الزامات اقتصادی مدیریت منابع آب

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشیار گروه اقتصاد، دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی، تهران

2 دانشجوی دکترای اقتصاد، موسسه عالی آموزش و پژوهش مدیریت و برنامه‌ریزی، تهران

چکیده

نماگرهای وضعیت منابع و مصارف آب در کشور بیانگر عدم تعادل بین عرضه و تقاضای آن است. سیگنال‌دهی نامناسب قیمت آب از ناکارایی بازار آب حکایت دارد. مطابق با ادبیات علم اقتصاد، ارزش‌گذاری نادقیق و عدم تبیین حقوق مالکیت آب از جمله مهم‌ترین عوامل پایین بودن کارایی بازار آب به‌حساب می‌آید. قیمت‌های پایین، حساسیت کم تقاضای آب نسبت به قیمت و نبود نهاده‌های جانشین منابع آبی مجموعه عواملی است که منجر به برداشت بی‌رویه از منابع آب در بخش‌های مصرفی، صنعتی و کشاورزی شده است. در این راستا بررسی‌ها حاکی از آن است که قیمت‌گذاری منابع آبی در ایران عمدتاً مبتنی بر روش حسابداری بوده در صورتی‌که مطالعات صورت گرفته نشان می‌دهد که رویکرد قیمت‌گذاری آب در کشورهای توسعه یافته، نه‌تنها هزینه نهایی آب را در نظر می‌گیرد، بلکه در محاسبه قیمت آب به پارامترهایی دیگری که عمدتاً متأثر از ارزش ذاتی آب نظیر ارزش میراثی و وجودی است، توجه ویژه دارند. مقاله حاضر با عطف توجه به مفاهیم ارزش، هزینه و قیمت‌گذاری آب بر اساس اصول اقتصادی، به تبیین ادبیات بازاریابی و قیمت‌گذاری دقیق منابع آب به‌عنوان دو استراتژی مهم اقتصاددانان در مدیریت منابع آب می‌پردازد. نتایج پژوهش حاضر بر تبیین دقیق حقوق مالکیت جهت ایجاد بازاریابی منابع آبی و احتساب پارامترهای مهم در قیمت‌گذاری مدرن منابع آبی در کشورهای توسعه یافته دلالت دارد و کاملاً مشهود است که قیمت‌گذاری موجود آب در ایران به شیوه حسابداری در بلندمدت موجب اتلاف منابع آبی کشور شده و لذا لازم است که این رویکرد برای جلوگیری از هدر رفت منابع مورد تجدیدنظر قرار گیرد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Economic Requirements of Water Resources Management

نویسندگان [English]

  • Nasser Khiabani 1
  • Soroush Bagheri 2
  • Amir Bashiripour 2
1 Assoc. Prof., Department of Economics, Allameh Tabatabaei University, Tehran
2 PhD Student of Economics, Management and Planning Higher Education and Research Institute, Tehran
چکیده [English]

Indicators of water resources status and water consumption in Iran reveal an imbalance between supply and demand. This is compounded by the current unrealistic water price that signals the inefficiency of the water market in Iran. In economics parlance, the most important factors responsible for the low efficiency of water market are inaccurate valuation and failure to define the ownership rights of water. Low prices, low sensitivity of water demand to prices, and the lack of proper inputs as substitutes for water resources have collectively contributed to excessive pressures on the available water resources for domestic, industrial, and agricultural uses. A brief glance reveals that water resources in Iran are merely priced based on cost accounting. This is while study has shown that developed countries adopt approaches to water pricing that not only consider the final cost of water but also take into account such other parameters that are affected by intrinsic value of water including its bequest and existence values. The present paper draws upon the concepts of value, expenses, and pricing of water in an attempt to explore the marketing and pricing of water resources as the two major tools economists employ in the management of these resources. It is the objective of the study to arrive at an accurate definition of ownership rights of water resources to improve upon the present water marketing. In doing so, the more important components of modern pricing strategies adopted by developed nations will also be investigated. Results indicate that the present cost accounting method used in pricing water in Iran will in the long-run lead to the wastage of water resources and that it should, therefore, be given up in favor modern and more realistic policies to avoid such waste of resources.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Marketing
  • Ownership Rights
  • Valuation
  • pricing
  • Economic Management of Water Resources
1. Water for a Sustainable World. (2015). The United Nations World Water Development Report, USA.

2. Water for a Sustainable World. (2003). The United Nations World Water Development Report, USA.

3. The World Bank. (2014). World development Indicators, Washington DC.

4. Water for a Sustainable World. (2009). The United Nations World Water Development Report, USA.

5. United Nation World Water Development Report. (2014). Water and Energy. Vol 1., USA.

6. World Bank. (2006). World Development Indicators, USA.

7. President Deputy Strategic Planning and Control. (2009). Guide to determining the economic value of water for agriculture, 567 No., Tehran, Iran. (In Persian)

8. Zarepour, Z., Tahamipour, M., and Shavardi, A. (2011). “The estimate of economic value of water in urban and rural applications in Khuzestan province.” Agriculture and Development, 76, 121-143.

9. Olmstead, Sh., Hanemann, M., and Stavins, R. (2007). “Water demand under alternative price structures.” J. of Enviornmental Economics and Management, 54 (2), 181-198.

11. Arbués, F. (2003). “Estimation of residential water demand: A state-of-the-art review.” Journal of Socio-Economics, 32, 81-102.

12. Ruijs, A., Zimmermann, A., and Vanden Berg, M. (2008). “Demand and distributional effects of water pricing policies.” Ecological Economics, 66 (2-3), 506-516.

13. Groom, B., Xiaoying, L., and Swanson, T.  (2008). “Resource pricing and poverty alleviation: The case of block tariffs for water in Beijing.” In Coping with Water Deficiency Environment and Policy, 48, 213-237.

14. Salehnia, N. (2006). “Urban water pricing with Ramsey model.” MSc Thesis, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad. (In Persian)

15. Fallahi, M. A., Ansari, H., Davari, K., and Salehnia, N. (2009). “Pricing urban drinking water with Ramsey model.” Quarterly Iranian Economic Research, 38, 217-242. (In Persian)

16. Fotros, M. H. (2013). “The Impact of increasing block pricing on the residential water consumption in Iranian Provinces.” Journal of Economic Research 3 (12), 29-49.

17. Michelsen, M., and Young, R. (1993). “Optioning agricultural water rights for urban water supplies during drought.” American J. of Agricultural Economics, 75(4), 1010-1020.

18. Howe, C., Schurmeier, D., and Shaw, D. (1986). “Innovative approaches to water allocation: The potential for water markets.” Water Resources Research, 22(4), 439-445.

19.Walski, T. M., Chase, D. V., and Savic, D. A. (2001). Water distribution modeling, Civil and Environmental Engineering and Engineering Mechanics Faculty Publications, Heasted Press, Waterbury, CT.

20. Griffn, R. C., William, E. M., and Wade, J. C. (1981). “Urban residential demand for water in the United States: Comment.” Land Economics, 57, 252-256.

21. Griffn, R. C. (1991). “The welfare analytics of transaction costs, externalities, and institutional choice.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 73, 601-614.

22. Griffn, R. C. (1995). “On the meaning of economic effciency in policy analysis.” Land Economics, 71, 1-15.

23. Griffn, R. C. (1998). “The fundamental principles of cost-benefit analysis.” Water Resources Research, 34, 2063-2071.

24. Griffn, R. C. (2001). “Effective water pricing.” Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 37 1335-1347.

25. Griffn, R. C., and Gregory, W. Ch. (2002). “Issues and trends in texas water marketing.” Water Resources Update, 121,  29-33.

26. Griffn, R., and Manzoor Chowdhury, E. (1993). “Evaluating a locally financed reservoir: The case of applewhite.” Journal of Water Resource Planning and Management, 119, 628-644.

27. Griffn, R. C., and Shih-Hsun Hsu. (1993). “The potential for water market effciency when instream flows have value.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 75, 292-303.

28. Griffn, R. C., and Mjelde, J. W. (2000). “Valuing water supply reliability.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 82, 414-426.

29. Griffn, R. C. (2006). Water resource economics, the analysis of scarcity, The MIT Press Cambridge, Massachusetts London, England.

30. Wang, Y-D., Alleng, G., Byrne, J., Conte, H., Karki, J., Rao, S., Jose, S., DeMooy, J., Belden, A., Sood, A., and Cole, P. (2007). “Synergic benefits of integrated water and energy planning.” Presented to the 103rd Association of American Geographers Annual Meeting, San Francisco, CA.