Comparison of water permits trading policy among cotton farmers in Golestan | ||
| پژوهش های پنبه ایران | ||
| Article 1, Volume 5, Issue 2 - Serial Number 10, February 2018, Pages 15-32 PDF (795.51 K) | ||
| Document Type: Research Paper | ||
| DOI: 10.22092/ijcr.2018.116831 | ||
| Authors | ||
| parinaz Jansouz1; Javad Shahraki* 2; Mohammad Abdolhosseini3 | ||
| 1Ph.D student Dept. of Environmental Sciences and Sustainable Agriculture, University of Sistan and Baluchestan | ||
| 2Associate Prof., Dept. of Management and Economics, University of Sistan and Baluchestan, | ||
| 3Assistant Prof., Dept. of Water Engineering, Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources | ||
| Abstract | ||
| In this study, due to comparison of water permits trading and non-trading policies, two water allocation programs among cotton cultivators based on Interval-Parameter Two-Stage Stochastic Program model was designed. Then the results of two policies were compared together based on surplus water volume index, reduction in water deficiency and the area of irrigated land. For this study, 20 farm lands of cotton in Ghasemabad-village were selected which irrigated by released water from Voshmgir dam located in Aq-Qala city. The comparing of the results showed that water allocation under permit trading of cotton farmers led to water saving with low and high bounds of [47.36 , 52.89] ×103 m3 and decreasing in water deficiency equals to the interval of[35.54 , 42.66]×103m3and with decreasing in land use equals to bounds of [6.4 , 7]ha than non-trading policy ,so that the value of the total profit of the cotton cultivation system is maintained under trading policy equals to the interval of [56.82 , 94.29] million toman. Generally, trading policy than non-trading can lead to more effective allocation in view of water saving and reduction in water deficiency, but this policy can also reduce cotton irrigated area and in long term is resulted to remove of some farmers from agricultural activities. | ||
| Keywords | ||
| Trading; Interval-Parameter Two-Stage Stochastic Program; Water Permit; cotton | ||
| References | ||
|
1.Abyar, N.M., and Asgari, M. 2015. The Influence of Price Support Policy on Cotton Acreage Development in Golestan province. Iranian Journal of Cotton Researches, 3(2): 27-39. (In Persian with English Summary). 2.Becker, N., Zeitouni, N., and Shechter, M. 1996( Reallocation water resources in the Middle East through market mechanisms. Water Resources Development, 12(1): 17-32. 3.Dragun, A.K., and Gleeson, V. 1989. From water law to transferability in New South Wales. Natural Resources Journal, 29(3): 645–661. 4.Haeri, A., and Asayesh, A. 2010. Iran and world cotton status. a report for society of texture industry, The office of statistical a strategic research, 33 pages. (In Persian). 5.Hoppe, H., Weilandt, M., and Orth, H. 2004. A combined water management approach based on river water quality standards. Journal of Environmental Informatics, 3(2): 67-76. 6.Huang, G.H., and Loucks, D.P. 2000. An inexact two-stage stochastic programming model for water resources management under uncertainty. Civil Engineering and Environmental Systems, 17 (2): 95–118. 7.Ibragimov, N., Evett, S.R., Esanbekov, Y., Kamilov, B.S., Mirzaev, L., and Lamers, J.P. 2007. Water use efficiency of irrigated cotton in Uzbekistan under drip and furrow irrigation. Agricultural Water Management, 90 (1): 112-120. 8.Javan, J., and Fal-soleiman, M. 2008. Water Crisis and Importance of Water Productivity in Agriculture in Dry Area of Iran (Case Study: Birjand Plain). Iranaian Journal of Geography and Development, 115-138. (In Persian with English Summary). 9.Jenkins, M.W., and Lund, J.R. 2000. Integrating yield and shortage management under multiple uncertainties. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management, 126 (5): 288-297. 10.Kiem, A.S. 2013. Drought and water policy in Australia: Challenges for the future illustrated by the issues associated with water trading and climate change adaptation in the Murray–Darling basin. Global Environmental Change, 23(6): 1615-1626. 11. Landry, C. 1998. Market transfers of water for environmental protection in the Western United State. Water Policy, 1:457-469. 11.Li, M., Guo, P., Singh, V.P., and Yang, G. 2016. An uncertainty-based framework for agricultural water-land resources allocation and risk evaluation. Agricultural Water Management, 177: 10-23. 12.Li, Y.P., Liu, J., and Huang, G.H. 2014. A hybrid fuzzy-stochastic programming method for water trading within an agricultural system. Agricultural Systems, 123: 71–83. 13.Luo, B., Huang, G.H., Zou, Y., and Yin, Y.Y. 2007. Toward Quantifying The Effectiveness Of Water Trading Under Uncertainty. Journal of Environment Management, 83 (2): 181-190. 14.Najafi Hajivar, M., Kohpeima, A., and Tahmasbi, A. 2006. “Indices of drought in the province of Chahar Mahal and Bakhtiari.” The 1st Regional conf. of Exploitation of Water Resources and Basins of Karun Zayanderood, Shahrekord University. (in persian). 15.Palazzo, A., and Brozovic, N. 2014. The role of groundwater trading in spatial water management. Agricultural Water Management. 145 (C): 50-60. 16.Rosegrant, M., and Binswanger, H. 1994. Markets in tradable water rights: potential for efficiency gains in developing country water resource allocation. World Development, 22 (11): 1613 -1625. 17.Wets, R.J.B. 1966. Programming under uncertainty: the solution set. SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics. 14 (5): 1143-1151. 18.Zekri, S., and Easter, W. 2005. Estimating the Potential Gains from Water Markets: a Case Study from Tunisia. Agricultural Water Management, 72(3): 161-175.
| ||
|
Statistics Article View: 396 PDF Download: 310 |
||
Journal management system. designed by sinaweb