Evaluating Water Savings from Budget-Based Tiered Rates in Orange County, California

IF 1 4区 经济学 Q3 ECONOMICS
K. Harmon, Monobina Mukherjee, S. Gaur, Drew Atwater
{"title":"Evaluating Water Savings from Budget-Based Tiered Rates in Orange County, California","authors":"K. Harmon, Monobina Mukherjee, S. Gaur, Drew Atwater","doi":"10.1142/S2382624X21500077","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Interest in budget-based tiered rates (BBTRs, also referred to as water budgets) has grown across California in response to recurrent droughts, other threats to water supply, and calls for increased water-use efficiency. One major policy question surrounding BBTRs is whether or not they result in greater water-use efficiency relative to other rate structures, which results in water saving. In this paper, we provide a policy overview of BBTRs and their application in Orange County, California. We use fixed effects models to evaluate whether savings in water use occurred in two agencies which adopted BBTRs over the past decade, and the one which did not adopt BBTR but which applied a BBTR framework to provide information about water-use efficiency to consumers while retaining the existing rate structure. We also evaluate savings for three different user groups based on their average water-use characteristics, to assess whether BBTRs may produce greater savings for high-volume users relative to low- or medium-volume users. Our analysis indicates modest savings in single-family residential household water consumption attributable to BBTRs for three Orange County water agencies. Savings were realized for two agencies which converted to a budget-based rate structure at multiple levels of consumption. However, low-volume users in the agency which adopted an “informational” approach increased their water usage over the study period. This suggests that providing information on water budgets in the absence of a price signal may have limited conservation benefit, and may incentivize some low-volume users to increase their water consumption. Savings are generally higher for medium- and high-volume users than for low-volume users. We close with a discussion of our results, avenues for future research, and the limitations of this analytical framework, including the confounding effect of the 2015 historical drought and related government-mandated conservation measures. With ongoing climate change increasing the chances of more severe droughts in the future, research into the effects of alternative rate structures such as BBTRs will be valuable to water agencies and their customers.","PeriodicalId":48492,"journal":{"name":"Water Economics and Policy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Water Economics and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1142/S2382624X21500077","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Interest in budget-based tiered rates (BBTRs, also referred to as water budgets) has grown across California in response to recurrent droughts, other threats to water supply, and calls for increased water-use efficiency. One major policy question surrounding BBTRs is whether or not they result in greater water-use efficiency relative to other rate structures, which results in water saving. In this paper, we provide a policy overview of BBTRs and their application in Orange County, California. We use fixed effects models to evaluate whether savings in water use occurred in two agencies which adopted BBTRs over the past decade, and the one which did not adopt BBTR but which applied a BBTR framework to provide information about water-use efficiency to consumers while retaining the existing rate structure. We also evaluate savings for three different user groups based on their average water-use characteristics, to assess whether BBTRs may produce greater savings for high-volume users relative to low- or medium-volume users. Our analysis indicates modest savings in single-family residential household water consumption attributable to BBTRs for three Orange County water agencies. Savings were realized for two agencies which converted to a budget-based rate structure at multiple levels of consumption. However, low-volume users in the agency which adopted an “informational” approach increased their water usage over the study period. This suggests that providing information on water budgets in the absence of a price signal may have limited conservation benefit, and may incentivize some low-volume users to increase their water consumption. Savings are generally higher for medium- and high-volume users than for low-volume users. We close with a discussion of our results, avenues for future research, and the limitations of this analytical framework, including the confounding effect of the 2015 historical drought and related government-mandated conservation measures. With ongoing climate change increasing the chances of more severe droughts in the future, research into the effects of alternative rate structures such as BBTRs will be valuable to water agencies and their customers.
评估加州奥兰治县基于预算的分级费率节约用水
为了应对经常性干旱、供水面临的其他威胁以及提高用水效率的呼声,加州各地越来越关注基于预算的分层费率(bbtr,也被称为水预算)。围绕bbtr的一个主要政策问题是,相对于其他费率结构,bbtr是否能带来更高的用水效率,从而实现节水。在本文中,我们提供了bbtr的政策概述及其在加利福尼亚州奥兰治县的应用。我们使用固定效应模型来评估在过去十年中,两个采用BBTR的机构和一个没有采用BBTR但采用BBTR框架向消费者提供有关用水效率的信息同时保留现有费率结构的机构是否节约了用水。我们还根据三个不同用户群体的平均用水特征评估了节约用水,以评估bbtr是否可以为高容量用户相对于低或中容量用户产生更大的节约。我们的分析表明,三个奥兰治县水务机构的bbtr可适度节省单户住宅家庭用水。两个机构实现了节余,这两个机构在多个消费层次上采用了以预算为基础的费率结构。然而,在研究期间,该机构中采用“信息”方法的小容量用户的用水量增加了。这表明,在没有价格信号的情况下提供有关水预算的信息可能产生有限的节约效益,并可能鼓励一些用水量小的用户增加其用水量。中等和高容量用户的节省通常高于低容量用户。最后,我们讨论了我们的结果,未来研究的途径,以及该分析框架的局限性,包括2015年历史干旱的混淆效应和相关的政府强制保护措施。随着持续的气候变化增加了未来发生更严重干旱的可能性,研究bbtr等替代费率结构的影响对水务机构及其客户来说将是有价值的。
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
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
9.10%
发文量
26
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信