1. Climate Change and Water in Africa UNDP ACCRA

2. HAE Model- Integrated Assessment Climate Outcome Emission Scenario Hydrologic Response Agronomic Response Economic Outcome

3. Hydrology Exact impact on hydrology is basin specific (e.g. Revelle and Wagner 1983, Gleick 1987, Lettenmeier et al 1992) Depends on change in local temperature and rainfall- both are uncertain Depends on characteristics of basin Global analysis implies need for basin studies around the world

4. Watershed Changes That Lead to Impacts Changes in mean annual flow Increased evapotranspiration (increasing demand for water) Changes in seasonal flows (earlier runoff) Gleick 1987, Nash and Gleick 1993 Changes in peak flows (floods) Changes in interannual variance

5. Evaluating Water Impacts Need to determine demand for water by use (urban, industrial, mining, farming) Aggregate demand functions Equate aggregate demand with supply Water allocation inefficient if marginal value varies across users Optimal allocation equates marginal values

6. Water Adaptation Climate change will shift demand and supply of water Allocations across users must change given new demand and supply If new marginal values are not equated, damages can be large

7. Price Of Water Urban and Industrial Use Agriculture Use U0U0 A0A0 U1U1 A1A1 Welfare Loss Poor Adaptation

8. Adaptation Reallocate water from low to high valued use Implies equating marginal value of water across users Reduces magnitude of loss

9. Price Of Water Urban and Industrial Use Agriculture Use U0U0 A0A0 WELFARE CHANGE WITH ADAPTATION Gain Loss A1A1 U1U1

10. Water Allocation Methods Who pays for reductions depends on who owns the water, not on who reduces use If government owns water, users lose whenever water is taken away If current users own water, others must pay them to take it. Current users cannot be made worse off.

11. California Hydrology Lund et al 2006 SAC-SMA hydrology model 6 basins: Smith, Sacramento, Feather, American, Merced, Kings HADCM2 2090 (+3.3C, +58%P) PCM 2090 (+2.4C, -21%P)

12. Runoff Results Hadley Flow Month Oct Smith, Sacramento, Feather, American Apr 2090 Baseline 2090 baseline Merced, Kings

13. Runoff Results PCM Flow Month Oct Smith, Sacramento, Feather, American Apr 2090 Baseline 2090 baseline Merced, Kings

14. Runoff Conclusions Hadley- 2090- increase of 11%- mostly winter flow PCM- decrease of 9%- some Nov-Dec and some May-July

15. Change in Water Demand Adams 2006 RegionPCM 2090HAD 2090 Sacramento Delta +17%+19% San Joaquin+7%+15% Northeast+9%+16% Coast+19%+32%

16. CALVIN Lund et al 2006 Reallocates water to maximize economic benefits Flow constraints, dams Urban values of water Operating costs Does not consider changing infrastructure Assumes perfect foresight

17. CALVIN Results (Million $/yr) CostsPCM2090HAD2090 Urban87-3 Agriculture1476-18 Operating147-237 Total Losses1809-259

18. CALVIN CONCLUSION Wetter climate scenario leads to benefits and dryer scenario leads to damages Reallocating water to highest use reduces welfare effects Institutional and infrastructure constraints keep costs high

19. Water Institutions Need to be more efficient today Climate change likely to increase urgency of reforms Two major approaches to allocation: Improve centralized control or strengthen water rights and allow water trading