Regulation of non-point source pollution under n-firm Bertrand competition

Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - This study demonstrates the conditions under which an increase in the ambient charge positively or negatively affects the total level of non-point...     

Application of game theory for a groundwater conflict in Mexico

Exploitation of scarce water resources, particularly in areas of high demand, inevitably produces conflict among disparate stakeholders, each of whom may have their own set of priorities. In order to arrive at a socially acceptable compromise, the decision-makers should seek an optimal trade-off between conflicting objectives that reflect the priorities of the various stakeholders. In this study, game theory was applied to a multiobjective conflict problem for the Alto Rio Lerma Irrigation District, located in the state of Guanajuato in Mexico, where economic benefits from agricultural production should be balanced with associated negative environmental impacts. The short period of rainfall in this area, combined with high groundwater withdrawals from irrigation wells, has produced severe aquifer overdraft. In addition, current agricultural practices of applying high loads of fertilizers and pesticides have contaminated regions of the aquifer. The net economic benefit to this agricultural region in the short-term lies with increasing crop yields, which requires large pumping extractions for irrigation as well as high chemical loading. In the longer term, this can produce economic loss due to higher pumping costs (i.e., higher lift requirements), or even loss of the aquifer as a viable source of water. Negative environmental impacts include continued diminishment of groundwater quality, and declining groundwater levels in the basin, which can damage surface water systems that support environmental habitats. The two primary stakeholders or players, the farmers in the irrigation district and the community at large, must find an optimal balance between positive economic benefits and negative environmental impacts. In this paper, game theory was applied to find the optimal solution between the two conflicting objectives among 12 alternative groundwater extraction scenarios. Different attributes were used to quantify the benefits and costs of the two objectives, and, following generation of the Pareto frontier or trade-off curve, four conflict resolution methods were then applied.     

SAMPLE UNCERTAINTY IN FLOOD LEVEE DESIGN: BAYESIAN VERSUS NON-BAYESIAN METHODS1

ABSTRACT: Bayesian and non-Bayesian flood levee design methods that account for the uncertainty due to limited record length are compared using a case study. The first method, Bayesian decision theory (BDT), imbeds the uncertainty in the parameters of the yearly peak stage into a loss function. The optimum design of the flood levee, called Bayes design, corresponds to the minimum expected loss, called Bayes risk. The second method, induced safety algorithm (ISA), computes a margin of safety to be added to either an existing levee or a levee designed by classical benefit-cost analysis. The design decision is shown to fluctuate as different record lengths are considered. For short record lengths, BDT, which takes small sample bias into account, appears to yield a more conservative design than ISA. On the other hand, ISA, which is simple to implement, seems to be preferable to BDT for longer record lengths.