<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">
<front>
<journal-meta>
<journal-id>1816-7950</journal-id>
<journal-title><![CDATA[Water SA]]></journal-title>
<abbrev-journal-title><![CDATA[Water SA]]></abbrev-journal-title>
<issn>1816-7950</issn>
<publisher>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Water Research Commission (WRC)]]></publisher-name>
</publisher>
</journal-meta>
<article-meta>
<article-id>S1816-79502012000300013</article-id>
<title-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Valuing groundwater: a practical approach for integrating groundwater economic values into decision making - A case study in Namibia, Southern Africa]]></article-title>
</title-group>
<contrib-group>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Bann]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[C]]></given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="A01"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Wood]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[SC]]></given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="A02"/>
</contrib>
</contrib-group>
<aff id="A01">
<institution><![CDATA[,Economics for the Environment Consultancy Ltd  ]]></institution>
<addr-line><![CDATA[London ]]></addr-line>
<country>UK</country>
</aff>
<aff id="A02">
<institution><![CDATA[,UK Atkins  ]]></institution>
<addr-line><![CDATA[Surrey ]]></addr-line>
<country>UK</country>
</aff>
<pub-date pub-type="pub">
<day>00</day>
<month>00</month>
<year>2012</year>
</pub-date>
<pub-date pub-type="epub">
<day>00</day>
<month>00</month>
<year>2012</year>
</pub-date>
<volume>38</volume>
<numero>3</numero>
<fpage>461</fpage>
<lpage>466</lpage>
<copyright-statement/>
<copyright-year/>
<self-uri xlink:href="http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&amp;pid=S1816-79502012000300013&amp;lng=en&amp;nrm=iso&amp;tlng=en"></self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_abstract&amp;pid=S1816-79502012000300013&amp;lng=en&amp;nrm=iso&amp;tlng=en"></self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_pdf&amp;pid=S1816-79502012000300013&amp;lng=en&amp;nrm=iso&amp;tlng=en"></self-uri><abstract abstract-type="short" xml:lang="en"><p><![CDATA[Groundwater provides a range of services to people in Southern Africa; however, the benefits provided by these services are often not fully appreciated and factored into decisions about groundwater management and use. After outlining briefly the importance of groundwater in the region and the pressures facing groundwater, this paper discusses how economic valuation can help improve its management. The main focus of the paper is the presentation of the practical 5-step economic valuation methodology that has been developed as part of the Southern African Development Community (SADC) Groundwater and Drought Management Project. This methodology can be generally applied to groundwater management issues across the SADC region. The methodology is based upon an ecosystem services approach which considers all the potential services that groundwater provides, which can result in improvements in human welfare. These services include provisioning services such as water for domestic use, agriculture and industry; regulating services such as the recharge of surface waters and carbon storage benefits; and cultural services such as the tourism associated with wildlife at groundwater-fed watering holes. The methodology incorporates a 2-tiered valuation approach. The Tier 1 valuation is based on market pricing and value-transfer approaches and can provide an initial view of the economic value of a resource in a particular use. A value-transfer tool has been developed, which allows the user to select from a menu of the currently available transfer values for use in an assessment. A Tier 2 valuation requires more detailed primary studies and may be required following a Tier 1 assessment where more certainty in decision-making is required. The methodology has been tested at 4 pilot sites in the region. An example of the application of the SADC groundwater-valuation methodology in Namibia is presented in this paper. The paper concludes with recommendations for the development of groundwater valuation in the region. Emphasis is placed on training, the commissioning of more groundwater-valuation studies and the need for more scientific research to facilitate the valuation of groundwater-regulating services.]]></p></abstract>
<kwd-group>
<kwd lng="en"><![CDATA[economic value]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="en"><![CDATA[groundwater]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="en"><![CDATA[ecosystem services]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="en"><![CDATA[SADC]]></kwd>
</kwd-group>
</article-meta>
</front><body><![CDATA[ <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="4"><b><a name="top"></a>Valuing    groundwater: A practical approach for integrating groundwater economic values    into decision making - A case study in Namibia, Southern Africa</b></font></p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><b>C Bann<sup>I,    <a href="#back">*</a></sup>; SC Wood<sup>II</sup></b></font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><sup>I</sup>Economics    for the Environment Consultancy Ltd (eftec), 16 Percy St, London, UK, W1T 1DT        <br>   <sup> II</sup>UK Atkins, Woodcote Grove, Ashley Road, Epsom, Surrey, UK, KT18    5BW</font></p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>     <p>&nbsp;</p> <hr size="1" noshade>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><b>ABSTRACT</b></font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Groundwater provides    a range of services to people in Southern Africa; however, the benefits provided    by these services are often not fully appreciated and factored into decisions    about groundwater management and use. After outlining briefly the importance    of groundwater in the region and the pressures facing groundwater, this paper    discusses how economic valuation can help improve its management. The main focus    of the paper is the presentation of the practical 5-step economic valuation    methodology that has been developed as part of the Southern African Development    Community (SADC) Groundwater and Drought Management Project. This methodology    can be generally applied to groundwater management issues across the SADC region.    