Water Markets, Regulation and Technology: A Survey of Irrigators in Washington State

IF 2.2 4区 环境科学与生态学 Q3 ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL
Suhina Deol, Georgine Yorgey, Jonathan Yoder, Kirti Rajagopalan, Michael Brady, Dan Haller, Julie Padowski, Joseph Cook
{"title":"Water Markets, Regulation and Technology: A Survey of Irrigators in Washington State","authors":"Suhina Deol,&nbsp;Georgine Yorgey,&nbsp;Jonathan Yoder,&nbsp;Kirti Rajagopalan,&nbsp;Michael Brady,&nbsp;Dan Haller,&nbsp;Julie Padowski,&nbsp;Joseph Cook","doi":"10.1111/1752-1688.70091","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Water markets hold potential for helping communities in the western United States adapt to water scarcity, but market activity remains low. Reforms to policies and institutions could spur more market activity but could also be politically infeasible if water users opposed them. Improving complementary tools like seasonal forecasts and consumptive use monitoring can help only if the tools are used. We surveyed 248 water users in four sub-basins of the Columbia River in Washington State to measure (a) their existing knowledge of and participation in water markets, (b) their demand for hypothetical future policy changes and (c) their use of these complementary tools. Only half of water rights holders were familiar with the concept of water markets, though participation was relatively high among those who were. Three quarters reported ‘difficulty’ knowing what a fair price for their water right would be, and a majority voted in favor of a hypothetical policy to mandate disclosure of water market transaction prices. A large majority supported repealing relinquishment (i.e., ‘use-it-or-lose-it’) rules. A majority of irrigation district growers said they would advise their Boards of Directors to vote for a 1 year program to lease water out of the district, but to vote against a 5 year ‘dry-year option’ program. Only one-third used long-range (1–7 months) forecasts of precipitation, snowpack, temperature or water availability, and less than a quarter measure their consumptive use.</p>","PeriodicalId":17234,"journal":{"name":"Journal of The American Water Resources Association","volume":"62 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1752-1688.70091","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of The American Water Resources Association","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1752-1688.70091","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Water markets hold potential for helping communities in the western United States adapt to water scarcity, but market activity remains low. Reforms to policies and institutions could spur more market activity but could also be politically infeasible if water users opposed them. Improving complementary tools like seasonal forecasts and consumptive use monitoring can help only if the tools are used. We surveyed 248 water users in four sub-basins of the Columbia River in Washington State to measure (a) their existing knowledge of and participation in water markets, (b) their demand for hypothetical future policy changes and (c) their use of these complementary tools. Only half of water rights holders were familiar with the concept of water markets, though participation was relatively high among those who were. Three quarters reported ‘difficulty’ knowing what a fair price for their water right would be, and a majority voted in favor of a hypothetical policy to mandate disclosure of water market transaction prices. A large majority supported repealing relinquishment (i.e., ‘use-it-or-lose-it’) rules. A majority of irrigation district growers said they would advise their Boards of Directors to vote for a 1 year program to lease water out of the district, but to vote against a 5 year ‘dry-year option’ program. Only one-third used long-range (1–7 months) forecasts of precipitation, snowpack, temperature or water availability, and less than a quarter measure their consumptive use.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

水市场、监管和技术:对华盛顿州灌溉者的调查
水市场在帮助美国西部社区适应水资源短缺方面具有潜力,但市场活动仍然很低。政策和制度改革可能会刺激更多的市场活动,但如果用水者反对,改革也可能在政治上不可行。改进补充工具,如季节预报和消费监测,只有在这些工具被使用的情况下才能有所帮助。我们调查了华盛顿州哥伦比亚河四个子流域的248名用水者,以衡量(a)他们对水市场的现有知识和参与,(b)他们对假设的未来政策变化的需求,以及(c)他们对这些补充工具的使用。只有一半的水权持有者熟悉水市场的概念,尽管这些人的参与率相对较高。四分之三的人表示,他们“很难”知道自己的水权的公平价格是多少,大多数人投票赞成一项强制披露水市场交易价格的假想政策。绝大多数人支持废除让与(即“要么使用,要么失去”)规则。大多数灌溉区种植者表示,他们会建议董事会投票支持为期1年的区域水租赁计划,但投票反对为期5年的“旱年选项”计划。只有三分之一的人使用长期(1-7个月)的降水、积雪、温度或水的可用性预测,不到四分之一的人测量他们的消费使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of The American Water Resources Association
Journal of The American Water Resources Association 环境科学-地球科学综合
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
12.50%
发文量
100
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: JAWRA seeks to be the preeminent scholarly publication on multidisciplinary water resources issues. JAWRA papers present ideas derived from multiple disciplines woven together to give insight into a critical water issue, or are based primarily upon a single discipline with important applications to other disciplines. Papers often cover the topics of recent AWRA conferences such as riparian ecology, geographic information systems, adaptive management, and water policy. JAWRA authors present work within their disciplinary fields to a broader audience. Our Associate Editors and reviewers reflect this diversity to ensure a knowledgeable and fair review of a broad range of topics. We particularly encourage submissions of papers which impart a ''take home message'' our readers can use.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书