Refuting two claims about virtual water trade

E. Ansink

doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.06.001

Refuting two claims about virtual water trade

E. Ansink

Environmental Economics

Research output: Contribution to Journal › Article › Academic › peer-review

Abstract

Using the Heckscher-Ohlin trade model, I refute two prominent but incorrect claims on virtual water trade. These claims are that virtual water trade (i) levels uneven water distribution, and (ii) reduces the potential for water conflict. Both claims are based on an incorrect understanding of comparative advantage in the production of water-intensive goods. The results show that both claims only hold under certain conditions, but do not necessarily follow from the Heckscher-Ohlin trade model. © 2010 Elsevier B.V.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	2027-2032
Journal	Ecological Economics
Volume	69
Issue number	10
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.06.001
Publication status	Published - 2010

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

SDG 6 Clean Water and Sanitation
SDG 17 Partnerships for the Goals

Access to Document

10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.06.001

Persistent URL (handle)

Persistent link

Cite this

@article{b6fde4104c514220a94223e2e5303f8a,

title = "Refuting two claims about virtual water trade",

abstract = "Using the Heckscher-Ohlin trade model, I refute two prominent but incorrect claims on virtual water trade. These claims are that virtual water trade (i) levels uneven water distribution, and (ii) reduces the potential for water conflict. Both claims are based on an incorrect understanding of comparative advantage in the production of water-intensive goods. The results show that both claims only hold under certain conditions, but do not necessarily follow from the Heckscher-Ohlin trade model. {\textcopyright} 2010 Elsevier B.V.",

author = "E. Ansink",

year = "2010",

doi = "10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.06.001",

language = "English",

volume = "69",

pages = "2027--2032",

journal = "Ecological Economics",

issn = "0921-8009",

publisher = "Elsevier B.V.",

number = "10",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Refuting two claims about virtual water trade

AU - Ansink, E.

PY - 2010

Y1 - 2010

N2 - Using the Heckscher-Ohlin trade model, I refute two prominent but incorrect claims on virtual water trade. These claims are that virtual water trade (i) levels uneven water distribution, and (ii) reduces the potential for water conflict. Both claims are based on an incorrect understanding of comparative advantage in the production of water-intensive goods. The results show that both claims only hold under certain conditions, but do not necessarily follow from the Heckscher-Ohlin trade model. © 2010 Elsevier B.V.

AB - Using the Heckscher-Ohlin trade model, I refute two prominent but incorrect claims on virtual water trade. These claims are that virtual water trade (i) levels uneven water distribution, and (ii) reduces the potential for water conflict. Both claims are based on an incorrect understanding of comparative advantage in the production of water-intensive goods. The results show that both claims only hold under certain conditions, but do not necessarily follow from the Heckscher-Ohlin trade model. © 2010 Elsevier B.V.

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/77954621548

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/77954621548#tab=citedBy

U2 - 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.06.001

DO - 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.06.001

M3 - Article

SN - 0921-8009

VL - 69

SP - 2027

EP - 2032

JO - Ecological Economics

JF - Ecological Economics

IS - 10

ER -

Refuting two claims about virtual water trade

Abstract

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Persistent URL (handle)

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this