The methodology is based upon an ecosystem services approach which considers    all the potential services that groundwater provides, which can result in improvements    in human welfare. These services include provisioning services such as water    for domestic use, agriculture and industry; regulating services such as the    recharge of surface waters and carbon storage benefits; and cultural services    such as the tourism associated with wildlife at groundwater-fed watering holes.    The methodology incorporates a 2-tiered valuation approach. The Tier 1 valuation    is based on market pricing and value-transfer approaches and can provide an    initial view of the economic value of a resource in a particular use. A value-transfer    tool has been developed, which allows the user to select from a menu of the    currently available transfer values for use in an assessment. A Tier 2 valuation    requires more detailed primary studies and may be required following a Tier    1 assessment where more certainty in decision-making is required. The methodology    has been tested at 4 pilot sites in the region. An example of the application    of the SADC groundwater-valuation methodology in Namibia is presented in this    paper. The paper concludes with recommendations for the development of groundwater    valuation in the region. Emphasis is placed on training, the commissioning of    more groundwater-valuation studies and the need for more scientific research    to facilitate the valuation of groundwater-regulating services.</font></p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><b>Keywords:</b>    economic value, groundwater, ecosystem services, SADC</font></p> <hr size="1" noshade>     <p>&nbsp;</p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="3"><b>Background</b></font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Atkins and the    Economics for the Environment Consultancy (eftec) have recently completed an    18-month study to develop a practical groundwater-valuation tool for the Southern    African Development Community (SADC). This study was funded by the World Bank    and managed by the United Nations Office for Project Services (UNOPS) on behalf    of SADC, under its Groundwater and Drought Management Programme (GDMP). The    need for this research was driven by the fact that while the development and    management of water resources in SADC member states has traditionally focused    on surface waters, increasing aridity and limited surface water resources have    increased the dependence on groundwater for both domestic and commercial water    needs. At the same time, groundwater faces a range of threats from increasing    population and industrial development, including over-abstraction and aquifer    pollution. These threats are compounded by the effects of drought and climate    change and are impacting the security and sustainability of water resources    and resulting in the degradation of groundwater-dependent ecosystems (GDEs).    Under the study the following activities were undertaken: a high-level characterisation    of the groundwater resource across the SADC and the pressures that it faces;    an extensive literature review on groundwater valuation; development of a practical    groundwater-valuation methodology, which includes a value-transfer tool to facilitate    high-level assessments; the testing of the groundwater-valuation methodology    at 4 sites in the region; production of a user guide to accompany the methodology;    and an analysis of future priorities and needs to develop groundwater valuation    in the SADC.</font></p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="3"><b>The importance    of groundwater in the SADC</b></font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><b>Groundwater    use within SADC</b></font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">About one-third    of the people in the SADC member states live in drought-prone areas. In the    driest part of the region, groundwater is the primary source of: drinking water    for the human population and livestock; irrigation for agriculture; and water    supply to industry. It is also essential for wildlife and hence is fundamental    to the tourism industry in these dryland areas (SADC, 2010). For the arid and    semi-arid areas within the SADC (Botswana, Namibia and parts of most of the    other SADC member states), groundwater is often the only source of water and    is used for a range of purposes. For example, in Namibia groundwater is used    for urban water supply (e.g. Windhoek, Swakopmund and Walvis Bay), irrigation    (Stampriet aquifer, Grootfontein/Tsumeb aquifer), mining and rural water supply.    In the humid areas (including large areas of Angola, Democratic Republic of    Congo, Madagascar, Malawi, South Africa, Zambia and Zimbabwe), groundwater is    mostly used for rural water supply and for mines in isolated areas.</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">The dependence    on groundwater and its importance (value) in the SADC region is set to increase    over the coming decades as water resources face increasing pressures related    to the growth in populations and economies of the region, pollution and climate    change. If the region becomes more drought-prone under a changing climate, the    use of groundwater, which is generally a more drought-resistant resource than    surface water, will be extremely valuable.</font></p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><b>Pressures facing    groundwater resources in the SADC</b></font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">The pressures referred    to above can generally be categorised either as threats to quantity or quality    although both are often experienced together.</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Reduced recharge    due to long-term drought or climate-change-driven changes in spatial distribution    of precipitation can result in a reduction in the quantity of groundwater available    for abstraction or support to surface waters and wetland habitats. However,    these outcomes can also be caused by over-abstraction of groundwater from an    aquifer.</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Increased population    and economic development inevitably result in an increase in the generation    of waste products and, if disposed of inappropriately, these have the potential    to contaminate groundwater resources and lead to degradation and economic costs.</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Within the SADC    region, potential sources of groundwater contamination are numerous and include    activities in the domestic, agricultural, mining, industrial and urban sectors.    The widespread use of on-site sanitation in rural and urban parts of the region    can cause contamination of shallow aquifers and in fractured or karst bedrock    with pathogens and nitrates. The increase in commercial agriculture, particularly    horticulture, in some parts of the region has led to the contamination of some    aquifers with fertiliser-derived nutrients (e.g. in the Kafue Valley in Zambia    and the Kutuma and Sinthumule districts of Venda, South Africa). Mining activities    have, in some cases, led to the contamination of aquifers with metals and other    contaminants as well as depleting the groundwater in aquifers to the detriment    of other users. Pollution from mineral processing has led to the contamination    of aquifers with arsenic in Zimbabwe and heavy metals and sulphates in shallow    groundwater systems in Botswana (SADC, 2010).</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><b>Why value groundwater?</b></font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">There are 2 reasons    why it is important to value groundwater in the SADC:</font></p> <ul>       <li><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><b>Raise awareness</b>      of the importance and varied use and services provided by groundwater</font></li>       <li><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><b>Improve decisions</b>      on the management and use of the groundwater resource.</font></li>     </ul>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><b>Raising awareness:</b>    Identifying, and where possible valuing, the full range of services provided    by groundwater can assist in raising the profile of groundwater in the region    and contribute towards its sustainable management. These services include the    provision of water for domestic, agricultural and industrial use, but also less    well appreciated services such as the recharge of surface waters and flood-prevention    services. <a href="/img/revistas/wsa/v38n3/13t01.jpg">Table 1</a> provides a typology of the    full range of groundwater 'ecosystem services'. This typology adopts an <b>ecosystem    services framework,</b> which explicitly recognises that ecosystems and the    biological diversity contained within them contribute to the individual and    social wellbeing of humans. Ecosystem services are categorised into: <b>provisioning    services</b> which are associated with goods provided by the ecosystem such    as water supply; <b>regulating services</b> which refer to processes such as    climate regulation, modification of flow processes (e.g. flood control) and    the dilution of pollutants; and <b>cultural services</b> which relate to the    non-material benefits obtained from groundwater and GDEs, for example, through    tourism and educational and spiritual experiences.</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><b>Improving decisions:</b>    Groundwater valuation is important as an input into decisions on its use and    management. The use of groundwater as a scarce resource entails tradeoffs -    its use in one activity (e.g., agriculture) implies that it is not available    for another use (e.g., domestic supply or to support ecosystems of high conservation    value). An understanding of the economic value of groundwater in different uses    and under different management options can promote its sustainable management,    help allocate water to its highest value use, and inform policies on the provision    of water as a basic human need.</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Groundwater valuation    and economic appraisal can help answer important questions fundamental to the    sustainable management of the groundwater resource, for example:</font></p> <ul>       <li><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">What is the      best groundwater project, policy, management option from a set of alternatives      (i.e., which option maximises net benefits)?</font></li>       <li><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">What are the      costs of unsustainable groundwater use?</font></li>       <li><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Is a project      or policy worthwhile?</font></li>       <li><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">How much does      groundwater contribute to the economy?</font></li>       <li><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">What sectors      are most dependent on groundwater?