The paper reviews the $12.9 billion Water for the Future package in the Murray-Darling Basin from the perspective of cost-effectiveness and assesses the possible losses to irrigators from reduced diversions to achieve desired environmentalflow regimes. It argues that combining the $3.1 billion allocated to buying water entitlements with the $5.8 billion targeted by Water for the Future for water infrastructure subsidies into a purchase of water entitlements from willing sellers would maximise the water acquired for the environment per dollar of expenditure, provide greater assistance to holders of water entitlements, and reduce the expected gap between average water diversions for agriculture and sustainable diversion limits.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
R. Quentin Grafton (2010) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: