English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Australian governments have increasingly relied upon water markets to reallocate water between consumptive and environmental uses. Such markets appear appropriate for facilitating consumptive users’ adjustment to factors such as drought. However, where effective institutional arrangements remain elusive, markets alone will be insufficient to provide environmental water reallocation. A basin-wide planning approach represents the Australian Government’s strategy to replace diverse state water-sharing plans, address over-reliance upon markets and take in hand institutional failure. Given its previous inability to deliver environmental reallocation, this paper applies McCann and Easters’ transaction cost typology and Williamson’s transaction costs analysis framework approach to evaluate alternative Basin Plan institutional structures, and determine if efficient institutional approaches to water-reallocation are possible. We find that while efficient institutional alternatives are feasible, careful attention to design is required. This involves consideration of environmental property rights, statefocused incentives and appropriate use of existing market institutions.A. Loch and R. McIve

The Murray-Darling Basin plan and public policy failure: a transaction costs analysis