Garbage and Recycling with Endogenous Local Policy

Kinnaman, Thomas C.; Fullerton, Don

doi:10.1006/juec.2000.2174

Cited by 204 publications

(154 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

139

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Interestingly, and also in line with Abbott et al (2011), we find that a decrease in frequency of the unsorted waste collection increases the recycling rate for compostable waste. The intuition behind this result is that when faced with fewer unsorted waste collections, households have an incentive to exert more effort in separating compostable waste from 26 Callan and Thomas (1997) and Kinnaman and Fullerton (2000) also find a significant and negative relationship between population density and recycling. 27 Abbott et al (2013Abbott et al ( , 2014 examine the role of social norms in general.…”

Section: Methods and Datamentioning

confidence: 95%

“…These combinations are counted as the frequency system. We follow Kinnaman and Fullerton (2000) and estimate the material-specific recycling rates as a series of demand equations. Since the independent variables in each equation are the same, there is no bias from estimating the system as separate equations.…”

Section: Methods and Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other authors claim that non-monetary initiatives, such as the provision of frequent curbside recycling services, increase recycling as well [see, for example, Thomas (1997, 2001), Kinnaman and Fullerton (2000), Ferrera and Missios (2005), Kipperberg (2007) and Usui (2008)]. Based on UK municipal panel data, Abbott et al (2011) study the determinants of dry recycling and composting rates separately.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

An EU Recycling Target: What Does the Dutch Evidence Tell Us?

Dijkgraaf

Gradus²

2016

Environ Resource Econ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The European Union (EU) advocates a household waste recycling rate of more than 65 %. Although the Netherlands has already invested heavily in recycling policies, this is still a big challenge as nowadays this rate is approximately 50 % on average and very few no municipalities have a rate above 65 %. Given this practice, it is possible to learn from the Dutch experience which policies are effective in increasing recycling rates. Based on a large panel data set for the Netherlands, we show that unit-based pricing, avoiding a duo-bin for unsorted and compostable waste, and reducing the frequency of collecting unsorted and compostable waste at the curbside are effective in raising the recycling rate. However, only a bag-based pricing system has a substantial effect, but this policy can have some adverse effects. Other unit-based pricing systems have effects of less than 10 % points. In nearly all cases, changing the frequency of collection of recyclables has no or very small effects. Moreover, the complementarity between unit-based pricing and curbside service is low. Overall, it seems very difficult to reach the EU goal of 65 % with the policies applied.

show abstract

Section: Methods and Datamentioning

confidence: 95%

Section: Methods and Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

An EU Recycling Target: What Does the Dutch Evidence Tell Us?

Dijkgraaf

Gradus²

2016

Environ Resource Econ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There is no natural experiment (Besley and Case 2000). Kinnaman and Fullerton (2000) correct for endogenous policy using instrumental variables, and find that their results depend crucially on this correction. Dijkgraaf and Gradus (2004) and Dijkgraaf and Gradus (2009) try correcting for environmental activism by testing whether communities that introduce UBP already have lower waste quantities before introduction.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Unit-Based Garbage Pricing: A Differences-in-Differences Approach

Allers

Hoeben

2009

Environ Resource Econ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using a unique 10-year dataset of all 458 Dutch municipalities, we apply a differences-in-differences approach to estimate the effect of unit-based pricing on household waste quantities and recycling. Community-level studies of unit-based pricing typically do not include fixed effects at the local level. We find that failure to do so may substantially inflate the estimated price effect. We also find that unit-based pricing may be endogenous, and use instrumental variables to account for this. Our analysis shows that user fees depend on user fees in neighboring jurisdictions (policy interaction). Our estimate of the garbage reduction per $1 user fee is lower than any previous estimate bar one. The price effect depends on the pricing system: weight-based systems reduce garbage quantities more than volume-based systems. User fees increase recycling, especially of paper, but not nearly as much as they reduce garbage quantities. We find no evidence for waste tourism or illegal dumping.

show abstract

“…We test below whether the magnitude of PGB's effect is the same when measuring garbage in kilograms. In computing the price elasticity of demand we follow the strategy outlined by Kinnaman and Fullerton (2000) and find an arcelasticity of about −0.3. 9 Results on the control variables indicate that a high level of education as measured by possessing a university degree is related to less solid waste per week per capita (about 8 l) compared to having completed only the compulsory education (the reference case).…”

Section: Results For Garbagementioning

confidence: 99%

Is taxing waste a waste of time? Evidence from a supreme court decision

Carattini

Baranzini

Lalive

Climate Change and Law Collection

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A B S T R A C TEnvironmental taxes are often underexploited. This paper analyses the effectiveness of a garbage tax, assessing its effects on multiple outcomes as well as its acceptability. We study how a Supreme Court decision, mandating the Swiss Canton of Vaud to implement a tax on garbage, affects garbage production and beliefs about the tax. We adopt a difference-in-differences approach exploiting that parts of Vaud already implemented a garbage tax before the mandate. Pricing garbage by the bag (PGB) is highly effective, reducing unsorted garbage by 40%, increasing recycling of aluminium and organic waste, without causing negative spillovers on adjacent regions. The effects of PGB seem very persistent over time. Our assessment of PGB looks very favourable. It may surprise that PGB is not implemented more often. Hence, we look at people's perceptions. We find that people are very concerned with PGB ex ante. Public opposition seems to be the main obstacle to PGB. However, implementing PGB reduces concerns with effectiveness and fairness substantially. After implementing PGB, people accept 70% higher garbage taxes compared to before PGB. We argue that environmental taxes could be much more diffused, if people had the chance to experience their functioning and correct their beliefs.

show abstract

Garbage and Recycling with Endogenous Local Policy

Cited by 204 publications

References 8 publications

An EU Recycling Target: What Does the Dutch Evidence Tell Us?

An EU Recycling Target: What Does the Dutch Evidence Tell Us?

Effects of Unit-Based Garbage Pricing: A Differences-in-Differences Approach

Is taxing waste a waste of time? Evidence from a supreme court decision

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About