Valuing reductions in water extractions from groundwater basins with benefit transfer: The Great Artesian Basin in Australia

Abstract

The management of groundwater to generate net community benefits is challenging because of the complexity of impacts that can be involved, the varying interests of different stakeholder groups, time lags between changes in extraction rates and aquifer levels, and the level of technical and scientific uncertainty. In an economic framework, decisions about conserving groundwater reserves by limiting extraction rates should be made by comparing the benefits of conservation activities with the associated costs. However, limited information about benefits and costs makes it difficult to apply a benefit‐cost framework to issues of groundwater management. This can be addressed to some extent by sourcing nonmarket values from other studies in a benefit transfer process. In this paper, benefit transfer techniques are applied to an evaluation case study about limiting extractions from the Great Artesian Basin in Australia. The results demonstrate some of the issues with the benefit transfer approach and confirm that the publicly funded bore capping program in Australia has been delivering net benefits to the community.

Ecosystem services: Challenges and opportunities for hydrologic modeling to support decision making

“…This requires going beyond changes to streamflow, nutrient concentrations, sediment loads, and groundwater levels to the resultant effects on human health and well‐being. This translation may be more straightforward for some services, such as hydropower production, but for others, such as the impact of a change in recharge on the existence value of a groundwater spring [e.g., Rolfe , ], the task is more difficult. Moreover, in an uncertain environment, the information needs may vary depending on the risk preferences held by decision makers.…”

Optimality Versus Viability in Groundwater Management with Environmental Flows

“…The optimal modelling approach is based on the economic valuation of the ecosystem services sustained by the groundwater flows (Rolfe 2010, Momblanch et al 2016. This evaluation consists in a three-step process, including first the identification of the dependent ecosystems, the determination of the flow regime (scenarios) that may critically affect their functioning and species living there, and finally the estimation of values that people place on related non-market goods and services.…”

“…For instance Akter et al (2014) develop an integrated hydro-ecological model of a river managed by dams together with non-market economic values of wetland inundation to estimate the economic value of an additional unit of water in the environment. This method has also been used for the preservation of springs and some endemic species in Rolfe (2010). In the groundwater context, Esteban and Albiac (2011), Esteban and Dinar (2013;2016) give specific focus on ecosystem services provided by wetland areas related to the Western La Mancha aquifer in Spain.…”

Rationales Behind Irrationality of Decision Making in Groundwater Quality Management

“…(4) Although there are existing models and data for estimating the cost of various monitoring and remediation efforts involved in rehabilitating or containing damaged aquifers, methods for estimation of the long‐term costs arising from losing the aquifer are not as developed (Rolfe 2010). This is partly because of the uncertainty regarding predicting future changes in populations and needs of the society using the aquifer.…”