Water pricing in Tunisia: Can an original rate structure achieve multiple objectives?

Favré, Marine; Montginoul, Marielle

doi:10.1016/j.jup.2018.06.004

Cited by 9 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…3 Web of Science and Scopus were considered as alternative search engines but ultimately ruled out due to the lower applicability of journals included in Web of Science for this review, and the unavailability of Scopus to all of the authors due to it being an Elsevier product which none of the authors' institutions subscribed to at the time of writing. 4 Most of the articles on this topic implicitly assume that cross-subsidization from higher to lower income residential customers is equitable to address affordability (Favre & Montginoul, 2018). Only three studies in this review explicitly discuss cross-subsidization by customer class (non-residential to residential) (Brown & Heller, 2017;van den Berg, 2015;Ying et al, 2010).…”

Section: Conflict Of Interestmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…4 4 Most of the articles on this topic implicitly assume that cross‐subsidization from higher to lower income residential customers is equitable to address affordability (Favre & Montginoul, 2018). Only three studies in this review explicitly discuss cross‐subsidization by customer class (non‐residential to residential) (Brown & Heller, 2017; van den Berg, 2015; Ying et al, 2010).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Solutions to the problem of drinking water service affordability: A review of the evidence

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rapidly‐growing concern among scholars and policy makers over residential drinking water affordability in the United States highlights the need to identify and assess the efficacy of potential solutions to address this problem. Accordingly, in this advanced review of the literature, we examine the state of scholarly evidence over the last 30 years on the prevalence and effectiveness of strategies to address household drinking water affordability in the United States. We classify interventions into four categories: rate structure designs, water efficiency programs, recurring bill assistance, and crisis relief. Our findings are twofold. First, the conceptual literature on affordability interventions is fairly robust, but demonstrates both tradeoffs and complementarities across the four approaches. Second, despite employing a PRISMA approach, we identify few empirical studies that demonstrate the effectiveness of affordability interventions in practice, especially the targeted approaches of recurring bill assistance and crisis relief. The literature on affordability interventions thus appears to lag considerably behind scholarship identifying and defining the problem of affordability. Accordingly, we suggest key questions throughout our review that need to be answered, thereby providing an agenda for future research on drinking water affordability solutions. This article is categorized under: Engineering Water > Planning Water Human Water > Value of Water

show abstract

Section: Conflict Of Interestmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Solutions to the problem of drinking water service affordability: A review of the evidence

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The complexity of the tariff structure (Favre and Montginoul, 2018;Klassert et al, 2018), the possible transfer of FWUC responsibility (Acselrad et al, 2015), and the low prices for freshwater use (Rosa, 2019) danger the water resources management with negative consequences on the environment, the society, the watershed committee, and all freshwater users.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The #2 scenario unfolds into two possibilities associated with Embasa's two parts tariff structures that combine a fixed first block with variable tariffs to additional volume consumed. Theoretically, there are many choices for the block tariff structure, which must be adequate for the number and size of blocks, the company cost structure, the water consumption curve, the basic needs, and social aims (Favre and Montginoul, 2018;Klassert et al, 2018).…”

Section: Fig 3 Drinking Water Supply Index In Phb Municipalitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Cost of Freshwater Charging in Brazil: suppliers’ main alternatives

Teixeira

Veiga²,

Julien³

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Charging for freshwater use raises debate on water suppliers' financial sustainability and, social and operational sector efficiency problems. The issue stands out when suppliers' income flows are insufficient to cover production costs or household revenues are low, making it difficult for tariffs to increase. Moreover, it is even worse with the combination of these factors in watersheds with water scarcity. The present work analyzes the freshwater use charging from the perspective of cost increment destination in the sanitation sector. We compared a scenario of cost absorption with the possibility of transfer to final consumers in the first block tariff, fixed by volume ( #2a), and the second block tariff charged by additional m3 consumed (#2b). Results show that scenario #1 reduces resource availability for investments, compromising infrastructure maintenance and service expansion. Alternatively, as a natural monopoly sector, the pass-through to consumers is the most likely. Both #2a and #2b scenarios nullify the encouragement of rational use and operational efficiency, add risk to environmental sustainability, and compromise basin committee plans. However, in the #2b scenario, the possibility of minor water consumption by households, changing for the first block tariff, brings back the #1 scenario possibilities. Scenario #2a, as a plausible choice, demands an accurate discussion of governance in freshwater charging.

show abstract

“…Furthermore, estimating the price elasticity of demand is also relevant to evaluating policies focused on water consumption reduction (Baerenklau et al., 2014; Beecher & Kalmbach, 2013; Renzetti et al., 2015; Sahin et al., 2017). Moreover, price elasticities contribute to evaluating consumer welfare changes (Hajispyrou et al., 2002) due to variations in rates and rate structures (Smith & Al‐Maskati, 2007; Thrikawala et al., 2008), and they are relevant to assessing the achievement of multiple tariff objectives (Clarke et al., 2017; Favre & Montginoul, 2018; Zetland & Gasson, 2013). Recently, the adverse effects of climate change on water availability and the constant population growth have motivated a strong resurgence of interest in water demand estimation to contribute to the efficient and sustainable use of water (Nachtnebel & Nandalal, 2021).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Estimating Residential Water Demand Under Systematic Shifts Between Uniform Price (UP) and Increasing Block Tariffs (IBT)

Chovar Vera,

Vásquez‐Lavín,

Ponce Oliva

2024

Water Resources Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We evaluate whether changing from a uniform price (UP) to an increasing block tariff (IBT) changes people's behavior. We exploit a unique setting in which the price scheme moves back and forth yearly from UP to IBT. We discuss the effectiveness of IBT in reducing summer consumption. This issue is relevant to many countries and policymakers interested in designing tariff structures. There is no evidence of how the same consumer may react to systematically switching from one tariff structure to another yearly. We estimate the residential water demand and its price elasticity using a generalized least squared random effect model for the UP and the discrete/continuous choice model for the IBT. In addition, we split the sample between low and high‐consumption groups. For the low consumption group unaffected by the tariff change, the elasticity in the nonsummer months is higher (more elastic) than in the summer. Consumers in this group reduce their elasticity from nonsummer to summer months (−0.299 vs. −0.071, respectively) and increase their consumption by 13%. The high consumption group increased its summer consumption, but only by 8.7%, and contrary to the first group, its elasticity increased significantly (from −0.299 to −0.568). The high‐consumption group is indeed affected by the change in tariff. From a policy perspective, this implies that the IBT structure is relevant. However, if the policy seeks to promote conservation, it needs to be adjusted to a lower decile of the water consumption distribution to affect a more significant portion of the population.

show abstract

Water pricing in Tunisia: Can an original rate structure achieve multiple objectives?

Cited by 9 publications

References 27 publications

Solutions to the problem of drinking water service affordability: A review of the evidence

Solutions to the problem of drinking water service affordability: A review of the evidence

The Cost of Freshwater Charging in Brazil: suppliers’ main alternatives

Estimating Residential Water Demand Under Systematic Shifts Between Uniform Price (UP) and Increasing Block Tariffs (IBT)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About