Irrigated Agriculture and the Cost Recovery Principle of Water Services: Assessment and Discussion of the Case of the Guadalquivir River Basin (Spain)
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. The Application of the CRP in the Irrigation Sector
2.1. EU Context
2.2. Spanish Context
3. Description of the Case-Study
4. Assessment of the Application of the CRP in the Guadalquivir River Basin
4.1. Financial and Environmental Costs
4.2. Assessment of Resource Cost and Cost Recovery
- (a)
- Water used by agriculture in down-stream services is used for the estimate. By means of omitting the simultaneous inclusion of up-stream and down-stream services, double accounting of the costs is avoided. Additionally, the use of down-stream services enables groundwater use by agriculture to be accounted for in the overall estimation.
- (b)
- Estimation of the resource cost should be estimated considering the specific characteristics of the GRB, thereby taking as reference values those set by trading prices agreed in the context of the GRB. Specifically, the sale price of the latest inter-basin transfer from the GRB for irrigation purposes set at 0.20 €/m3 (in prices of 2012) has been considered.
- (c)
- A proxy of the resource cost can be obtained upon the difference (or additional cost) between current cost paid by the irrigation sector and the price that this sector would be willing to pay in the case of resource scarcity (around 0.20 €/m3) multiplied by the served water in each down-stream water service (Table 7).
5. Discussion and Policy Implications
6. Conclusions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- FAO. Irrigation Water Requirement and Water Withdrawal by Country; Food and Agriculture Organization: Rome, Italy, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- EC. The Water Framework Directive and the Floods Directive: Actions towards the ‘Good Status’ of EU Water and to Reduce Flood Risks; Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council, COM (2015) 120 Final; EC: Brussels, Belgium, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- EEA. Assessment of Cost Recovery through Water Pricing; EEA Technical Report 16/2013; Publications Office of the European Union: Luxembourg, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Unnerstall, H. The Principle of Full Cost Recovery in the EU-Water Framework Directive—Genesis and Content. J. Environ. Law 2007, 19, 29–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gómez-Limón, J.A.; Martin-Ortega, J. The economic analysis in the implementation of the Water Framework Directive in Spain. Int. J. River Basin Manag. 2013, 11, 301–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reese, M. Cost recovery and water pricing in water services and water uses in Germany. J. Eur. Environ. Plan. Law 2013, 10, 355–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- OECD. Sustainable Management of Water Resources in Agriculture; OECD Publishing: Paris, France, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Gawel, E. Article 9 of the EU Water Framework Directive. J. Eur. Environ. Plan. Law 2014, 11, 249–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ahodo, K.; Svatonova, T. The use of economic instruments in environmental policies to mitigate diffuse pollution from agriculture. Agric. Econ. 2014, 60, 74–81. [Google Scholar]
- Esteban, E.; Albiac, J. Assessment of Nonpoint Pollution Instruments: The Case of Spanish Agriculture. Int. J. Water Resour. Dev. 2012, 28, 73–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alcon, F.; Martin-Ortega, J.; Berbel, J.; de Miguel, M.D. Environmental benefits of reclaimed water: an economic assessment in the context of the water framework directive. Water Policy 2012, 14, 148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- EU. Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for the Community Action in the Field of Water Policy; European Union: Brussels, Belgium, 2000. [Google Scholar]
