70
To some extent, the different options in water uses are mutually exclusive and
constitute a potential for confl icting interests. For example, water consumed for
drinking is no longer available for other uses or users. It is economically rational to
minimise trade-offs and maximise net gains, particularly through the application of
multifunctional management approaches.
1 Management decisions on water
resources therefore have to consider these trade-offs (Falkenmark and Rockström
2006 ). Assessments that provide reliable data can help to inform decisions on effi -
cient resource use (Poff et al. 2003 ). In this respect, it is decisive to include all
water-related services into consideration. To account for all associated costs and
benefi ts of different uses, an overarching value framework is required.
Economics can provide such an overarching framework.
2 The concept of total
economic value (TEV) represents a general framework to assess all values water
delivers to humans. It is an anthropocentric view
3 where values go far beyond direct
use values. Economic values do not consider just the (market) values of directly
used goods and services (e.g. drinking water, water for irrigation), but also those
subject to an indirect use, such as ground or surface water regulating services for
agricultural production or fl ood control (e.g. high water tables, providing wetlands
for a protection against fl ooding). In addition to these use-values, the TEV covers
values assigned to a non-use of the resource such as bequest, altruistic, or existence
values. Bequest values point to the fact that people have a benefi t if certain water
services are important for future generations (their children and grandchildren).
Altruistic values are benefi ts people obtain from the fact that other people have
water resources suffi ciently at hand. And existence values point to the fact that
people have a benefi t just from the existence of water resources, e.g. certain species,
irrespective of whether they see and enjoy this species. Between the use values and
non-use values, there is the “option value” that points to the fact that keeping an
option might be benefi cial for humans (e.g. the option of future water benefi ts
obtained from water tables where the benefi ts are not yet known). Figure 5.2 provides an overview of the TEV framework.
1 Dams often serve a single goal. According to ICOLD Data ( 2014 ) over 70 % of the world’s large
dams are single purpose dams and half of them are constructed for irrigation.
2 We see such an economic approach, which is based on a comprehensive understanding of advantages and disadvantages of a MWEP, in line with the framework developed in Sect. 3.1 of this
volume. The economic valuation approach, as we see it, can serve as a comprehensive method
taking the assessment principles derived in Sect. 3.1 into account.
3 As will be shown below, we are fully aware that there exist also holistic approaches of water
values where intrinsic values and additional ethical issues are considered, too (Young 2005a , b ).
These approaches include the aspect that water is not primarily considered as a resource for
humans (“water as a means”), but also as a living entity with a non-economic value (“water as an
end”). Freshwaters are among the most diverse, complex and dynamic ecosystems globally, at the
same time they are more threatened than many other systems (e.g., Living Planet Index 2014).
Therefore, many argue that there is an urgent need to balance the needs for humans (anthropocentric view) and nature (non-anthropocentric view) (e.g. Pahl-Wostl et al. 2013 ).
B. Hansjürgens et al.
To some extent, the different options in water uses are mutually exclusive and
constitute a potential for confl icting interests. For example, water consumed for
drinking is no longer available for other uses or users. It is economically rational to
minimise trade-offs and maximise net gains, particularly through the application of
multifunctional management approaches.
1 Management decisions on water
resources therefore have to consider these trade-offs (Falkenmark and Rockström
2006 ). Assessments that provide reliable data can help to inform decisions on effi -
cient resource use (Poff et al. 2003 ). In this respect, it is decisive to include all
water-related services into consideration. To account for all associated costs and
benefi ts of different uses, an overarching value framework is required.
Economics can provide such an overarching framework.
2 The concept of total
economic value (TEV) represents a general framework to assess all values water
delivers to humans. It is an anthropocentric view
3 where values go far beyond direct
use values. Economic values do not consider just the (market) values of directly
used goods and services (e.g. drinking water, water for irrigation), but also those
subject to an indirect use, such as ground or surface water regulating services for
agricultural production or fl ood control (e.g. high water tables, providing wetlands
for a protection against fl ooding). In addition to these use-values, the TEV covers
values assigned to a non-use of the resource such as bequest, altruistic, or existence
values. Bequest values point to the fact that people have a benefi t if certain water
services are important for future generations (their children and grandchildren).
Altruistic values are benefi ts people obtain from the fact that other people have
water resources suffi ciently at hand. And existence values point to the fact that
people have a benefi t just from the existence of water resources, e.g. certain species,
irrespective of whether they see and enjoy this species. Between the use values and
non-use values, there is the “option value” that points to the fact that keeping an
option might be benefi cial for humans (e.g. the option of future water benefi ts
obtained from water tables where the benefi ts are not yet known). Figure 5.2 provides an overview of the TEV framework.
1 Dams often serve a single goal. According to ICOLD Data ( 2014 ) over 70 % of the world’s large
dams are single purpose dams and half of them are constructed for irrigation.
2 We see such an economic approach, which is based on a comprehensive understanding of advantages and disadvantages of a MWEP, in line with the framework developed in Sect. 3.1 of this
volume. The economic valuation approach, as we see it, can serve as a comprehensive method
taking the assessment principles derived in Sect. 3.1 into account.
3 As will be shown below, we are fully aware that there exist also holistic approaches of water
values where intrinsic values and additional ethical issues are considered, too (Young 2005a , b ).
These approaches include the aspect that water is not primarily considered as a resource for
humans (“water as a means”), but also as a living entity with a non-economic value (“water as an
end”). Freshwaters are among the most diverse, complex and dynamic ecosystems globally, at the
same time they are more threatened than many other systems (e.g., Living Planet Index 2014).
Therefore, many argue that there is an urgent need to balance the needs for humans (anthropocentric view) and nature (non-anthropocentric view) (e.g. Pahl-Wostl et al. 2013 ).
B. Hansjürgens et al.