Groundwater pumping and spatial externalities in agriculture

Pfeiffer, Lisa; Lin, Chuan-Yao

doi:10.1016/j.jeem.2012.03.003

Cited by 100 publications

(72 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We assume the aquifer recharges at a rate of 1.25 inches per year, and that the only losses are through agricultural withdrawals-a reasonable assumption for the High Plains Aquifer. We abstract from lateral flow and neighbor effects on pumping, which are, at most, secondary drivers of groundwater volume (55). We find that groundwater withdrawal increases at an increasing rate with more water in the West Kansas High Plains Aquifer.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Measuring the value of groundwater and other forms of natural capital

Fenichel

Abbott

Bayham

et al. 2016

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Valuing natural capital is fundamental to measuring sustainability. The United Nations Environment Programme, World Bank, and other agencies have called for inclusion of the value of natural capital in sustainability metrics, such as inclusive wealth. Much has been written about the importance of natural capital, but consistent, rigorous valuation approaches compatible with the pricing of traditional forms of capital have remained elusive. We present a guiding quantitative framework enabling natural capital valuation that is fully consistent with capital theory, accounts for biophysical and economic feedbacks, and can guide interdisciplinary efforts to measure sustainability. We illustrate this framework with an application to groundwater in the Kansas High Plains Aquifer, a rapidly depleting asset supporting significant food production. We develop a 10-y time series (1996−2005) of natural capital asset prices that accounts for technological, institutional, and physical changes. Kansas lost approximately $110 million per year (2005 US dollars) of capital value through groundwater withdrawal and changes in aquifer management during the decade spanning 1996–2005. This annual loss in wealth is approximately equal to the state’s 2005 budget surplus, and is substantially more than investments in schools over this period. Furthermore, real investment in agricultural capital also declined over this period. Although Kansas’ depletion of water wealth is substantial, it may be tractably managed through careful groundwater management and compensating investments in other natural and traditional assets. Measurement of natural capital value is required to inform management and ongoing investments in natural assets.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Measuring the value of groundwater and other forms of natural capital

Fenichel

Abbott

Bayham

et al. 2016

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This annual amount was determined when the user originally applied for the permit and is the same fixed amount each year (Pfeiffer and Lin 2012). Appropriation contracts are stated in terms of a maximum acre-feet of extraction per year with a "use it or lose it" clause.…”

Section: The High Plains Aquifer In Kansasmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effects of Energy Prices on Agricultural Groundwater Extraction from the High Plains Aquifer

Pfeiffer

Lin

2014

American J Agri Economics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We examine the effects of energy prices on groundwater extraction using an econometric model of a farmer's irrigation water pumping decision that accounts for both the intensive and extensive margins. Our results show that energy prices have an effect on both types of margins. Increasing energy prices would affect crop selection decisions, crop acreage allocation decisions, and farmers' demand for water. Our estimated total marginal effect, which sums the effects on the intensive and extensive margins, suggests that a $1 per million btu increase in the energy price would decrease water extraction by an individual farmer by 5.89 acre‐feet per year, a decrease of 3.6 percent of the average annual extraction rate. Our estimated elasticity of water extraction with respect to energy price is −0.26.

show abstract

“…A limited number of papers are beginning to use a spatial aquifer to examine groundwater flow (Kovacs et al, 2015;Brozovic et al, 2010;Pfeiffer and Lin, 2012). We define p ik as the expected proportion of the groundwater in the aquifer that flows underground out of site i into the aquifer of site k when an acre-foot of groundwater is pumped out of site k, where p ik is a negative quadratic function of the distance and the hydraulic diffusivity between sites i and k. The amount of water leaving site i is then P m k¼1 p ik GW k ðtÞ.…”

Section: Water Use Constraintsmentioning

confidence: 99%