Benefits from Groundwater Management: Magnitude, Sensitivity, and Distribution

Feinerman, Eli; Knapp, Keith C.

doi:10.2307/1240458

Cited by 129 publications

(95 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The estimated welfare gains from optimal management were quite small (less than 3.7%). Similarly small gains were found by several other authors including Allen and Gisser, Nieswiadomy, and Fienerman and Knapp [1,18,8]. See Koundouri [16] for a more comprehensive review.…”

Section: Notessupporting

confidence: 56%

Groundwater use under incomplete information

Saak

Peterson

2007

Journal of Environmental Economics and Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper introduces a game theoretic model of groundwater extraction in a two-cell aquifer under incomplete information. A novel assumption is that individual users have incomplete knowledge of the speed of lateral flows in the aquifer: although a user is aware that his neighbor's water use has some influence on his future water stock, he is uncertain about the degree of this impact. We find that the lack of information may either increase or decrease the rate of water use and welfare. In a two-period framework, the relevant characteristic is the ratio of the periodic marginal benefits of water use. Depending on whether this ratio is convex or concave, the average speed with which the aquifer is depleted decreases or increases when users learn more about the local hydrologic properties of groundwater. In principle, welfare may decrease even in cases when the groundwater allocation is closer to the efficient groundwater allocation.

show abstract

Section: Notessupporting

confidence: 56%

Groundwater use under incomplete information

Saak

Peterson

2007

Journal of Environmental Economics and Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A secondary set of necessary elements includes the considerations related to stakeholder concerns and revolves around the topic of groundwater governance. Feinerman and Knapp 1983;Gisser and Sánchez 1980;Bredehoeft and Young 1970;Freeze and Massmann 1990;Alley et al 1999;Kresic 1997;Harbaugh and McDonald 1996;Kalf and Wooley 2005 -this Diffusivity is an indication of the rate of movement through a system and the capacity to sustain localized drawdowns without resulting in long-term storage depletion. An aquifer's diffusivity is probably a good indicator of the relationship to an appropriate planning horizon…”

Section: Aquifer Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

Decision Support Systems and Processes for Groundwater

Pierce

Sharp

Eaton

2016

Integrated Groundwater Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Information and knowledge management challenges abound in groundwater sciences. Groundwater problems of interest to society are characteristically complex and exceed our ability to solve them without the aid of computational analysis. Yet discipline specific problems that are of interest to hydrogeologists frequently do not directly address the immediate decision making needs of policy makers, groundwater managers, and stakeholders. It is the immediate societal needs that drive the demand for science-based information for common problems in which groundwater figures as a prominent element. Integrated Assessment and Modeling (IAM) presents an approach for merging discipline and case-specific knowledge, such as those in hydrogeological sciences, with social drivers for use in decision support applications. Moreover, decision support systems (DSS) that are constructed and applied using integration as a guiding principle and design ethic can advance groundwater DSS beyond passive support toward active and, eventually, proactive support for implementations to achieve real world integrated groundwater management. IntroductionGroundwater is a critical water resource that must be managed effectively while meeting the demands of society. The behavior and response of groundwater systems to natural and human influences are best understood through scientific analyses using data and models. In groundwater resource management, as with all water resources, disputes can be compounded by misconceptions about the meaning of data and scientific models, as well as social and political misunderstandings among the various interests. The complexity of groundwater management creates the need for computational assistance to support reasoned consideration of available scientific knowledge in conjunction with the preferences of the resource users.Decision support systems (DSS) are computational systems that use data and models interactively to aid in the formulation, analysis, and selection of management strategies. The design, architecture, and implementation of DSS are extensive, highly variable, and, ultimately driven by the needs of the decision problem and instance that is under evaluation. At the simplest levels, DSS may provide repositories of data and information in accessible formats and could offer tools to search and discover repository content. At the other end of the spectrum, DSS may incorporate sophisticated simulations, link with optimization algorithms, or other intelligent systems components to enhance decision making. Regardless of the level of sophistication, DSS are well suited for application to integrated groundwater problems because they can provide a set of applications, methodologies, and tools to cope with the inherent complexity and uncertainty. They can also be part of an Integrated Assessment and Modelling (IAM) process (Jakeman and Letcher 2003) providing distinct advantages for facilitating the IAM process, its transparency and its legacy. Indeed if constructed appropriately, DSS can provide ways o...

show abstract

“…12 The return of revenue can cause problems if it distorts the incentives provided by the efficiency price (see e.g., Feinerman and Knapp 1983). We achieve a non-distorting, lump-sum revenue transfer by means of an inframarginal block that is priced at less than its marginal cost.…”

Section: Revenuementioning

confidence: 99%

Pareto‐Improving Water Management over Space and Time: The Honolulu Case

Pitafi¹,

Roumasset²

2009

American J Agri Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We model welfare gains from efficient allocation of groundwater over space and time relative to the status quo policy of financial cost recovery. In order to promote political feasibility, an intertemporal compensation plan is devised that renders the reform Pareto-improving. Gainers from the reform finance the compensation in proportion to their benefits through a block-pricing scheme. For the Honolulu case, only 7% of the $441 million in gains to winners is needed to compensate losers from the reform. Future winners from the reform also repay the deficit created by the compensation package, much as state and local governments finance capital improvements. Copyright 2009, Oxford University Press.

show abstract

Benefits from Groundwater Management: Magnitude, Sensitivity, and Distribution

Cited by 129 publications

References 12 publications

Groundwater use under incomplete information

Groundwater use under incomplete information

Decision Support Systems and Processes for Groundwater

Pareto‐Improving Water Management over Space and Time: The Honolulu Case

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About