Skip to main content

Part of the book series: Water Science and Technology Library ((WSTL,volume 46))

Abstract

A scarce good can only be obtained by giving up something else or by paying a positive price for it. In most urban areas, water is a scarce good and is therefore subject to the laws and principles of economics. In particular, the quantity of water taken from the market by any given buyer or group of buyers is influenced by the price that must be paid. The price of water, in its most general sense, includes not only monetary payments, but the time and energy expended to obtain that water. For example, if a person must drive or walk some distance to buy water, the price includes the value of time spent as well as the monetary payment. As urban water becomes increasingly scarce, price can be used to allocate its use efficiently among its many competing end uses. Prices can also be used to encourage the meeting of community social goals with regard to the availability and use of water.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Agthe, D.E. and R.B. Billings, 1997. “Equity and Conservation Pricing Policy for A Government Run Water Utility,” Journal of Water Supply Research Technology-Aqua, 46 (5):252–260.

    Google Scholar 

  • Black and Veatch, 1997. Arizona Water/Wastewater Survey 1997, Phoenix, Arizona.

    Google Scholar 

  • Black and Veatch, 1995. Arizona Water/Wastewater Survey, 1995, Phoenix, Arizona.

    Google Scholar 

  • Black and Veatch, 1993. Arizona Water/Wastewater Survey, 1993, Phoenix, Arizona.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haddad, B.M., 2000. “Economic Incentives for Water Conservation on the Monterey Peninsula: the Market Proposal,” Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 36(1): 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D., 1988. “Down the Drain,” The Los Angeles Times, Feb. 2, Sect 5:1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, W.M., N.H. Laney, and A.W. Griffin, 1983. Saving Water in a Desert City, Resources for the Future, Inc., Baltimore.

    Google Scholar 

  • Timmins, C. 2002. “Measuring the Dynamic Efficiency of Regulator’s Performances: Municipal Water Utilities in the Arid West,” Econometrica, 70(2) :603–629.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Suggestions for Additional Reading

  • Agthe, D.E., and R.B. Billings, 1987. “Equity, Price Elasticity and Household Income Under Increasing Block Rates for Water,” American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 46 (3):201–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Billings, R.B., and D.E. Agthe, 1980. “Price Elasticities for Water: A Case of Increasing Block Rates,” Land Economics, 56(l):73–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Billings, R.B. and C.V. Jones, 1996. Chapter 9, Forecasting Urban Water Demand, American Water Works, Association, Denver, Colorado.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foster, H., and B. Beattie, 1979. “Urban Residential Demand for Water in the United States,” Land Economics, 55(l):43–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haddad, B.M., Rivers of Gold: Designing Markets to Allocate Water in California, Island Press, Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howe, C.W., and F.P. Linaweaver, 1967. “The Impact of Price on Residential Water Demand and Its Relation to System Design and Price Structure,” Water Resources Research, 3(1): 13–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mansfield, E., 1994, Applied Microeconomics 2nd. Edition, W.W. Norton and Company, New York, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, W.E., and J.F. Thomas, 1986. “Policy Relevance in Studies of Urban Residential Water Demand,” Water Resources Research, 22(13):1735–1741.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neufeld, J.L., and J.M. Watts, 1981. “Inverted Block or Lifeline Rates and Microefficiency in the Consumption of Electricity,” Energy Economics, 3 (2):113–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stigler, G., 1966. The Theory of Price, The MacMillan Company, New York.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2003 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Agthe, D.E., Billings, R.B. (2003). Price Rationing. In: Agthe, D.E., Billings, R.B., Buras, N. (eds) Managing Urban Water Supply. Water Science and Technology Library, vol 46. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-0237-9_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-0237-9_3

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-90-481-6470-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-017-0237-9

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics