Abstract

Water scarcity frequently leads to a need for rationing. The choice of an adequate rationing method should be based on the impact on consumer welfare that is produced by each rationing plan. Some rationing schemes, such as the frequently used supply interruption method, can be regarded as changes in the characteristics of the good (in this case, time availability) that do not modify the pre-set consumer budget. Under the standard theoretical restrictions on consumer behavior compensating or equivalent variations/surpluses cannot be used to identify the impacts of these methods on household welfare. In this paper, we propose a set of sufficient conditions with respect to the utility function that allows for the evaluation of the compensating or equivalent variations/surpluses associated with changes in goods’ quality, even if those goods are considered to be essential for consumers. We use these conditions to compare the welfare losses associated with the water supply cuts implemented in Seville (Spain) to those that would result if water was instead rationed using price changes.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.