How to reallocate water rights when environmental goals conflict with existing entitlements
Author(s) -
Sophie Thoyer
Publication year - 2006
Publication title -
international journal of sustainable development
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.151
H-Index - 27
eISSN - 1741-5268
pISSN - 0960-1406
DOI - 10.1504/ijsd.2006.011637
Subject(s) - negotiation , equity (law) , scarcity , business , environmental resource management , sustainable development , natural resource economics , water scarcity , economics , public economics , environmental economics , environmental planning , water resources , microeconomics , political science , environmental science , ecology , law , biology
Emerging concerns for environmental flows translate into reforms that aim to preserve minimal flows in rivers. These policy measures have consequences for traditional right-holders: how to share between consumptive users the new scarcity created by the protection of instream flows? This paper compares different policy mechanisms in France, Australia and California in an attempt to answer the questions of how to allocate water restrictions and compensations and how to pursue simultaneously efficiency, equity and acceptability objectives. It measures the shortcomings and advantages of different voluntary approaches: auctions, contracts and negotiations
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom