¿Libre de la Maleza Estatista? Assessing Neoliberal Promises and Water Markets in Chile

IF 7.3 1区 地球科学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Earths Future Pub Date : 2024-10-11 DOI:10.1029/2024EF004963
Benji Reade Malagueño, Paolo D'Odorico
{"title":"¿Libre de la Maleza Estatista? Assessing Neoliberal Promises and Water Markets in Chile","authors":"Benji Reade Malagueño,&nbsp;Paolo D'Odorico","doi":"10.1029/2024EF004963","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <p>Neoliberal approaches to water governance, pioneered in Chile in the 1980s, are reappearing today on the centerstage of the water policy debate. While advocates claim that strong property rights, limits on government authority, and water markets can enhance environmental sustainability, efficiency, neutrality, and equity in the distribution of water rights, limited empirical evidence exists on whether neoliberal policies have delivered on these key promises. In this paper, we combine hydrological analysis with a nationwide data set on government water rights allocations between 1981 and 2021 to determine when and where water has been allocated beyond sustainable limits. We then integrate water market transaction and agricultural data to assess how allocations and scarcity conditions relate to spatial and temporal patterns in irrigation, crop distribution, and water market activity. Our results indicate that 30% of catchments are overallocated, and that continued government allocations of water rights during scarcity exacerbate already-high inequalities in the distribution of water. We find no evidence that scarcity or water markets induced improvements in numerous efficiency metrics. Overall, our results support growing claims that the neoliberal water model fails to fulfill its key promises, notably to the detriment of nature and marginalized rural communities.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":48748,"journal":{"name":"Earths Future","volume":"12 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1029/2024EF004963","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Earths Future","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2024EF004963","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Neoliberal approaches to water governance, pioneered in Chile in the 1980s, are reappearing today on the centerstage of the water policy debate. While advocates claim that strong property rights, limits on government authority, and water markets can enhance environmental sustainability, efficiency, neutrality, and equity in the distribution of water rights, limited empirical evidence exists on whether neoliberal policies have delivered on these key promises. In this paper, we combine hydrological analysis with a nationwide data set on government water rights allocations between 1981 and 2021 to determine when and where water has been allocated beyond sustainable limits. We then integrate water market transaction and agricultural data to assess how allocations and scarcity conditions relate to spatial and temporal patterns in irrigation, crop distribution, and water market activity. Our results indicate that 30% of catchments are overallocated, and that continued government allocations of water rights during scarcity exacerbate already-high inequalities in the distribution of water. We find no evidence that scarcity or water markets induced improvements in numerous efficiency metrics. Overall, our results support growing claims that the neoliberal water model fails to fulfill its key promises, notably to the detriment of nature and marginalized rural communities.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
¿Libre de la Maleza Estatista?评估智利的新自由主义承诺和水市场
20 世纪 80 年代在智利率先提出的新自由主义水治理方法,如今再次出现在水政策辩论的中心舞台上。虽然倡导者声称,强有力的产权、对政府权力的限制以及水市场可以提高环境可持续性、效率、中立性以及水权分配的公平性,但关于新自由主义政策是否兑现了这些关键承诺的经验证据却十分有限。在本文中,我们将水文分析与 1981 年至 2021 年间政府水权分配的全国性数据集相结合,以确定何时何地水权分配超出了可持续限度。然后,我们整合了水市场交易和农业数据,以评估分配和稀缺条件与灌溉、作物分布和水市场活动的时空模式之间的关系。我们的研究结果表明,30% 的集水区被过度分配了水权,政府在缺水期间继续分配水权加剧了本已严重的水分配不平等。我们没有发现任何证据表明稀缺性或水市场会促使许多效率指标得到改善。总体而言,我们的研究结果支持了越来越多的观点,即新自由主义的水资源模式未能实现其主要承诺,尤其是损害了自然和边缘化的农村社区。
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 去求助
来源期刊
Earths Future
Earths Future ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCESGEOSCIENCES, MULTIDI-GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
CiteScore
11.00
自引率
7.30%
发文量
260
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Earth’s Future: A transdisciplinary open access journal, Earth’s Future focuses on the state of the Earth and the prediction of the planet’s future. By publishing peer-reviewed articles as well as editorials, essays, reviews, and commentaries, this journal will be the preeminent scholarly resource on the Anthropocene. It will also help assess the risks and opportunities associated with environmental changes and challenges.
期刊最新文献
Effective Adaptation Options to Alleviate Nuisance Flooding in Coastal Megacities—Learning From Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam Observations Over a Century Underscore an Increasing Likelihood of Compound Dry-Hot Events in China Response of Global Runoff Components to Rising CO2 Increased Asian Sulfate Aerosol Emissions Remarkably Enhance Sahel Summer Precipitation Consumption-Based Emissions of African Countries: An Analysis of Decoupling Dynamics and Drivers
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1