Frameworks for water rights: an overview of institutional options

Abstract

There is increasing agreement on the need for greater attention to the role of water rights in water resources management. This paper presents an overview of institutional options for water rights. It introduces the reasons why water rights are important and are receiving increasing attention and then presents general principles related to property rights. Various types of institutional arrangements may be used to regulate socially accepted claims to water, including community-based selfgovernance, agency administration and water markets. Methods for improving water rights and water allocation institutions include forming forums, clarifying water rights, planning and modeling techniques, and capacity building for specialized management agencies. Institutional arrangements and methods for improving water rights and allocation institutions should combine to a framework for water rights that draws optimally on the strengths of various water allocation institutions.

Water resources and biofuel production after the fast-track land reform in Zimbabwe

“…Agency problems are cropping up in Chigwizi and Dowoyo villages because the actors are not willing to follow the rules governing water access and use as codified in the national laws. Legal pluralism and forum shopping suggest that when such conflicts over water rights arise, people shop around amongst multiple normative frameworks such as customary law, state law and religious law, coexisting in a society, depending on which of the laws they consider would help validate their claim (Bruns & Meinzen-Dick, 2005;Meinzen-Dick & Pradhan, 2002;Pradhan & Meinzen-Dick, 2003;Spiertz, 2000).…”

Promoting Competitive Water Resource Use Efficiency at the Water‐Market Scale: An Intercooperative Demand Equilibrium‐Based Approach to Water Trading

“…Water rights provide opportunities for rights holders to individually or collaboratively employ their allocations to create economic benefits (Du et al, ; Goetz etal, ; Renwick, ). Water rights law varies greatly by region, but generally promotes (Dozier et al, ): Efficient use of water specifically where land ownership is not a prerequisite to obtaining water rights (Howitt, ; Rosegrant & Binswanger, ; Rosegrant & Gazmuri, ). Economic benefits where temporary and permanent water rights transactions are allowed (Cai & Rosegrant ; Rosegrant & Binswanger, ; Rosen & Sexton, ). Reduction of government costs by constraining the total number of water rights which creates a demand ceiling (Bruns & Meinzen‐Dick, ; Donoso, ). Maintaining environmental flows by creating a demand ceiling. Improvements to system reliability and resilience in the face of supply variability (Frederick, ). …”

“…3. Reduction of government costs by constraining the total number of water rights which creates a demand ceiling (Bruns & Meinzen-Dick, 2005;Donoso, 2006). 4.…”

“…have similar water law in terms of allocation uncertainty and temporary markets (Crase et al, 2004;Endo et al, 2018;H€ aberli, 2017;Hadjigeorgalis, 2008;Margerum & Robinson, 2015;Turral et al, 2005). In addition, the World Bank and other international development agencies have long touted Chilean water law as a model for international reform, and have recommended its use as a framework where water markets could be established (Bauer, 2004a(Bauer, , 2010(Bauer, , 2015Briscoe et al, 1998;Bruns & Meinzen-Dick, 2005;Chikozho & Kujinga, 2017;Holden & Thobani, 1996). (Figure 1).…”

Irrigation water rights: options for pro‐poor reform

“…Such a misunderstanding risks creating ''cadastre disasters'' wasting large amounts of resources on formal registration, in ways that undermine local resource management, while failing to establish an effective water rights system (Bruns and Meinzen-Dick, 2003;Meinzen-Dick and Nkonya, 2005).…”