- Daugbjerg, C.; Feindt, P.H. Post-exceptionalism in public policy: Transforming good and agricultural policy. J. Eur. Public Policy 2017, 24, 1565–1584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Greer, A. Post-exceptional politics in agriculture: An examination of the 2013 CAP reform. J. Eur. Public Policy 2017, 24, 1585–1603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pollans, M.J. Drinking Water Protection and Agricultural Exceptionalism; Pace Law Faculty Publications: New York, NY, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Boeuf, B.; Fritsch, O.; Martin-Ortega, J. Undermining European Environmental Policy goals? The EU Water Framework Directive and the politics of exemptions. Water 2016, 8, 388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- CHG. Plan Hidrológico de la Demarcación del Guadalquivir 2015–2021; R. D. 1/2016; Confederación Hidrográfica del Guadalquivir: Sevilla, Spain, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- EC. Common Implementation Strategy for the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC); Guidance Document No. 1: Economics and the Environment: The Implementation Challenge of the Water Framework Directive (WATECO); European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Maia, R. The WFD implementation in the European Member States. Water Resour. Manag. 2017, 31, 3043–3060. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Berbel, J.; Expósito, A. Economic challenges for the EU Water Framework Directive reform and implementation. Eur. Plan. Stud. 2018, 26, 20–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boyle, S. The case for regulation of agricultural water pollution. Environ. Lett. Rev. 2014, 16, 4–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- EEB. 10 Years of the Water Framework Directive: A Toothless Tiger; A Snapshot Assessment of EU Environmental Ambitions; European Environment Bureau: Brussels, Belgium, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- EC. The Role of Water Pricing and Water Allocation in Agriculture in Delivering Sustainable Water Use in Europe; Final Report; European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Giannakis, E.; Bruggeman, A.; Djuma, H.; Zozyra, J.; Hammer, J. Water pricing and irrigation across Europe; opportunities and constraints for adopting irrigation scheduling decision support systems. Water Sci. Technol. 2016, 16, 245–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- EC. Report on the Progress in Implementation of the Water Framework Directive. Programmes of Measures; Commission Staff Working Document; EC: Brussels, Belgium, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Cornish, G.; Bosworth, B.; Perry, G.; Burke, J. Water Charging in Irrigated Agriculture. An Analysis of International Experience; FAO Water Reports 28; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- European Commission. A Blueprint to Safeguard Europe’s Water Resources; Communication from the commission to the European Parliament, The Council, The European Economic and Social Committee and The Committee of the Regions. COM (2012) 673 Final; EC: Brussels, Belgium, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- MAPAMA. Avances de los Análisis Económicos en los Planes de Demarcación y Recomendaciones; Grupo de Análisis Económico del Agua, Ministerio de Agricultura, Pesca, Alimentación y medio Ambiente, Gobierno de España: Madrid, Spain, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- EDG. Assessment of Environmental and Resource Costs under the Water Framework Directive; European Drafting Group ECO2; EDG: Brussels, Belgium, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Expósito, A.; Berbel, J. Agricultural irrigation water use in a closed basin and the impacts on water productivity: The case of the Guadalquivir river basin (Southern Spain). Water 2017, 9, 136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Garrido, A.; Martínez-Santos, P.; Llamas, M.R. Groundwater irrigation and its implications for water policy in semiarid countries. Hydrogeol. J. 2006, 14, 340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grindlay, A.L.; Zamorano, M.; Rodríguez, M.I.; Molero, E.; Urrea, M.A. Implementation of the European Water Framework Directive: Integration of hydrological and regional planning at the Segura River Basin, southeast Spain. Land Use Policy 2011, 28, 242–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Berbel, J.; Kolberg, S.; Martin-Ortega, J. Assessment of the draft hydrological basin plan of the Guadalquivir river basin (Spain). Int. J. Water Resour. Dev. 2012, 28, 43–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Berbel, J.; Expósito, A.; Borrego-Martín, M.M. Conciliation of competing uses and stakeholders rights to groundwater: An evaluation of Fuencaliente Aquifer (Spain). Int. J. Water Resour. Dev. 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martin-Ortega, J.; Berbel, J. Using multi-criteria analysis to explore non-market monetary values of water quality changes in the context of the Water Framework Directive. Sci. Total Environ. 2010, 408, 3990–3997. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Brouwer, R.; Martin-Ortega, J.; Berbel, J. Spatial heterogeneity in choice experiments. Land Econ. 2010, 86, 552–568. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Perman, D.; Ma, Y.; Common, M.; Maddison, D.; McGillivray, J. Natural Resource and Environmental Economics; Pearson: Harlow, UK, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Martin-Ortega, J. Los beneficios ambientales de las aguas del Guadalquivir: Un análisis económico; Fundacion Publica Centro de Estudios Andaluces: Sevilla, Spain, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Martin-Ortega, J.; Giannoccaro, G.; Berbel, J. Environmental and resource costs under water scarcity conditions: An estimation in the context of the European Water Framework Directive. Water Resour. Manag. 2011, 25, 1615–1633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Palomo-Hierro, S.; Gómez-Limón, J.A.; Riesgo, L. Water markets in Spain: Performance and challenges. Water 2015, 7, 652–678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Montilla-López, N.; Gutiérrez-Martín, C.; Gómez-Limón, J.A. Water banks: What have we learnt from the international experience? Water 2016, 8, 466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Berbel, J.; Mesa-Jurado, M.A.; Pistón, J.M. Value of irrigation water in Guadalquivir basin (Spain) by residual value method. Water Resour. Manag. 2011, 25, 1565–1579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Berbel, J.; Mesa, P. Valoración del agua de riego por el método de precios quasi-hedónicos: Aplicación al Guadalquivir. Econ. Agrar. Recur. Nat. 2011, 7, 127–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Expósito, A.; Berbel, J. Why is water pricing ineffective for deficit irrigation schemes? A case study in southern Spain. Water Resour. Manag. 2017, 31, 1047–1059. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gómez-Limón, J.A.; Arriaza, M.; Berbel, J. Conflicting implementation of agricultural and water policies in irrigated areas in the EU. J. Agric. Econ. 2002, 53, 259–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rogers, P.; de Silva, R.; Bhatia, R. Water is an economic good: How to use prices to promote equity, efficiency, and sustainability. Water Policy 2002, 4, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- European Commission. Accompanying Document to ‘Towards Sustainable Water Management in the European Union: First Stage in the Implementation of the Water Framework Directive 2000/60/EC’; COM (2007) 128 Final; EC: Brussels, Belgium, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Grossman, M.T. Agriculture and the polluter pays principle: An introduction. Okla. Law Rev. 2006, 59, 1–52. [Google Scholar]
- Arriaza, M.; Gómez Limón, J.A.; Ruiz, P. Evaluación de alternativas de desacoplamiento total de ayudas COP: El caso de la agricultura de regadío del Valle del Guadalquivir. Econ. Agrar. Recur. Nat. 2003, 6, 129–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Garrido, A.; Varela-Ortega, C. Economía del Agua en la Agricultura e Integración de Políticas Sectoriales; Panel Científico técnico de seguimiento de la política de aguas, University of Seville and Ministry of the Environment: Seville, Spain, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- García-Mollá, M.; Ortega-Reig, M.; Sanchis-Ibor, C.; Avellà-Reus, L. The effects of irrigation modernisation on the cost recovery of water in the Valencia Region (Spain). Water Sci. Technol. 2014, 14, 414–420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- EC. Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 640/2014 of 11 March 2014 Supplementing Regulation (EU) 1306/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council with Regard to the Integrated Administration and Control System and Conditions for Refusal or Withdrawal of Payments and Administrative Penalties Applicable to Direct Payments, Rural Development Support and Cross Compliance; EC: Brussels, Belgium, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Bartolini, F.; Gallerani, V.; Raggi, M.; Viaggi, D. Connecting agri-environmental schemes and cross-compliance designs: An explanatory case study in Emilia Romana. In The Common Agricultural Policy after the Fischler Reform: National Implementations, Impact Assessment and the Agenda for Future Reforms; Sorrentino, A., Henke, R., Severini, S., Eds.; Routledge: London, UK, 2016; pp. 313–330. [Google Scholar]
- Mohaupt, V.; Crosnier, G.; Todd, R.; Petersen, P.; Dworak, T. WFD and agriculture activity of the EU: First linkages between the CAP and the WFD at EU Level. Water Sci. Technol. 2007, 56, 163–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Berbel, J.; Gómez-Limón, J.A. The impact of water pricing policy in Spain: An analysis of three irrigated areas. Agric. Water Manag. 2000, 43, 219–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Riesgo, L.; Gómez-Limón, J.A. Multi-criteria policy scenario analysis for public regulation of irrigated agriculture. Agric. Syst. 2006, 91, 1–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gallego-Ayala, J.; Gómez-Limón, J.A.; Arriaza, M. Irrigation water pricing instruments: A sustainability assessment. Span. J. Agric. Res. 2011, 9, 981–999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Komives, K.; Foster, V.; Halpern, J.; Wodon, Q. Water, Electricity, and the Poor; World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- UNDP. Beyond Scarcity: Power, Poverty and the Global Water Crisis; United Nations Development Programme: New York, NY, USA, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Mesa-Jurado, M. Valoración del Agua de Riego y Disposición a Pagar por la Mejora de la Garantía de Suministro. El caso del olivar de Regadío. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Cordoba, Cordoba, Spain, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Giannoccaro, G.; Prosperi, M.; Zanni, G. Assessing the Impact of Alternative Water Pricing Schemes on Income Distribution. J. Agric. Econ. 2010, 61, 527–544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gómez-Limón, J.A.; Riesgo, L. Irrigation water pricing: Differential impacts on irrigated farms. Agric. Econ. 2004, 31, 47–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Interwies, E.; Dworak, T.; Görlach, B.; Best, A. WFD and Agricultural Linkages at the EU Level; Final Report about Incentive Water Pricing and Cost Recovery in the WFD: Elements for Linking EU Agricultural and Water Policies; Ecologic—Institute for International and European Environmental Policy: Berlin, Germany, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Riegels, N.; Pulido-Velazquez, M.; Doulgeris, C.; Sturm, V.; Jensen, R.; Møller, F.; Bauer-Gottwein, P. Systems Analysis Approach to the Design of Efficient Water Pricing Policies under the EU Water Framework Directive. J. Water Resour. Plan. Manag. 2013, 139, 574–582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Rutz, C.; Dwyer, J.; Schramek, J. More new wine in the same old bottles? The evolving nature of the CAP reform debate in Europe, and prospects for the future. Sociol. Rural. 2014, 54, 266–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Country | Agricultural Withdrawals (% Total) | Type of Charge | Average Irrigation Tariffs | CR Rate | EC | RC |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
France 1 | 20 | Water tariff (all-in) | 0.09 EUR/m3 | 95% * | No | No |
Water tariff (dual) | 80–160 EUR/ha + 0.06–0.08 EUR/m3 | |||||
Spain 2 | 70 | Water tariff (volumetric) | 0.064 EUR/m3 | 62% | Yes | No |
Water fee (flat-rate) | 113–470 EUR/ha | |||||
Greece 3 | 87 | Water tariff (volumetric) | 0.05–0.7 EUR/m3 | 54% | Yes | Yes |
Water fee (flat-rate) | 90–210 EUR/ha | |||||
Italy 1 | 44 | Water tariff (volumetric) | 0.04–0.25 EUR/m3 | 50% | Yes | No |
Water fee (flat-rate) | 30–150 EUR/ha | |||||
Portugal 1 | 80 | Water tariff (volumetric) | 0.002 EUR/m3 | 23% | Yes | No |
Water fee (flat-rate) | 120 EUR/ha |
Water use | GVA | Productivity | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
RBD | Hm3 | % Total | % Total | (€/m3) |
Ebro | 5085 | 97.2 | 3.1 | 0.46 |
Guadalquivir | 3357 | 88.0 | 4.8 | 0.88 |
Guadiana | 1916 | 89.9 | 6.2 | 0.70 |
Jucar | 2581 | 79.6 | 2.4 | 0.84 |
Segura | 1546 | 86.0 | 4.6 | 0.97 |
Spain | 22,181 | 82.3 | 2.8 | 0.94 |
RBD | Financial Costs | Environmental Costs | Revenues | CR Rate 1 | CR Rate 2 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ebro | 773.5 | 100.8 | 630.4 | 0.82 | 0.72 |
Guadalquivir | 338.2 | 55.5 | 259.1 | 0.76 | 0.66 |
Guadiana | 163.5 | 55.0 | 130.9 | 0.80 | 0.60 |
Jucar | 490.2 | 56.4 | 399.1 | 0.81 | 0.73 |
Segura | 220.2 | 141.7 | 164.3 | 0.75 | 0.45 |
Spain | 2950.1 | 760 | 2300.2 | 0.78 | 0.62 |
Water Services | Instruments | Prices | |
---|---|---|---|
Up-stream services | Surface regulated waters | Abstraction charge “Canon de regulación and Tarifa de utilización del agua” | 0.034 €/m3 |
Down-stream services | Surface regulated waters | Irrigation charge (charged by IWUAs) | 0.064 €/m3 262.9 €/ha |
Non-regulated and groundwaters (GW) | No legal charges for water use. Operating costs supported by users (Average cost 0.15 €/m3) | ||
Recycled | Urban water charges | 0.24 €/m3 |
Water Services | Financial Costs (F) (Million €) | Environmental Costs (E) (Million €) | CR Rate 1 | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Up-Stream Services | Regulated | 47.5 | 7 | 0.60 |
Down-Stream Services | Regulated | 90.7 | 40.9 | 0.69 |
Non-regulated and GW | 196.4 | 3.7 | 0.66 | |
Recycled | 4.0 | 3.9 | 0.48 | |
Global | 338.4 | 55.5 | 0.66 2 |
Intra-Basin Water Transfers | Year | Price (€/m3) | Price (2012) |
---|---|---|---|
Mediterranean Andalusian RB | 2007 | 0.15 | 0.16 |
Segura RB | 2012 | 0.22 | 0.22 |
GRB to Mediterranean Andalusian RB | 2006–2008 | 0.18 | 0.20 |
Tagus RB to Segura RB | 2008 | 0.22 | 0.24 |
Water banks | |||
Júcar RB | 2008 | 0.25 | 0.27 |
Segura RB | 2008 | 0.17 | 0.18 |
Average | 0.21 |
Down-Stream | Current Cost (€/m3) | Additional Cost (€/m3) 1 | Served Water (hm3) 2 | Resource Cost (Million €) 1×2 |
---|---|---|---|---|
Regulated | 0.098 | 0.102 | 2061 | 210 |
Non-regulated and GW | 0.15 | 0.05 | 1188 | 59 |
Recycled | 0.24 | n.a. | 15.4 | n.a. |
Total | - | - | 3264 | 269 |
Water Services | CR Rate | |
---|---|---|
Up-stream services | Regulated | 0.60 |
Down-stream services | Regulated | 0.27 |
Non-regulated and GW | 0.51 | |
Recycled | 0.48 | |
Global | 0.44 1 |
© 2018 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Expósito, A. Irrigated Agriculture and the Cost Recovery Principle of Water Services: Assessment and Discussion of the Case of the Guadalquivir River Basin (Spain). Water 2018, 10, 1338. https://doi.org/10.3390/w10101338
Expósito A. Irrigated Agriculture and the Cost Recovery Principle of Water Services: Assessment and Discussion of the Case of the Guadalquivir River Basin (Spain). Water. 2018; 10(10):1338. https://doi.org/10.3390/w10101338
Chicago/Turabian StyleExpósito, Alfonso. 2018. "Irrigated Agriculture and the Cost Recovery Principle of Water Services: Assessment and Discussion of the Case of the Guadalquivir River Basin (Spain)" Water 10, no. 10: 1338. https://doi.org/10.3390/w10101338