Demand‐Based Benefit‐Cost Model of Participation in Water Project
Publication: Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management
Volume 116, Issue 5
Abstract
The concept of consumer surplus is used to estimate the benefits from a new water source for urban water customers. This benefits model is estimated for the projected arrival of Central Arizona Project (CAP) water in Tucson, Ariz., using the parameters of a regression‐based demand model. The estimated benefits to water users of the anticipated CAP water are $91 million compared to costs of $175 million at the 8.625% discount rate currently required for federal projects. Thus direct costs exceed direct benefits by $84 million over the 100 year life of the project. To keep current water customers from suffering net losses, a payment of $2,514 in 1985 dollars would be required from each new housing unit over the 100 year life of the project. The internal rate of return for the project is 4.86%, which exceeds the 3.25% rate used in the original analysis of the project. This research demonstrates the practical application of the frequently advocated but less frequently used consumer‐surplus model in estimating the benefits of increasing the supply of urban water.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
Agthe, D. E., and Billings, R. B. (1980). “Dynamic models of residential water demand.” Water Resour. Res., 16(3), 476–480.
2.
Agthe, D. E., Billings, R. B., and Dworkin, J. M. (1988). “Effects of rate structure knowledge on household water use.” Water Resour. Bulletin, 24(3), 627–630.
3.
Billings, R. B., and Day, W. M. (1982). “Price, socioeconomic, and climatic influences on residential water use in Southern Arizona.” Project Completion Report, Office of Water Resources and Technology, Tucson, Ariz.
4.
Billings, R. B., and Day, W. M. (1989). “Demand management factors in residential water use: The southern Arizona experience.” Amer. Water Works Assoc. J., 81(3), 58–64.
5.
Colander, D. C., and Haltiwanger, J. C. (1979). “Comment on ‘Price elasticity of demand for municipal water: A case study of Tucson, Arizona.’.” Water Resour. Res., 15(5), 1275–1277.
6.
De Rooy, J. (1974). “Price responsiveness of the industrial demand for water.” Water Resour. Res., 10(4), 403–406.
7.
Final water rates report for Tucson Water. (1985). R. W. Beck and Associates, Phoenix, Ariz.
8.
Foster, H. S., Jr., and Beattie, B. R. (1979). “Urban residential demand for water in the United States.” Land Economics, 55(1), 43–59.
9.
Gysi, M. (1971). “The effect of price on long run water supply benefits and costs.” Water Resour. Bull., 7(3), 521–528.
10.
Hanke, S. H. (1979). “Discussion, ‘Municipal water conservation alternatives by William E. Sharpe.’.” Water Resour. Bull., 15(4), 1176–1177.
11.
Hanke, S. H., and Anwyll, J. B. (1980). “On the discount rate controversy.” Public Policy, 28(2), 171–183.
12.
Hanke, S. H., and Davis, R. K. (1973). “Potential for marginal cost pricing in water resource management.” Water Resour. Res., 9(4), 808–824.
13.
Hearings before the Subcommittee on Irrigation and Reclamation, 89th Congress, 1st session, on the Lower Colorado River Basin Project. (1965). House of Representatives, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., page 828.
14.
Howe, C. W. (1971). Benefit‐cost analysis for water system planning, American Geophysical Union, Washington, D.C.
15.
Johnston, J. (1972). Econometric methods, 2nd Ed., McGraw‐Hill Book Co., Inc., New York, N.Y.
16.
Kelso, M. M., Martin, W. E., and Mack, L. E. (1973). Water supplies and economic growth in an arid environment, University of Arizona Press, Tucson, Ariz.
17.
Local climatological data, Tucson, 1971–1976. (1977). U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Environmental Data Service, Washington, D.C.
18.
Local climatological data, Tucson, 1977–1980. (1981). U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Environmental Data Service, Washington, D.C.
19.
Lower Colorado region study. (1971). Pacific Southwest Interagency Group, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
20.
Lynne, G. D., Luppold, W. G., and Kiker, C. (1978). Water Resour. Bull., 14(3), 719–729.
21.
Martin, W. E., and Thomas, J. F. (1986). “Policy relevance in studies of urban residential water demand.” Water Resour. Res., 22(13), 1735–1741.
22.
Master plan and ten year capital improvement program, 1987 to 1997. (1987). Tucson Water, Tucson, Ariz.
23.
Mishan, E. J. (1982). Cost‐benefit analysis, 3rd ed., George Allen & Unwin, London, England.
24.
Monthly labor review. (1975). 98(3), U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Washington, D.C.
25.
Monthly labor review. (1976). 99(3), U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Washington, D.C.
26.
Monthly labor review. (1977). 100(3), U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Washington, D.C.
27.
Monthly labor review. (1978). 101(3), U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Washington, D.C.
28.
Monthly labor review. (1978). 101(9), U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Washington, D.C.
29.
Monthly labor review. (1979). 102(3), U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Washington, D.C.
30.
Monthly labor review. (1979). 102(9), U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Washington, D.C.
31.
Monthly labor review. (1980). 103(3), U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Washington, D.C.
32.
Monthly labor review. (1980). 103(9), U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Washington, D.C.
33.
Monthly labor review. (1981). 104(3), U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Washington, D.C.
34.
Powers, T. M. (1978). An economic analysis of the Central Arizona Project. CAP Publications, Phoenix, Ariz.
35.
Report on the Central Arizona Project to the 81st Congress, 1st session. (1949). House of Representatives, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., Vol. 1.
36.
Tuscson active management area groundwater management plan. (1983). Arizona Dept. of Water Resour., Phoenix, Ariz.
37.
Tucson trends, 1976. (1976). Valley National Bank and Tucson Newspapers, Inc., Tucson, Ariz.
38.
Tucson trends, 1978. (1978). Valley National Bank and Tucson Newspapers, Inc., Tucson, Ariz.
39.
Tucson trends, 1980. (1980). Valley National Bank and Tucson Newspapers, Inc., Tucson, Ariz.
40.
Willig, R. D. (1976). “Consumer's surplus without apology.” American Economic Review, 66(4), 589–597.
41.
Young, R. A. (1973). “Price elasticity of demand for municipal water: A case study of Tucson, Arizona,” Water Resour. Res., 9(4), 1088–1072.
42.
Ziegler, J. A., and Bell, S. E. (1984). “Estimating demand for intake water by selfsupplied firms.” Water Resour. Res., 20(1), 4–8.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management
Volume 116 • Issue 5 • September 1990
Pages: 593 - 609
Copyright
Copyright © 1990 ASCE.
History
Published online: Sep 1, 1990
Published in print: Sep 1990
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.