Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x5gtn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-07T08:27:38.017Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Method For Estimating the Value of Water Among Sectors of A Regional Economy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2015

Mark S. Henry  and
Ernie Bowen
Mark S. Henry
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, Clemson University
Ernie Bowen
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, Clemson University
Get access

Extract

Recent trends in the southeastern states toward increased use of irrigation in agriculture may be attributed to risk aversion management by farmers in response to recent drought periods. Despite ample annual average rainfall in the Southeast during the growing season, the vicissitudes of rainfall patterns provide sufficient reason to consider irrigation for field crops as well as for vegetables and fruit (Ganguly). Increased use of irrigation additionally results in new demands for water in rural areas.

It is also well documented that nonmetropolitan areas are experiencing substantial rates of positive net immigration (Wardell and Gilchrist). In the Southeast, there is a trend for new manufacturing plants to locate in rural areas where wages, taxes, and union activity are at low levels. As growth occurs in these nonmetropolitan regions, industrial, residential, and commercial activities require additional supplies of water.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics , Volume 13 , Issue 2 , December 1981 , pp. 125 - 132
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 1981

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Clemson University, Department of Agricultural Engineering. Unpublished survey, “Irrigation by Crop and County in South Carolina,” 1980.Google Scholar
Fox, Irvin K. “We Can Solve Our Water Problems.” Water Resources Research 2(1966):617–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ganguly, S.A Risk-Return Economic Analysis of Irrigating Field Crops in South Carolina. Ph.D. dissertation, Clemson University, Clemson, S.C., August 1980.Google Scholar
Howe, Charles W. “Broad Horizons in Water Resources Planning and Investment.” Water Resources Research 2(1966):843–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelso, Maurice M., Martin, William E., and Mack, Lawrence F.Water Supplies and Economic Growth in an Arid Environment: An Arizona Case Study. Tucson: University of Arizona Press, 1973.Google Scholar
Kiker, C. “Water Allocation in the East.” Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, Economic Review (1981):27–31.Google Scholar
Kiker, C. and Lynne, G. D. “Water Allocations Under Administrative Regulations: Some Economic Considerations.” S. J. Agr. Econ. 8(1976):57–63.Google Scholar
Lofting, E. M. and McGauhey, P. H.Economic Evaluation of Water, Part III: An Interindustry Analysis of the California Water Economy. Sanitary Engineering Research Lab., University of California, Berkeley, Water Resources Center Contribution No. 67, 1963.Google Scholar
Lofting, E. M. and McGauhey, P. H.Economic Evaluation of Water, Part IV: An Input-Output Linear Programming Analysis of California Requirements. Sanitary Engineering Research Lab., University of California, Berkeley, Water Resources Center Contribution No. 116, 1968.Google Scholar
Mulkey, D. and Hite, J.A Procedure for Estimating Interregional Input-Output Matrices from Secondary Data. South Carolina Agr. Exp. Sta. Tech. Bull. 1072, March 1979.Google Scholar
Richard, Murray C. and Reeves, E. Bodette. Estimated Use of Water in the United States, 1970. Washington, D.C., U.S. Department of Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, Circular 676, 1971.Google Scholar
South Carolina Cash Receipts From Farm Marketing. South Carolina Crop and Livestock Reporting Service, Agr. Exp. Sta., Clemson University, Clemson, S.C., AE 416, September 1980.Google Scholar
South Carolina Crop Statistics. South Carolina Crop and Livestock Reporting Service, Agr. Exp. Sta., Clemson University, Clemson, S.C., AE 413, June 1980.Google Scholar
South Carolina Department of Labor. Unpublished annual wage and salary survey of manufacturing firms in South Carolina. Columbia, S.C., 1977.Google Scholar
South Carolina Employment Security Commission. Manpower In Industry. Columbia, S.C., 1980.Google Scholar
South Carolina Livestock and Poultry Statistics. South Carolina Crop and Livestock Reporting Service, Agr. Exp. Sta., Clemson University, Clemson, S.C., AE 414, June 1980.Google Scholar
South Carolina Water Resource Commission. Unpublished water resource maps for Clarendon, Kershaw, Lee, and Sumter counties. Columbia, S.C., 1980.Google Scholar
Stoevener, H. H. and Castle, E. N., “Input-Output Models and Benefit Cost Analysis in Water Re¬sources Research.” J. Farm Econ. 47(1967): 1572-79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tijoriwala, Anilkumar G., Martin, William E., and Bower, Leonard G.The Structure of the Arizona Economy: Output Interrelationships and Their Effects on Water and Labor Requirements, Part I. Arizona Agr. Exp. Sta. Tech. Bull. 180. Tucson: University of Arizona Press, 1968.Google Scholar
United Nations. Formulation and Economic Appraisal of Development Projects, Vol. 1. New York: U.N. Department of Economics and Social Affairs, p. 94, 1951.Google Scholar
Wardell, J. and Gilchrist, C. “Employment Déconcentration in the Nonmetropolitan Turnaround.” Demography 17(1980): 145–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar