Attention is then turned to the "water as a commodity" issue. We argue here that the "water as a commodity" issues is at best poorly framed. In our view debate in Georgia should center on alternatives for resolving the reallocation issue; it should focus on the question as to how Georgia is to strike a balance between private, competing use of water and public, non-competing uses of water (e.g., instream flows), and how this balance is to be adjusted over time in response to changes in social, environmental, and climatic conditions. When market mechanisms are considered as one of the means to achieve reallocation, evaluation of their effectiveness is dependent on a particular set of market institutions. Thus, being "for" or "against" markets makes no more sense that being "for" or "against" water use permits -- everything depends on the provisions and protections of specific laws and proposals. Working Paper # 2002-008
WHAT TO READ NEXT
Published By
Copyright
- Copyright 2002 Environmental Policy Group at the Andrew Young School of Policy Studies