Ч а с т ь I i I главный редактор

Conclusion and Recommendation
At the moment, the opinion of economists is inclined to 
believe that this method is more suitable in the conditions of 
Tajikistan, but at present there are some shortcomings in this 
method as well. At first glance, this is not bad, since the fee will 
be charged based on the economic cost of sowing, but if you 
take a closer look, you can understand that in this applied tariff, 
when determining water consumption limits, only biological 
irrigation norms of agricultural crops are taken as a basis, but 
in most cases, their effect on water erosion of soil, deterioration 
of the land reclamation state and loss of humus, etc., are not 
taken into account.
Based on the foregoing, we can confidently refer to the 
fact that year after year, new economic conditions oblige us 
to move all spheres and aspects in parallel in order to achieve 
comprehensive achievements and harmony. Consequently, 
changes in water pricing can improve economic efficiency and 
social equity, and, if fewer resources are used more efficiently, 
lead to better environmental conditions. Consequently, water 
prices will help solve all three problems related to resource 
sustainability issues that are relevant today.

---

193
“Young Scientist” . # 28 (370) . July 2021
Economics and Management
But, despite all the existing studies, it has been shown that 
area pricing methods are used in more than 60 % of cases, while 
volumetric pricing is used in about 25 % of the cases studied 
(Bose and Walters, 1990) and they were more effective.
Summing up, we can say with confidence that in order to 
achieve the desired results, first of all, it is necessary to correctly 
formulate a water policy based on the nature of the property 
rights assigned to water in different countries. Only then can 
an equitable distribution of water resources and an increase 
in the sustainability of both the resource itself and the supply 
be achieved. The preferred pricing method is the one that 
provides the most benefit, including transaction costs. In cases 
where transaction costs are not high (in cases where the water 
is gravity), pricing per hectare can be used, but in other cases 
it is more efficient to use tiered methods. For example, in the 
absence of implementation costs, it would be efficient to use the 
volumetric method. Since the implementation costs associated 
with each pricing method vary greatly from region to region due 
to differences in climate, demographics, social structure, water 
rights, water bodies, history and general economic conditions, 
the net benefit associated with each method, the best option 
would be to vary from region to region.
References:
1. David Zilberman and Karina Schoengold (2005) The Use of Pricing and Markets for Water Allocation, Canadian Water 
Resources Journal, Vol. 30 (1): 47–54
2. Peter Rogers, Radhika de Silva, Ramesh Bhatia (2002) Water is an economic good: How to use prices to promote equity, 
efficiency, and sustainability, Water Policy 4 (1–17).
3. Bjornlund H. and McKay J. (1998) Factors affecting water prices in a rural water Market: a South Australian experience, 
Water Resource Research, 34, 1563–1570
4. Johansson R. C., Tsur Y., Roe T. L., Doukkali R. and Dinar A. (2002) Pricing irrigation water: a review of theory and practice, 
Water Policy, 4, 173–199
5. Boworth B., Cornish G., Perry C. and Van Steenbergen F. (2002) Water charging in irrigated agriculture: lessons from the 
literature. Report OD 145. HR Wallingford Ltd, Wallingford, UK.
6. Molle F. and Berkoff J. (2007) Water pricing in irrigation: mapping the debate in the light of experience.
7. Hellegers P. J. G. J. and Perry C. J. (2004) Water as an Economic Good in Irrigated Agriculture: Theory and Practice. Report 
3.04.12. LEI-Wageningen UR: The Hague.
8. World Water Commission, 2000
9. State Committee for Land Management and Geodesy of the Republic of Tajikistan, Dushanbe 2019.
10. Agency for Land Reclamation and Irrigation under the Government of the Republic of Tajikistan, Dushanbe.