Conclusions and Policy Implications 277 



explicit policy objective. In that case, there would be additional 

 equity considerations for policy-makers to weigh. For example, 

 if the industrialization of an underdeveloped region were to come 

 principally at the expense of low-income groups in older, econom- 

 ically more advanced regions, the equity consideration underlying 

 the economic development in the underdeveloped region may be 

 compromised by the incidence of the burdens associated with the 

 policy. In the case of private development of hydroelectric sites 

 with the aid of accelerated amortization privileges, when the dis- 

 tribution of equity shares in these utilities is skewed toward the 

 upper-income, investor classes and held predominantly in the older, 

 financially more mature centers in eastern United States, neither 

 the developmental nor equity objective is served. 



As a final note, this study may serve to emphasize that it is 

 difficult, if not impossible, to generalize as to what constitutes the 

 most efficient approach to the development of water resources. 

 Our conclusions have varied significantly, depending upon the 

 specific conditions in the individual cases. Moreover, it is desirable 

 to re-emphasize that an efficiency solution to a water resource devel- 

 opment problem need not necessarily be the socially desirable 

 solution; the latter depends on what weights attach to each of the 

 separate issues within the larger policy context. Nevertheless, 

 efficiency is a significant value in our society; in decisions regarding 

 multiple purpose development, the public interest requires that 

 efficiency considerations be given due weight. 



