4. Discussion

It is important to note that the order of the list is based on aggregate farmgate GDP generated from the supply of irrigation water from the particular waterbody. Water use information is not available to calculate the marginal return from each additional unit of water. Other criteria such as value added per hectare irrigated or by cubic metre of water used should also be considered.

It is also important to note that the values identified for current irrigation exist alongside the other values from those waterbodies identified in other reports within the Waters of National Importance study. In the same way, the potential for irrigation from waterbodies may be able to be realised without the loss of other values or indeed may create other benefits for those values. Irrigation benefit is not necessarily (but may be) gained at the expense of other values.

The estimate of total value of each waterbody is likely to be conservative for the following reasons:

1. Gross margin analysis does not account for fluctuations in output over time. Downside fluctuations are likely to be greater under a dryland scenario than under irrigation.
2. The benefits of irrigation of parts of farms are not accounted for (e.g., growing fodder crops to support the stock carried on the rest of the farm). If they were, it would have the effect of further increasing the value of irrigation.

Of these qualifiers, the first has been taken into account to a degree in assuming that some land uses would not occur without irrigation. Even so, the fluctuations in dryland pastoral incomes are demonstrably larger than for irrigated areas (Butcher 200011). The second is difficult to demonstrate, although evidence of the value of partially irrigating properties is supported by farm consultants.

The relative importance of each waterbody for irrigation compared to each other is unlikely to change, but the absolute values calculated in this study are subject to a number of assumptions that must be more closely examined when the next stage of the project compares values.


11 Regional Economic Impacts of the 1997-1999 Canterbury Drought, Butcher Partners Ltd and Agriculture NZ, Feb 2000, MAF Technical Paper 00/18.

 Previous Page Table Of ContentsNext Page

Contact for Enquiries

Water Programme of Action
Ministry for the Environment
PO Box 10-362
Wellington
or
Water Programme of Action
Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry
PO Box 2526
Wellington Contact this person