Environmental Economics and Policy Studies

, Volume 16, Issue 3, pp 263–278 | Cite as

Optimal groundwater management when recharge is declining: a method for valuing the recharge benefits of watershed conservation

Research Article

Abstract

Demand for water will continue to increase as per capita income rises and the population grows, and climate change can exacerbate the problem through changes in precipitation patterns and quantities, evapotranspiration, and land cover—all of which directly or indirectly affect the amount of water that ultimately infiltrates back into groundwater aquifers. We develop a dynamic management framework that incorporates alternative climate-change (and hence, recharge) scenarios and apply it to the Pearl Harbor aquifer system on O‘ahu, Hawai‘i. By calculating the net present value of water for a variety of plausible climate scenarios, we are able to estimate the indirect value of groundwater recharge that would be generated by watershed conservation activities. Enhancing recharge increases welfare by lowering the scarcity value of water in both the near term and the future, as well as delaying the need for costly alternatives such as desalination. For a reasonable range of parameter values, we find that the present value gain of maintaining recharge ranges from $31.1 million to over $1.5 billion.

Keywords

Groundwater management Climate change adaptation Watershed conservation 

JEL Codes

Q25 Q54 

References

  1. Bassiouni M, Oki DS (2012) Trends and shifts in streamflow in Hawai‘i, 1913–2008. Hydrol Process. doi:10.1002/hyp.9298 Google Scholar
  2. Brown G, Deacon R (1972) Economic optimization of a single cell aquifer. Water Resour Res 8:552–564Google Scholar
  3. Chiang AC (2000) Elements of dynamic optimization, vol 1. Waveland Press, Inc., Illinois, pp 240–243Google Scholar
  4. Christensen JH, Hewitson B, Busuioc A, Chen A, Gao X, Held I, Jones R, Kolli RK, Kwon W-T, Laprise R, Magaña Rueda V, Mearns L, Menéndez CG, Räisänen J, Rinke A, Sarr A, Whetton P (2007) Regional climate projections. In: Solomon S et al (eds) Climate change 2007: the physical science basis, contribution of working group I to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  5. Chu PS, Chen H (2005) Interannual and interdecadal rainfall variations in the Hawaiian Islands in a warming climate. J Clim 18:4796–4813CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chu PS, Chen YR, Schroeder T (2010) Changes in precipitation extremes in the Hawaiian Islands in a warming climate. J Clim 23:4881–4900CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Feinerman E, Knapp KC (1983) Benefits from groundwater management: magnitude, sensitivity, and distribution. Am J Agric Econ 65:703–710CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Giambelluca TW, Diaz HF, Luke MSA (2008) Secular temperature changes in Hawai‘i. Geophys Res Lett 35:L12702CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gingerich SB, Oki DS (2000) Ground water in Hawaii, U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet 126-00Google Scholar
  10. Gisser M, Sanchez DA (1980) Competition versus optimal control in groundwater pumping. Water Resour Res 31:638–642CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kaiser B (2012) Watershed Conservation in the Long Run, ManuscriptGoogle Scholar
  12. Kaiser B, Krause N, Roumasset J (1999) Environmental valuation and the hawaiian economy, University of Hawaii Economic Research Organization Working PaperGoogle Scholar
  13. Krulce DL, Roumasset JA, Wilson T (1997) Optimal management of a renewable and replaceable resource: the case of coastal groundwater. Am J Agric Econ 79:1218–1228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Liu CCK (2006) Analytical groundwater flow and transport modeling for the estimation of the sustainable yield of pearl harbor aquifer, Project Report PR-2006-06, Water Resources Research Center, HawaiiGoogle Scholar
  15. Mink JF (1980) State of the Groundwater Resources of Southern Oahu, vol 1. Honolulu Board of Water Supply, Hawaii, p 68Google Scholar
  16. Oki DS (2005) Numerical simulation of the effects of low-permeability valley-fill barriers and the redistribution of ground-water withdrawals in the Pearl Harbor Area, Oahu, Hawaii, U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2005-5253, 111 ppGoogle Scholar
  17. Pitafi BA, Roumasset JA (2009) Pareto-improving water management over space and time: the honolulu case. Am J Agric Econ 91(1):138–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Roumasset JA, Wada CA (2012) Ordering the extraction of renewable resources: the case of multiple aquifers. Resour Energy Econ 34:112–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Safeeq M, Fares A (2012) Hydrologic response of a Hawaiian watershed to future climate change scenarios. Hydrol Process 26:2745–2764CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Sumiye J (2002) Ko‘olau Mountains Watershed Partnership Management PlanGoogle Scholar
  21. Timm O, Diaz HF (2009) Synoptic-statistical approach to regional downscaling of IPCC twenty-first-century climate projections: seasonal rainfall over the Hawaiian Islands. J Climate 22:4261–4280Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Japan 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Hawai‘i Economic Research OrganizationHonoluluUSA

Personalised recommendations