
54. Morrison MD, Bennett J, Blamey R, Louviere J (2002) Choice modeling and tests of benefit transfer. Am J Agr Econ 84(1): 161-170.
55. Raje DV, Dhobe PS, Deshpande AW (2002) Consumer's willingness to pay more for municipal supply water: a case study. Ecol Econ 42: 391-400.
56. Rolfe J, Bennett J (2009) The impact of offering two versus three alternatives in choice modelling experiments. Ecol Econ 68(4): 1140-1148.
57. Rolfe J, Bennett J, Louviere J (2000) Choice modelling and its potential application to tropical rainforest preservation. Ecol Econ 35(2): 289-302.
58. Rose JM, Bliemer MCJ (2008) Stated preference experimental design strategies. In: Hensher DA, Button KJ (eds) Handbook of transport modelling. Pergamon.
59. Scarpa R, Rose J (2008) Design efficiency for non-market valuation with choice modelling: how to measure it, what to report and why. Aust J Agr Resour Ec 52(3): 253-282.
60. Spanish Association for Water Supply and Water Treatment AEAS (2008) Available at: www. aeas. es. Cited Sept 2010.
61. Thurstone LL (1929) Theory of attitude measurement. Psychol Rev 36: 222-241.
62. Train K (2003) Discrete choice methods with simulation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
63. Vásques WF, Moxumbder P, Hérandez-Arce J, Berrerns RP (2009) Willingness to pay for safe drinking water: evidence from Parral, Mexico. J Environ Manage 90: 3391-3400.
64. Whitehead J, Groothuis PA, Blomquist GC (1993) Testing for non-response and sample selection bias in contingent valuation: analysis of a combination phone/mail survey. Econ Lett 41(2): 215-220.
65. Xenarios S, Bithas K (2009) Welfare improvisation from the receiving waters of urban wastewater systems in the context of the Water Framework Directive. Water Resour Manage (23): 981-1000.