一般均衡框架下的纳什议价:共享地表水供应的情况

IF 2.3 3区 经济学 Q2 ECONOMICS Water Resources and Economics Pub Date : 2022-07-01 DOI:10.1016/j.wre.2022.100206
Arpita Nehra, Arthur J. Caplan
{"title":"一般均衡框架下的纳什议价:共享地表水供应的情况","authors":"Arpita Nehra,&nbsp;Arthur J. Caplan","doi":"10.1016/j.wre.2022.100206","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>We extend the axiomatic Nash bargaining approach to the context of interregional water sharing in order to assess the approach’s normative implications in a general equilibrium (GE) framework. The GE model is applied to a water development project proposed for the Wasatch Front and Cache Valley regions of Utah — the Bear River Development Project (BRDP). We demonstrate conceptually how an allocation rule and attendant net regional welfare measures are endogenously determined as equilibrium solutions to the bargaining problem. Numerical analysis, based upon a simulation model calibrated to current data, reveals that Nash bargaining is generally infeasible as a solution mechanism for sharing surplus water supplies generated through the implementation of the BRDP, with or without potential ex post side-payments made between Cache Valley and the Wasatch Front. Only in the special case of (1) larger future regional population sizes, (2) a hypothetical, joint per-capita cost-share arrangement where total project (i.e. fixed) costs are shared equally across the two regions, (3) hypothetically larger water augmentation rates, and (4) the ignoring of potential environmental costs, is the Nash bargaining solution viable. Otherwise, for all other scenarios where the analysis is based upon current or future population sizes, joint- or region-specific cost-share arrangements, lower or higher water augmentation rates, and internalized or externalized environmental costs, the Nash bargaining solution is found to be unattainable as a potential mechanism to share surplus water supplies produced by the BRDP.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48644,"journal":{"name":"Water Resources and Economics","volume":"39 ","pages":"Article 100206"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Nash bargaining in a general equilibrium framework: The case of a shared surface water supply\",\"authors\":\"Arpita Nehra,&nbsp;Arthur J. Caplan\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.wre.2022.100206\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>We extend the axiomatic Nash bargaining approach to the context of interregional water sharing in order to assess the approach’s normative implications in a general equilibrium (GE) framework. The GE model is applied to a water development project proposed for the Wasatch Front and Cache Valley regions of Utah — the Bear River Development Project (BRDP). We demonstrate conceptually how an allocation rule and attendant net regional welfare measures are endogenously determined as equilibrium solutions to the bargaining problem. Numerical analysis, based upon a simulation model calibrated to current data, reveals that Nash bargaining is generally infeasible as a solution mechanism for sharing surplus water supplies generated through the implementation of the BRDP, with or without potential ex post side-payments made between Cache Valley and the Wasatch Front. Only in the special case of (1) larger future regional population sizes, (2) a hypothetical, joint per-capita cost-share arrangement where total project (i.e. fixed) costs are shared equally across the two regions, (3) hypothetically larger water augmentation rates, and (4) the ignoring of potential environmental costs, is the Nash bargaining solution viable. Otherwise, for all other scenarios where the analysis is based upon current or future population sizes, joint- or region-specific cost-share arrangements, lower or higher water augmentation rates, and internalized or externalized environmental costs, the Nash bargaining solution is found to be unattainable as a potential mechanism to share surplus water supplies produced by the BRDP.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48644,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Water Resources and Economics\",\"volume\":\"39 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100206\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Water Resources and Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212428422000135\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Water Resources and Economics","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212428422000135","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

我们将公理纳什议价方法扩展到区域间水资源共享的背景下,以评估该方法在一般均衡(GE)框架中的规范性含义。GE模型应用于犹他州瓦萨奇前沿和卡什谷地区的一个水资源开发项目——熊河开发项目(BRDP)。我们从概念上证明了分配规则和相应的净区域福利措施是如何内生地决定为讨价还价问题的均衡解决方案的。基于对当前数据校准的模拟模型的数值分析表明,纳什议价通常是不可行的,作为共享BRDP实施产生的剩余水资源的解决方案机制,无论是否在Cache Valley和Wasatch Front之间进行潜在的事后侧支付。只有在以下特殊情况下,纳什议价方案才是可行的:(1)未来更大的区域人口规模;(2)假设共同的人均成本分担安排,其中总项目(即固定)成本在两个地区平均分担;(3)假设更高的水资源增水量率;(4)忽略潜在的环境成本。否则,对于基于当前或未来人口规模、联合或区域特定成本分担安排、较低或较高的水资源增给率以及内部化或外部化环境成本进行分析的所有其他情景,纳什议价解决方案被认为是无法实现的,无法作为分享BRDP产生的剩余供水的潜在机制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Nash bargaining in a general equilibrium framework: The case of a shared surface water supply

We extend the axiomatic Nash bargaining approach to the context of interregional water sharing in order to assess the approach’s normative implications in a general equilibrium (GE) framework. The GE model is applied to a water development project proposed for the Wasatch Front and Cache Valley regions of Utah — the Bear River Development Project (BRDP). We demonstrate conceptually how an allocation rule and attendant net regional welfare measures are endogenously determined as equilibrium solutions to the bargaining problem. Numerical analysis, based upon a simulation model calibrated to current data, reveals that Nash bargaining is generally infeasible as a solution mechanism for sharing surplus water supplies generated through the implementation of the BRDP, with or without potential ex post side-payments made between Cache Valley and the Wasatch Front. Only in the special case of (1) larger future regional population sizes, (2) a hypothetical, joint per-capita cost-share arrangement where total project (i.e. fixed) costs are shared equally across the two regions, (3) hypothetically larger water augmentation rates, and (4) the ignoring of potential environmental costs, is the Nash bargaining solution viable. Otherwise, for all other scenarios where the analysis is based upon current or future population sizes, joint- or region-specific cost-share arrangements, lower or higher water augmentation rates, and internalized or externalized environmental costs, the Nash bargaining solution is found to be unattainable as a potential mechanism to share surplus water supplies produced by the BRDP.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Water Resources and Economics
Water Resources and Economics Environmental Science-Water Science and Technology
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
审稿时长
51 days
期刊介绍: Water Resources and Economics is one of a series of specialist titles launched by the highly-regarded Water Research. For the purpose of sustainable water resources management, understanding the multiple connections and feedback mechanisms between water resources and the economy is crucial. Water Resources and Economics addresses the financial and economic dimensions associated with water resources use and governance, across different economic sectors like agriculture, energy, industry, shipping, recreation and urban and rural water supply, at local, regional and transboundary scale. Topics of interest include (but are not restricted to) the economics of: Aquatic ecosystem services- Blue economy- Climate change and flood risk management- Climate smart agriculture- Coastal management- Droughts and water scarcity- Environmental flows- Eutrophication- Food, water, energy nexus- Groundwater management- Hydropower generation- Hydrological risks and uncertainties- Marine resources- Nature-based solutions- Resource recovery- River restoration- Storm water harvesting- Transboundary water allocation- Urban water management- Wastewater treatment- Watershed management- Water health risks- Water pollution- Water quality management- Water security- Water stress- Water technology innovation.
期刊最新文献
Identifying optimal funding allocations for public water infrastructure improvements under uncertainty Interregional watershed services: Valuation of the benefits of controlled embankment breaches to manage urban flood risk Sensitivity of water reallocation performance assessments to water use data Impacts of intermittent water supply on household electricity demand: An econometric analysis for the Pune Metropolitan Region, India Capturing the drivers of crop water footprints in Africa and its spatial patterns
×
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