</font></li>       <li><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">How much should      be spent on groundwater management practices?</font></li>       <li><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Is there a case      for actions to conserve groundwater?</font></li>       ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<li><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">What is the      appropriate level of a groundwater user tariff?</font></li>       <li><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">What level should      a payment for ecosystem service (PES) be set at?</font></li>       <li><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">What uses should      abstracted groundwater be allocated to?</font></li>       <li><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">What is the      value of environmental damages?</font></li>       <li><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">What scale of      compensation for damage is justified?</font></li>     </ul>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><b>A practical    methodology for groundwater valuation</b></font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">A practical methodology    for integrating the economic values of groundwater services into decision making    in the SADC has been developed and tested. It entails 5 key steps as presented    in <a href="#f1">Fig. 1</a>.</font></p>     <p><a name="f1"></a></p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p align="center"><img src="/img/revistas/wsa/v38n3/13f01.jpg"></p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><b>Step 1</b> provides    background on the groundwater site under study and the context for the economic    valuation and assessment. This step involves building up an understanding of    the groundwater resource - its physical characteristics as well as the uses    and pressures it faces - and determining how economic valuation can help inform    key policy or management decisions about the use of groundwater at the site.</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><b>Step 2</b> defines    the scope of the assessment. Under Step 2, the key groundwater ecosystem services    at the site, such as water supply, surface-water recharge benefits, and reduced    flood risk, are identified through a qualitative assessment and the analyst    determines whether the data and resources exist to value them. This step also    determines what type of assessment framework would be appropriate. The most    straightforward type of assessment framework is a valuation of a groundwater    resource in its current use, but cost-benefit analysis (CBA) is recommended    where possible to understand the trade-offs associated with different groundwater    uses and management.</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><b>Step 3</b> values    the groundwater ecosystem services identified in Step 2 as being significant    and possible to value, given available data and resources. The methodology provides    for a 2-tiered valuation approach. The Tier 1 valuation allows a relatively    quick and less data-intensive route to providing an initial assessment of the    groundwater resource, which can be used to inform decisions and/or to indicate    if and where more certainty in the evidence base is required. The Tier 1 valuation    approach is based on the use of market price and value-transfer approaches.    Where possible, market price approaches should be used. Where market prices    do not exist, or non-market values are known to be large, value transfer may    be used. A value-transfer tool has been developed, which presents available    unit transfer values for groundwater ecosystem services in the SADC, along with    guidance on their application. This value-transfer tool is based on an extensive    literature review of studies from the region, and provides transfer values for    the following ecosystem services - public water supply; private/ community water    supply; agricultural abstraction; industrial abstraction; attenuation of pollutants;    and recharge to surface water. In some cases surface water estimates have been    used as proxies for groundwater values due to the extremely limited number of    groundwater-specific studies. The transfer values may also be used as benchmarks    against which new values based on market-price approaches or other methods can    be compared. Given that the majority of transfer values relate to provisioning    services, for which market-price approaches can be applied, this comparative    use of the value-transfer tool is considered to be highly relevant. A Tier 2    assessment involves the use of a more detailed primary valuation approach involving    targeted, site-specific economic research. It is only undertaken following a    Tier 1 assessment if better evidence is required and should be managed by an    experienced economist.</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><b>Step 4</b> analyses    the valuation undertaken in Step 3. In all cases unit values need to be aggregated    based on the population, or by the number of hectares, benefiting from the groundwater    ecosystem services to derive total values. Sensitivity analysis is also recommended    in all cases to highlight to decision makers the confidence that may be attached    to the values. If a CBA of alternative groundwater-use scenarios is being undertaken,    different options or scenarios will need to be defined and compared, and discounting    of annual values and one-off costs over an appropriate timeframe will be required    to derive net present values (NPVs). A distributional analysis is recommended.    This is used to identify who wins from current and potential groundwater use    and who loses. This information can be used to develop mechanisms to compensate    those who lose from a particular groundwater use or allocation.