Missing Water Markets: A Cautionary Tale of Governmental Failure

Pérez, Vanessa Casado

doi:10.2139/ssrn.2406726

Cited by 4 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Motivated by drought experiences in the 1990s, the 1999 law introduced formal water market mechanisms as a means of 'enhancing efficiency or optimising the social utility of a scarce resource' (Casado-Perez 2015: 181). These were originally limited and highly regulated to overcome political resistance from irrigators, left-wing political parties and environmentalists that opposed the idea of treating water as a commodity (De Stefano, 2005;Del Moral et al, 2000, Casado-Pérez, 2015.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Water markets in federal countries: comparing coordination institutions in Australia, Spain and the Western USA

Garrick

Hernández-Mora²,

O’Donnell

2018

Reg Environ Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Water markets are a prime example of decentralized resource allocation, yet their success often depends on strong coordination institutions, particularly as water is redistributed across sectors and political borders. The territorial division of authority in federal countries creates potential intergovernmental coordination challenges in river basins shared by multiple jurisdictions. This paper compares water markets and associated institutional reforms in Australia, Spain and the Western USA -three federations with longstanding experience with water markets but different approaches to distributing authority and intergovernmental coordination. We conduct an institutional mapping of national and subnational roles in market-based water allocation reforms across the three countries and employ process tracing techniques to examine coordination challenges and institutional responses associated with water markets. We find that (1) policy goals addressed by water markets vary across -and within -the three countries, reflecting differences in the level of decentralisation, but (2) all three countries have required capable coordination institutions to address the distributional conflicts associated with water markets. Coordination institutions can take multiple forms, and include both formal and informal venues for planning, financing and conflict management matched to local conditions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Water markets in federal countries: comparing coordination institutions in Australia, Spain and the Western USA

Garrick

Hernández-Mora²,

O’Donnell

2018

Reg Environ Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Over time, private waters became increasingly subject to state control, and the distinction between public and private water ownership has become obsolete (Schorr, 2017), although some countries still struggle to make this distinction obsolete. For example, in Spain, while the 1879 Water Act gave landowners private water rights to groundwater, which were considered private property (Ariño Ortiz & Sastre Beceiro, 2009; Casado‐Perez, 2015), in 1985 the new water law put all continental waters in the public domain and encouraged landowners to give up their private water rights, but many did not do so (Irujo, 2003).…”

Section: Water Property Rights In Different Systems Of Lawmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Water markets promote effective (optimal allocation) and efficient water management (reallocation of water to high‐valued uses), and it is said that they do not function to their full potential without the legal recognition of clearly defined property rights (Zellmer & Harder, 2008). Water markets, whether functioning or not, are in place in Alberta (Canada) (Block & Forrest, 2005; Hurlbert, 2018; Hurlbert & Diaz, 2013; Percy, 1996, 2005), Australia (Bjornlund & McKay, 2002; Pilz, 2010), Chile (Vergara & Rivera, 2018), Mexico (Hernandez, 2003), Spain (Casado‐Perez, 2015), South Africa (van Koppen et al, 2021), and China (de Bonviller et al, 2020; Easter & Huang, 2014; Schiller, 2009; Zhang, 2021).…”

Section: Water “Property” Rights In Statutory Instrumentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…McKenzie (2009, p. 463) looked at the exclusivity, duration, security including compensation, quality of title, and transferability and divisibility of the permits, and concludes that: “there is probably enough to suggest that the water rights under access licences do amount to rights of property.” Mascher and Curran (2017, p. 206) look at “the four characteristics of property including exclusivity, security, duration and transferability,” and conclude that the license “possess the mentioned features”; however, “the limitations … may suggest they do not possess enough of these characteristics to be considered private property rights.” Hence, the water use licensing system can be seen as a market system that:

“draws on the strengths of markets and private property‐like water rights to incentivize efficiency but positions those rights within a framework that allows for flexibility and adaptive management to deliver an efficient and sustainable water allocation system” (Mascher & Curran, 2017, p. 202).Also in Spain, all water resources are put in the public domain, and water is allocated through the administrative granting of permits. In 1999, Spain introduced water market mechanisms by the Water Law Amendment (Law 46/1999) which allowed for the trade in water permits between users (Casado‐Perez, 2015). Permits are needed for both surface‐ and groundwater and are subject to specified conditions (including e.g., period up to 75 years, max volume of flow, and location).…”

Section: Water “Property” Rights In Statutory Instrumentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The tension between state ownership and private quasi‐property rights in water

Bosch

Gupta

2022

WIREs Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A critical legal issue in water governance is who owns and who holds property rights in water. Hence, we address the question: How has the state of legal knowledge on private property rights in water evolved worldwide, and how are these rights embedded in the current existing legal constructions? In answering the question, this article reviews the legal literature to: (i) understand the current state of water ownership and water property rights in the main legal systems, (ii) understand and capture how private water "property" rights are embedded in the existing legal constructions; and(iii) reflect on the application of these rights in practice. We conclude:(a) While most states have placed water in the public domain, past statutory systems of water rights are difficult to abolish, and increasingly Indigenous peoples are successfully demanding recognition of, and reclaiming their water rights. (b) States are (re)allocating water rights through statutory mechanisms, including clearly defined bundle-of-rights. And (c), while the state ostensibly controls the water, the allocation of water through historic and new statutory instruments "encroaches" on state water ownership, and has created confusion affecting the state's power to adaptively govern the water. This confusion reflects the tension between the need of states to own and govern water in the public interest, the rights of Indigenous peoples to their water, with the need of agriculture and industries to have reliable supplies of water, leading to water use rights that imply "quasi-property" rights in water.

show abstract

“…and Casado-Pérez (2014) suggest that government intervention (acting as a regulatory institution) should arbitrate the transactions. In Maneadero, saline intrusion has been historically a problem (Daesslé et al, 2005).…”

Section: Decision-makersmentioning

confidence: 99%

An analysis of water scarcity in a drought prone city: The case of Ensenada, Baja California, Mexico

Elizondo

Mendoza‐Espinosa²

2020

Tecnol. cienc. agua

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The city of Ensenada depends on groundwater, particularly from the Maneadero and Guadalupe aquifer for water supply for agricultural irrigation, urban use, and to support a range of ecosystem functions.Due to intensive extraction, the aquifers' water levels are decreasing and there is water scarcity in the area. Among the solutions implemented by the state of Baja California government is the construction of a desalination plant in Ensenada to meet urban demand, the construction of a new aqueduct to transport water from the Colorado River-Tijuana and the implementation of water reuse for irrigation and aquifer's infiltration. This paper aims to analyze the potential alternatives to mitigate water scarcity in Ensenada region, Baja California, by comparing the costs of water management alternatives and discussing possible solutions. It was found that the use of treated wastewater for irrigation and aquifer's injection could restore aquifers overused at the long term and is more cost-effective from an environmental and economic point of view. Transporting water from Colorado River-Tijuana-aqueduct Ensenada and the construction of a seawater desalination plant are important steps towards provisioning water to Ensenada yet are less desirable due to their environmental impact and the dependency on an already highly impacted watershed.

show abstract

Missing Water Markets: A Cautionary Tale of Governmental Failure

Cited by 4 publications

References 9 publications

Water markets in federal countries: comparing coordination institutions in Australia, Spain and the Western USA

Water markets in federal countries: comparing coordination institutions in Australia, Spain and the Western USA

The tension between state ownership and private quasi‐property rights in water

An analysis of water scarcity in a drought prone city: The case of Ensenada, Baja California, Mexico

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About