ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT OF WATER TRADE RESTRICTIONS IN THE MURRAY DARLING BASIN
ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT OF WATER TRADE RESTRICTIONS IN THE MURRAY DARLING BASIN
复制标题
墨累达令盆地水贸易限制的经济评估
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2006
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
M. Kirby
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
M. Proctor;M. Kirby
澳大利亚各地的水市场有许多限制，政府间最高论坛、澳大利亚政府理事会和其他机构提议，应放开水市场，以增加水对经济的净贡献。本文使用墨累河流域南部系统的模型，估计现有的限制和水对经济的贡献的变化的成本，如果，至少，水的临时市场是不受限制的。所使用的模型是短期年度模型，该模型假设分配水权以使“平均”年份的回报最大化。没有考虑的情况下，永久性贸易驱动的潜在机会，重新配置土地和水的使用在墨累河流域南部系统。允许贸易从区域内贸易转向区域间贸易，使净收益从25.02亿美元增加到25.90亿美元（即增加8，800万美元）。如果将自由贸易的无限制、无收费和无空间汇率与有限制、收费和汇率的情况进行比较，则交易限制、收费和空间汇率使净收益从25.90亿美元减少到25.73亿美元（即减少了1700万美元）。将南澳、新南威尔士和维多利亚排除在外，使情景C、D和E中的水交易净收益分别减少2 700万美元、3 100万美元和6 300万美元。1 000万美元、1 400万美元和4 600万美元的差额反映了防止这些州进入水市场的费用。
Water markets across Australia contain many restrictions and the peak intergovernmental forum, the Council of Australian Governments (CoAG) and others have proposed that water markets should be freed up so that the net contribution that water makes to the economy is increased. Using an model of the southern Murray River Basin system, this paper estimates the cost of existing restrictions and changes in the contribution that water makes to the economy if, at least, the temporary market for water was unrestricted. The model used is a short-run annual model which assumes that water entitlements are distributed so as to maximise returns in an “average” year. No account is taken of the case for permanent trading driven by underlying opportunities to reconfigure land and water use in the southern Murray River Basin system. Allowing trade from intraregional only to interregional trade has increased net returns from $2502 million to $2590 million (i.e. an increase of $88 million). When a comparison is made between no restriction, no charges and no spatial exchange rates on free trade to a case when there are restrictions and charges and exchange rates are applicable, the trading restrictions, charges, and spatial exchange rates reduce net returns from $2590 million to $2573 million (i.e. a reduction by $17 million). The exclusion of South Australia, New South Wales and Victoria reduces net returns by $27 million, $31 million and $63 million from water trading in Scenarios C, D and E, respectively. The difference of $10 million, $14 million and $46 million reflect the costs of preventing these states from entering in the water market.