News | Mammoth Water

Techstars Sustainability Accelerator

Mammoth Trading accepted into prestigious Techstars Sustainability Accelerator in Partnership with the Nature Conservancy Monday, July 29, 2019 Denver, CO—Mammoth […]

Read More

Report sheds light on complexities of agricultural water transfers

A new report co-produced by the Daugherty Water for Food Global Institute (DWFI) and Mammoth Trading offers insight into the […]

Read More

Groundwater trading for California

About the report Groundwater was the primary lifeline for Californians during the State’s recent drought. When surface water resources in rivers, […]

Read More

The Secret Life of Groundwater

Did you know that we know more about the surface of Mars than we do about water use in our […]

Read More

Are markets an easy solution for California’s groundwater problems?

By Nell Green Nylen and Michael Kiparsky It has become popular to lament how slowly California is embracing water markets. […]

Read More

Young, R. & Brozović, N. (2019). Agricultural Water Transfers in the Western United States.

Environmental Defense Fund & Mammoth Trading. (2017). Groundwater Trading as a Tool for Implementing California’s Sustainable Groundwater Management Act.

Kuwayama, Y., Young, R., & Brozović, N. (2017). Groundwater Scarcity: Management Approaches and Recent Innovations. In Competition for Water Resources (pp. 332-350).

Young, R., & Brozović, N. (2016). Innovations in Groundwater Management: Smart Markets for Transferable Groundwater Extraction Rights. Technology and Innovation, 17, pp. 219-226.

Brozović, N., & Young, R. (2014). Design and implementation of markets for groundwater pumping rights. In Water Markets for the 21st Century, pp. 283-303. Springer Netherlands.

Palazzo, A., & Brozović, N. (2014). The role of groundwater trading in spatial water management. Agricultural Water Management, 145, pp. 50-60.

Kuwayama, Y., & Brozović, N. (2013). The regulation of a spatially heterogeneous externality: Tradable groundwater permits to protect streams. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 66(2), pp. 364-382.