Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />~ <br />o <br />o <br />t-' <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Young, et. al., in their statement above, have presented the <br /> <br />processes which may be utilized to reduce the salt load and/or reduce <br /> <br />the concentrating effects. It will be useful from an economic perspective <br /> <br />to go back one step further and discuss broad types of policies that may <br /> <br />be utilized to induce improvements in water quality. The following is <br /> <br />one listing that would seem to cover most of the options availa ble: <br /> <br />(1) provision of additional quantities of water for dilution, (2) public <br /> <br />investment to improve quality, (3) initiate litigation or condemnation <br /> <br />proceedings against the heavy polluters, (4) impose strict quality standards <br /> <br />for all users, and (5) implement direct economic incentives (generally <br /> <br />taxes on pollution and/or subsidies for water quality improvement). <br /> <br />No firm boundaries separate these policy options, but some further <br /> <br />discussions of how they relate in principle to the external effects and <br /> <br />public goods problem, is warranted. <br /> <br />Provision of Additional Quantities of Water for Dilution. The <br /> <br />implication of suggestions to curtail upstream use to provide for higher <br /> <br />quality water for downstream users is to change the quantity allocated <br /> <br />to each set of users. No shifting of the curves in Figure VI-l is involved; <br /> <br />only a limitation on water use upstream to the socially optimal amount <br /> <br />per acre. Even though economic arguments could be advanced in favor <br /> <br />of this alternative, some knotty institutional problems would have to be <br /> <br />overcome. <br /> <br />9 <br />