</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><b>Step 5</b> involves    reporting and disseminating the results of the valuation and assessment.</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><b>Application    of the groundwater-valuation methodology</b></font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">The SADC groundwater-valuation    methodology presented above was piloted at the Kuiseb, Swakop and Omaruru alluvial    aquifers in Namibia. Water from these aquifers is predominately used for urban    water supply, uranium mining and small-scale agriculture. Groundwater also plays    an important role in supporting GDEs in the area. Uranium mining places significant    demand on water resources and is the main industry in the area. It is currently    experiencing an upsurge as a result of the growing interest in nuclear energy    both within Africa and further afield.</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">The case study    illustrates how the economic value of different water supply options (groundwater    or seawater desalination) can be investigated to support water resource management    decisions. It should be noted that the data and assumptions utilised in the    case study are based upon a high level desk-based literature search and the    resulting values are for illustrative purposes only. The application of the    5-step groundwater-valuation methodology is described below.</font></p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><b>Step 1a: Develop    a conceptual understanding of the physical characteristics of the groundwater    system.</b> The area covers 3 ephemeral river catchments and associated alluvial    aquifers that are situated on the desert west coast of Namibia: the Kuiseb,    Swakop and Omaruru catchments. There are 4 main urban settlements in the study    area comprising the coastal settlements of Walvis Bay, Swakopmund and Hentiesbaai    (with a combined population of around 87 000), and the inland mining town of    Arandis (with a population of around 4 000). Due to the harshness of the environment,    the remaining area is very sparsely populated. It is estimated that the sustainable    yield of the alluvial aquifers of these 3 river catchments is 32.8 Ml/d (32.8    x 10<sup>6</sup> l/d) (MME, 2010).</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><b>Step 1b: Define    the issue facing the groundwater resource.</b></font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Demand for water    within the area already exceeds the available freshwater resources and with    the anticipated expansion of uranium mining, pressures on water resources are    set to increase. The main water-resource options in the area are groundwater    and seawater desalination. With the groundwater resources already fully committed,    development plans need to take account of the potential economic and environmental    impacts of further development of water supplies.</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">The existing uses    of the groundwater within the study area include:</font></p> <ul>       <li><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Public water      supply for indigenous, non-indigenous and visitor populations</font></li>       <li><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Rural domestic      water supply and livestock watering on communal farms</font></li>       <li><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Water supply      to Inara melon harvested by Topnaar indigenous people</font></li>       <li><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Process and      potable water for mining operations</font></li>       <li><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Water supply      to natural vegetation along river corridors</font></li>       <li><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Springflow to      the groundwater-dependent components of Sandwich Harbour Ramsar site which      is a coastal wetland in the Kuiseb lower catchment</font></li>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[</ul>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><b>Step 1c: Define    the decision-making context and how the valuation evidence can assist decision    making.</b> It is evident that an economic analysis of different groundwater-use    scenarios would help clarify the tradeoffs between uses and inform policy decisions    on groundwater management in the area.</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><b>Step 2a: Select    ecosystem services for valuation based on a qualitative assessment of the services    provided, available data and resources to undertake the assessment.</b> Following    a literature review, it was determined that the groundwater ecosystem services    requiring valuation were: public water supply, private water supply, agricultural    water supply, industrial water supply, biodiversity non-use (in relation to    springflow to the Ramsar site) and cultural use (in relation to groundwater    use by the indigenous tribes).</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><b>Step 2b: Determine    the type of assessment.</b> A CBA of alternative groundwater use and water-supply    options for uranium mining was selected as a means of demonstrating the tradeoffs    involved and informing sustainable management options for the aquifers.</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><b>Step 2c: Quantify    the groundwater service and for scenario analysis quantify the impact on ecosystem    services of any predicted change.