Environmental and Resource Economics

, Volume 45, Issue 4, pp 499–515 | Cite as

A Pollution Offset System for Trading Non-Point Source Water Pollution Permits

  • R. A. Ranga Prabodanie
  • John F. Raffensperger
  • Mark W. Milke
Article

Abstract

Water pollution from non-point sources is a global environmental concern. Economists propose tradable permit systems as a solution, but they are difficult to implement due to the nature of non-point sources. We present a pollution offset system for trading non-point source water pollution permits. Conventional pollution offset systems suffer from thin markets and transaction costs. In this paper, we show how to overcome these problems with a centrally managed common-pool market. We define permits as allowable nitrate loading to a groundwater aquifer. This trading system utilizes estimates of potential nitrate leaching from land uses, a set of transport coefficients generated from a simulation of nitrate transport in groundwater, an online trading system, and a linear program to clear the market. We illustrate the concept using a hypothetical case study.

Keywords

Nitrate Non-point sources Linear program Trading Water pollution permits 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Coase RH (1960) The problem of social cost. J Law Econ 3(1): 1–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Dales JH (1968) Land, water and ownership. Can J Econ 1(4): 791–804CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Eheart JW, Brill ED, Lence BJ, Kilgore JD, Uber JG (1987) Cost efficiency of time-varying discharge permit programs for water quality management. Water Resour Res 23(2): 245–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Environment Waikato (2008) Nitrate contamination of groundwater. Retrieved 26 December 2008, from http://www.ew.govt.nz/Environmental-information/groundwater/Monitoring-groundwater-quality/Nitrate-contamination-of-groundwater/
  5. Ermoliev Y, Michalevich M, Nentjes A (2000) Markets for tradable emission and ambient permits: a dynamic approach. Environ Resour Econ 15(1): 39–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Harbaugh BAW, Banta ER, Hill MC, McDonald MG (2000) MODFLOW-2000: The U.S. Geological Survey Modular Groundwater Model. U.S. Geological SurveyGoogle Scholar
  7. Hogan WW, Read EG, Ring BJ (1996) Using mathematical programming for electricity spot pricing. Int Trans Oper Res 3: 243–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Horan RD, Shortle JS, Abler DG (2002) Point-nonpoint nutrient trading in the susquehanna river Basin. Water Resour Res 38(5):8:1–8:12Google Scholar
  9. Hung MF, Shaw D (2005) A trading-ratio system for trading water pollution discharge permits. J Environ Econ Manage 49(1): 83–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kerr S, Rutherford K, Lock K (2007) Nutrient trading in Lake Rotorua: goals and trading caps. Motu Economic and Public Policy ResearchGoogle Scholar
  11. King DM, Kuch PJ (2003) Will Nutrient Credit Trading Ever Work? An assessment of supply and demand problems and institutional obstacles. Environmental Law Reporter. News and Analysis, 5-2003Google Scholar
  12. Krupnick A, Oates W, Verg EVD (1983) On marketable air pollution permits: the case for a system of pollution offset. J Environ Econ Manage 10: 233–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Leston D (1992) Simulation of a two-pollutant, two-season pollution offset system for the Colorado river of Texas below Austin. Water Resour Res 28(5): 1311–1318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lock K, Kerr S (2007) Nutrient trading in Lake Rotorua: where are we now. Motu Economic and Public Policy ResearchGoogle Scholar
  15. Martin KC, Joskow PL, Ellerman AD (2007) Time and location differentiated NOx control in competitive electricity markets using cap-and-trade mechanisms. Center for Energy and Environmental Policy ResearchGoogle Scholar
  16. McGartland A (1988) A comparison of two marketable discharge permit systems. J Environ Econ Manage 15: 35–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. McGartlend AM, Oates WE (1985) Marketable permits for prevention of environmental deterioration. J Environ Econ Manage 12: 207–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Montero JP (2008) A simple auction mechanism for the optimal allocation of the commons. Am Econ Rev 98(1): 496–518CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Montgomery WD (1972) Markets in licenses and efficient pollution control programs. J Econ Theory 5(3): 395–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Morgan DS, Everett R (2005) Application of simulation-optimization methods for management of nitrate loading to groundwater from decentralized wastewater treatment systems near La Pine, Oregon. US Geological Survey Oregon Water Science CentreGoogle Scholar
  21. Morgan CL, Coggins JS, Eidman VR (2000) Tradable permits for controlling nitrates in groundwater at the farm level: a conceptual model. J Agric Appl Econ 32(2): 249–258Google Scholar
  22. Neil WO, David M, Moore C, Joeres E (1983) Transferable discharge permits and economic efficiency: the Fox River. J Environ Econ Manage 10(4): 346–355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. O’Shea L (2002) An economic approach to reducing water pollution: point and diffuse sources. Sci Total Environ 282(283): 49–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Revenga C, Mock G (2000) Dirty water: pollution problems persist. World Resources InstituteGoogle Scholar
  25. U.S. Geological Survey (1999) The quality of our nation’s waters: nutrients and pesticides. U.S. Geological SurveyGoogle Scholar
  26. U.S. Geological Survey (2006) Data input instructions for groundwater transport process (GWT). Reston, VirginiaGoogle Scholar
  27. Weber ML (2001) Markets for water rights under environmental constraints. J Environ Econ Manage 42: 53–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Zheng C (1990) MT3D—a modular three-dimensional transport model for simulation of advection, dispersion and chemical reaction of contaminants in groundwater systems. The United States Environmental Protection Agency-Robert S. Kerr Enivronmental Research Laboratory, Ada, OklahomaGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. A. Ranga Prabodanie
    • 1
  • John F. Raffensperger
    • 1
  • Mark W. Milke
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of ManagementUniversity of CanterburyChristchurchNew Zealand
  2. 2.Department of Civil and Natural Resources EngineeringUniversity of CanterburyChristchurchNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations