Earnhart & Hendricks: Adapting to Water Restrictions
In Adapting to Water Restrictions: Intensive Versus Extensive Adaptation Over Time Differentiated by Water Right Seniority, Dietrich Earnhart (Economics, University of Kansas) and Nathan P. Hendricks (Agricultural Economics, Kansas State University) explore adaptations farmers have made to accommodate groundwater use restrictions.
As policymakers begin to address natural resource scarcity, groundwater use restrictions have become particularly common. Earnhart and Hendricks concentrate on groundwater restrictions imposed in an Intensive Groundwater Use Control Area (IGUCA) in Walnut Creek Valley in Kansas. The article highlights the history of the evaluated region since the 1945 Water Appropriations Act began to impact water usage for irrigation. Central to the authors’ findings is that farmers with “senior” water rights (water rights appropriated before October 1, 1965) and farmers with “junior” water rights (water rights appropriated after that date), are impacted differently by the IGUCA restrictions.
By examining 656 individual water rights groups over 18 years within the IGUCA area, the authors group their insights in three categories: (1) the impact on acreage use due to the water restrictions, (2) the value of longer restriction timeframes for dynamic decision-making by farmers and the inefficiencies resulting from prior appropriation of water rights, and (3) empirical evidence indicating farmers’ lack of adaptation to managing restrictions.
Through this research, Earnhart and Hendricks first reaffirm earlier research findings that although water restrictions did not significantly decrease acreage used, the restrictions are more difficult for farmers with “junior” water rights. Second, their findings indicate that the 5-year use restrictions allow farmers to make more adaptive decisions. For example, farmers can allocate water between wet and dry years within the 5-year window rather than through an annual allotment system. Third, the authors highlight their empirical support for the proposition that the prior apportionment of “senior” water rights leads to more significant inefficiencies than if all farmers in the area were subjected to uniform restrictions. The authors suggest how reexamination of these senior property rights could improve overall water restriction policies.
Finally, Earnhart and Hendricks suggest that these findings apply to water use restrictions across similar environments and may be analogous to the challenges of restricting other natural resource uses, including in cases involving oil and gas, fishing, or pollution more generally.