</b> For each of the groundwater services identified    for valuation in Step 2a, components and quantities associated with the following    3 theoretical development scenarios were identified:</font></p> <ul>       <li><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><b>Scenario      1:</b> In addition to the 3 existing mines, 4 new mines are constructed and      mining is allocated the entire sustainable yield of the alluvial aquifers;      the remaining mining demand is met by seawater desalination; public water      supply is dependent on desalination; and the groundwater services provided      to the GDE, farming and Topnaar livelihoods are lost.</font></li>       <li><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><b>Scenario      2:</b> In addition to the 3 existing mines, new mine development is constrained      to the sustainable yield of the alluvial aquifers (i.e. 2 mines); public water      supply is therefore dependent on desalination; and the groundwater services      provided to the GDE, farming and Topnaar livelihoods are lost.</font></li>       <li><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><b>Scenario      3:</b> The GDE, farming and Topnaar livelihoods are maintained using groundwater;      the balance of sustainable groundwater yield is allocated to public water      supply and all mining water demand is met by seawater desalination.</font></li>     </ul>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><b>Step 3a: Tier    1 Valuation and Step 4a: Aggregation.</b></font></p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Quantities (e.g.    populations, water demands, cultivated areas, wetland areas) were estimated    for each of the services identified for valuation and for each of these, unit    values were obtained either from market price data or from the value-transfer    tool as detailed in <a href="/img/revistas/wsa/v38n3/13t02.jpg">Table 2</a>. The unit values    were adjusted to 2010 United States dollar (USD) prices and aggregated using    the identified quantities to obtain total values for each service.</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><b>Step 4b: Cost-benefit    analysis and Step 4c: Sensitivity analysis.</b> <a href="#t3">Table 3</a> presents    the total NPV of the 3 theoretical development scenarios. The range of values    presented for each scenario illustrates the result of undertaking basic sensitivity    analysis on the component unit values.</font></p>     <p><a name="t3"></a></p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>     <p align="center"><img src="/img/revistas/wsa/v38n3/13t03.jpg"></p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">The high-level    valuation suggests that the economic value of using groundwater for uranium    mining outweighs the economic losses to other groundwater services under a 'maximum    mining' scenario. However, it was not possible to estimate the cultural economic    value associated with the dependence of the Topnaar population on groundwater.    Furthermore, the environmental costs associated with desalination plant discharges    were not included. These impacts are very site-specific and would require more    comprehensive research to facilitate appropriate valuation. Inclusion of such    values is likely to reduce the difference in the NPV between scenarios and could    change the ranking.</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><b>Step 4d: Distributional    analysis and Step 5a: Reporting.</b> A high-level distributional analysis demonstrates    that the rural and indigenous populations (approximately 20% of the total population)    are the cost bearers under Scenarios 1 and 2 and only become beneficiaries under    Scenario 3. The type and number of beneficiaries under Scenarios 1 and 2 are    more difficult to determine as this depends upon the complexities of how profits    from commercial uranium mining ultimately filter into the local population.    Further investigation would be required to characterise and quantify these impacts.</font></p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="3"><b>The way forward</b></font></p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">This study provides    a baseline in terms of the data and capacity currently available to undertake    groundwater valuation in the SADC region. Against this baseline the steps needed    to develop work in this area in the future have been prioritised as summarised    below.</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">The literature    review revealed that only 5 groundwater-specific valuation studies have been    undertaken in the SADC region. This very low number of studies highlights the    need to undertake more primary studies. The case studies undertaken for the    project were generally executed at relatively well-studied sites and were based    on readily available information. They were also undertaken primarily to test    the methodology and therefore have used default estimates and assumptions, which    would need further refinement in order to be used in decision-making. There    is a need to start to generate evidence on the benefits of sustainable groundwater    management at other, less well-studied sites through longer term research studies.    Priority areas of study include: studies of ecosystem services for which no    transfer values are available (e.g. provisioning services such as industrial    abstraction and the provision of a sink or source of energy and all groundwater    regulating services); key policy areas where valuation work is yet to be undertaken    such as the economic costs of pollution, contamination and saline intrusion;    and studies in countries where no estimates currently exist. This would provide    the SADC with a more complete repository of transfer values to be used to inform    policy decisions. New studies should therefore be undertaken with value transfer    in mind and ensure that information influencing the use of estimates in a value    transfer is carefully reported. Studies should be focused on common issues and    uses across the region in order to maximise their future transferability.</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">The valuation of    the groundwater ecosystem services is restricted by the scientific evidence    on the extent and function of these services, and how a change in their quality    or quantity will translate into changes in the environment and hence the economy.    Without a clear scientific definition and quantification of the service, it    is not possible to undertake the valuation. For example, scientific evidence    is required in order to make progress on the valuation of groundwater <b>regulating    service</b> (e.g. recharge of surface waters, flood-risk regulation, sink for    atmospheric carbon, attenuation of pollutants, and prevention of subsidence).    This emphasises the need for interdisciplinary research efforts to ensure a    smooth transition from the quantification of the impact (by scientists and planners)    to the monetisation of this impact by economists.</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Spatial factors    are very important in determining the value of most groundwater ecosystem services    given that ecosystem services are context dependent in terms of their provision    and their associated benefits and costs. Therefore site-specific studies that    build in key spatial features influencing the supply and demand of an ecosystem    service are required for truly reliable valuation estimates. Spatial factors    include temperature, rainfall, topography, quality, quantity, substitutes, population    and socioeconomic factors. Incorporation of spatial factors in ground-water-valuation    studies in the SADC in many cases requires the generation of data. The use of    Geographical Information Systems (GIS) in valuation is developing as a means    of incorporating spatial factors in ecosystem valuation. Groundwater valuation    in the SADC could build on existing SADC GIS initiatives in groundwater vulnerability    mapping and the mapping of groundwater-dependent ecosystem services.</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Training in groundwater    valuation and appraisal is important to encourage more valuation work, to ensure    that this work is executed to an acceptable standard, and to facilitate the    understanding of the valuation findings by decision-makers and others. A range    of training initiatives is recommended targeted at the different groups who    play a part in groundwater valuation, management and decision making, such as    economists, policy makers, implementation agents, the private sector and technical    and scientific experts. Medium to longer term priorities include the development    of scenario analysis for alternative groundwater uses building in existing climate-change    predictions and other relevant trend information, the development of green accounts    for groundwater and consideration of the option value of groundwater (this relates    to any premium that people may be willing to pay to ensure the option of being    able to use groundwater in the future).</font></p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="3"><b>References</b></font></p>     <!-- ref --><p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">LINDGREN A (1999)    The Value of Water: A Study of the Stampriet Aquifer in Northern Namibia. Master's    Thesis. UMEA University, Sweden.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=910983&pid=S1816-7950201200030001300001&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">MINISTRY OF MINES    AND ENERGY (MME) (2010) Strategic Environmental Assessment for the central Namib    Uranium Rush. Ministry of Mines and Energy, Windhoek, Republic of Namibia.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=910984&pid=S1816-7950201200030001300002&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"> MESA WATER (2011)    Panhandle Project. Mesa Water, Texas, USA. URL: <a href="http://www.mesawater.com/FAQs/default.asp" target="_blank">http://www.mesawater.com/FAQs/default.asp</a>    (Accessed 14 February 2011).</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=910985&pid=S1816-7950201200030001300003&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">MACGREGOR J, MASIREMBU    S, WILLIAMS R and MUNIKASU C (2000) Estimating the economic value of water in    Namibia. <i>Proc. 1<sup>st</sup> WARFSA/Waternet Symposium: Sustainable Use    of Water Resources.</i> 1-2 November 2000, Maputo, Mozambique. URL: <a href="http://www.waternetonline.ihe.nl/index.php?option=com_wrapper&amp;view=wrapper&amp;Ite" target="_blank">http://www.waternetonline.ihe.nl/index.php?option=com_wrapper&amp;view=wrapper&amp;Ite</a>    mid=230 (Accessed 13 July 2011).</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=910986&pid=S1816-7950201200030001300004&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">NAMIBIA DEPARTMENT    OF WATER AFFAIRS (NDWA) (2004) Draft Technical Summary of Water Accounts for    Namibia. Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Rural Development, Namibia.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=910987&pid=S1816-7950201200030001300005&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">SOUTHERN AFRICAN    DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY (SADC) (2010) Groundwater in SADC. SADC Groundwater website.URL:    <a href="http://www.sadc-groundwater.org/groundwater.php" target="_blank">http://www.sadc-groundwater.org/groundwater.php</a>.    (Accessed 13 July 2011).</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=910988&pid=S1816-7950201200030001300006&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">SOUTHERN WATER    (2009) Southern Water Water Resources Management Plan 2010 - 2035. URL: <u><a href="http://www.southernwater.co.uk/pdf/environment/waterResources/FWRMP_Main%20Rept%20combined_Sep%2009%20Final.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.southernwater.co.uk/pdf/environment/waterResources/FWRMP_Main%20    Rept%20combined_Sep%2009%20Final.pdf</a></u> (Accessed 3 June 2011).</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=910989&pid=S1816-7950201200030001300007&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">SWARTZ CD, DU PLESSIS    JA, BURGER AJ and OFFRINGA G (2006) A desalination guide for South African municipal    engineers. <i>Water SA</i> <b>32</b> (5) 641-647.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=910990&pid=S1816-7950201200030001300008&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">WORLD WILDLIFE    FUND (WWF) (2004) <i>The Economic Values of the World's Wetlands.</i> Report    prepared with support from the Swiss Agency for the Environment, Forests and    Landscape (SAEFL), Gland/ Amsterdam. URL: <a href="http://www.panda.org/downloads/freshwater/wetlandsbrochurefinal.pdf" target="_blank">www.panda.org/downloads/freshwater/wetlandsbrochurefinal.pdf</a>    (Accessed 13 July 2011).</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=910991&pid=S1816-7950201200030001300009&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><p>&nbsp;</p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">This paper was    originally presented at the International Conference on Groundwater: Our Source    of Security in an Uncertain Future, Pretoria, 19-21 September 2011.    <br>   <a name="back"></a><a href="#top">*</a> To whom all correspondence should be    addressed. +44 75 53 38-0163 e-mail: <a href="mailto:camille.bann@envecconsulting.com">camille.bann@envecconsulting.com</a></font></p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[ ]]></body>
<REFERENCES></REFERENCES<back>
<ref-list>
<ref id="B1">
<nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[LINDGREN]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[The Value of Water: A Study of the Stampriet Aquifer in Northern Namibia]]></source>
<year>1999</year>
<publisher-loc><![CDATA[Sweden ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[UMEA University]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B2">
<nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<collab>MINISTRY OF MINES AND ENERGY</collab>
<source><![CDATA[Strategic Environmental Assessment for the central Namib Uranium Rush]]></source>
<year>2010</year>
<publisher-loc><![CDATA[Windhoek ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Ministry of Mines and Energy]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B3">
<nlm-citation citation-type="">
<collab>MESA WATER</collab>
<source><![CDATA[Panhandle Project]]></source>
<year>2011</year>
<publisher-loc><![CDATA[Mesa Water^eTexas Texas]]></publisher-loc>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B4">
<nlm-citation citation-type="confpro">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[MACGREGOR]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[J]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[MASIREMBU]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[S]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[WILLIAMS]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[R]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[MUNIKASU]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[C]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Estimating the economic value of water in Namibia]]></source>
<year>2000</year>
<conf-name><![CDATA[1 WARFSA/Waternet Symposium: Sustainable Use of Water Resources]]></conf-name>
<conf-date>1-2 November 2000</conf-date>
<conf-loc>Maputo </conf-loc>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B5">
<nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<collab>NAMIBIA DEPARTMENT OF WATER AFFAIRS</collab>
<source><![CDATA[Draft Technical Summary of Water Accounts for Namibia]]></source>
<year>2004</year>
<publisher-loc><![CDATA[Namibia ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Rural Development]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B6">
<nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<collab>SOUTHERN AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY</collab>
<source><![CDATA[Groundwater in SADC]]></source>
<year>2010</year>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[SADC Groundwater website]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B7">
<nlm-citation citation-type="">
<collab>SOUTHERN WATER</collab>
<source><![CDATA[Southern Water Water Resources Management Plan 2010 - 2035]]></source>
<year>2009</year>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B8">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[SWARTZ]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[CD]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[DU PLESSIS]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[JA]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[BURGER]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[AJ]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[OFFRINGA]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[G]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[A desalination guide for South African municipal engineers]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Water SA]]></source>
<year>2006</year>
<volume>32</volume>
<numero>5</numero>
<issue>5</issue>
<page-range>641-647</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B9">
<nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<collab>WORLD WILDLIFE FUND</collab>
<source><![CDATA[The Economic Values of the World's Wetlands: Report prepared with support from the Swiss Agency for the Environment]]></source>
<year>2004</year>
<publisher-loc><![CDATA[Amsterdam ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Forests and Landscape (SAEFL), Gland]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
</ref-list>
</back>
</article>
