Upstream demand for water use by new tree plantations imposes externalities on downstream irrigated agriculture and wetlands*

Nordblom, Thomas L.; Finlayson, John D.; Hume, Iain

doi:10.1111/j.1467-8489.2012.00593.x

Cited by 12 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…2 define the prices and total volumes of water traded to upstream tree plantations. At $60 and $70/m 3 stumpage values, market solutions indicate trade of 47 and 90/GL of water entitlements, respectively, from downstream sectors to upstream watersheds (Nordblom et al, 2009(Nordblom et al, , 2012a. Notice the equilibrium water price of $1.89M/GL for the higher demand and 90/GL of trade induced by the higher tree-product price of $70/m 3 (Fig.…”

Section: Measures and Datamentioning

confidence: 97%

“…The present study assumes that new plantations will be P. radiata. Nordblom et al (2009Nordblom et al ( , 2012a use economic analysis to build upon this physical and biological foundation, to develop both aggregate catchment ( Fig. 2) and disaggregated subsector by subsector results (Fig.…”

Section: Measures and Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Schematic maps of our study area are given in Fig. 1 (adapted from Nordblom et al, 2009Nordblom et al, , 2012a to lay out the initial conditions against which simulated changes are measured.…”

Section: Measures and Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…That is, to illuminate the distributional consequences of water policy options quantified in the case of a large New South Wales catchment (the Macquarie River valley in the MDB) by Nordblom et al (2009Nordblom et al ( , 2011Nordblom et al ( , 2012a. Viewing these previously published results through the PPBF places them in new light for clearer interpretations.…”

mentioning

confidence: 94%

“…Nordblom et al (2006Nordblom et al ( , 2009Nordblom et al ( , 2010Nordblom et al ( , 2011Nordblom et al ( , 2012a have studied the economics of catchment water sharing among timber production, urban, agricultural and wetland uses under different rules. Jackson et al (2005), Schrobback et al (2011) and Polglase et al, 2013 point out that carbon-sequestration strategies typically favour standing biomass in tree plantations without considering the full environmental and economic consequences, which often include dramatic reductions in water yield.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Distributional consequences of upstream tree plantations on downstream water users in a Public–Private Benefit Framework

Nordblom

Hume

Finlayson³

et al. 2015

Agricultural Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We apply a Public-Private Benefit Framework (PPBF) for new perspectives on the distributional consequences of land-use change in upstream watersheds (wide expansion of tree plantations) negatively affecting downstream water users. Our study area is the Macquarie River catchment in central-west New South Wales, as part of Australia's Murray-Darling Basin, where active water entitlement markets exist downstream. We consider benefits and costs to private upstream landholders allowed to establish new plantations without regard to reduced water flows and qualities to downstream users (urban, agricultural and environmental). Second, we explore a policy requiring new plantations to purchase permanent entitlements in advance for amounts of water they will divert from downstream uses; the calculated increase in evapotranspiration above that of current land-use. With no requirement to purchase entitlements, new plantation areas and their increased water consumption would be greatest, as would negative impacts on downstream water users. Some downstream water users are assumed willing to surrender entitlements at lower prices than others, resulting in an upward-sloping supply curve. Demand for entitlements by new upstream plantations will be functions of anticipated tree product yields, prices, establishment and opportunity costs. Their aggregate demand is downward sloping and intersects the supply curve to define the equilibrium quantity and price of water entitlements traded. With a tree product price of $70/m 3 the economic consequences of unrestricted expansion of planting in the upper watersheds could be in the order of $639M (tree-NPV, 7%) in upstream private net benefit gains, but $388M in uncompensated losses to downstream public net benefits, counting losses of 154 GL in environmental flows valued at $1M/GL, for total catchment net benefits of $251M. The policy as confirmed by our PPBF, indicates "flexible negative incentives" to reduce the expansion of new private plantations by compensating downstream public losses through sale of water entitlements from the latter to the former. Assuming that environmental flows are protected and purchase of downstream water entitlements is required from irrigators and stock and domestic users for new tree plantations, net private benefits of $192M to new plantations are added to $138M in downstream public benefits, improving the net change in catchment benefits to $330M. The policy would improve total net catchment benefit from $251M to $330M, achieving an economically efficient, socially equitable and environmentally sustainable solution, which adjusts automatically over time through the market. Crown

show abstract

Section: Measures and Datamentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Measures and Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Measures and Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 94%