IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/resene/v31y2009i1p13-23.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Environmental activism and dynamics of unit-based pricing systems

Author

Listed:
  • Dijkgraaf, Elbert
  • Gradus, Raymond

Abstract

It is well-known that unit-based pricing systems have a significant effect on the quantity of collected waste. Part of this effect may, however, result from a selection bias or environmental activism effect. Based on a pooled cross-section for the Netherlands for 1998-2005 we show that despite the correction for environmental activism the effect of the weight and bag unit-based pricing system on the quantity of waste is sizeable. Moreover, this environmental activism effect is decreasing over time, so that the most environmental friendly municipalities implement unit-based pricing systems at first. In addition, we show that the volume effects of the different unit-based pricing systems are rather stable over time. Although we find some evidence for a learning effect, nearly no evidence is found for an awareness erosion effect. This means at least that the effect of unit-based pricing does not decrease over time, which is reassuring from an environmental point of view. Pricing waste helps.

Suggested Citation

  • Dijkgraaf, Elbert & Gradus, Raymond, 2009. "Environmental activism and dynamics of unit-based pricing systems," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 13-23, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:resene:v:31:y:2009:i:1:p:13-23
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0928-7655(08)00034-1
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomas C. Kinnaman, 2006. "Policy Watch: Examining the Justification for Residential Recycling," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 20(4), pages 219-232, Fall.
    2. Don Fullerton & Thomas C. Kinnaman, 2002. "Household Responses to Pricing Garbage by the Bag," Chapters, in: Don Fullerton & Thomas C. Kinnaman (ed.), The Economics of Household Garbage and Recycling Behavior, chapter 4, pages 88-101, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Dijkgraaf, E. & Gradus, R. H. J. M., 2004. "Cost savings in unit-based pricing of household waste: The case of The Netherlands," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 353-371, December.
    4. Kinnaman Thomas C., 2005. "Why do Municipalities Recycle?," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 5(1), pages 1-25, February.
    5. Calcott, Paul & Walls, Margaret, 2005. "Waste, recycling, and "Design for Environment": Roles for markets and policy instruments," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 287-305, November.
    6. Thomas C. Kinnaman & Don Fullerton, 1997. "Garbage and Recycling in Communities with Curbside Recycling and Unit-Based Pricing," NBER Working Papers 6021, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Paul Isely & Aaron Lowen, 2007. "Price And Substitution In Residential Solid Waste," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 25(3), pages 433-443, July.
    8. Elbert Dijkgraaf & Herman Vollebergh, 2005. "A Test for Parameter Homogeneity in CO 2 Panel EKC Estimations," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 32(2), pages 229-239, October.
    9. Oecd, 2006. "Impacts of Unit-based Waste Collection Charges," OECD Papers, OECD Publishing, vol. 6(8), pages 1-157.
    10. Timothy K. M. Beatty & Peter Berck & Jay P. Shimshack, 2007. "Curbside Recycling In The Presence Of Alternatives," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 45(4), pages 739-755, October.
    11. Linderhof, Vincent & Kooreman, Peter & Allers, Maarten & Wiersma, Doede, 2001. "Weight-based pricing in the collection of household waste: the Oostzaan case," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(4), pages 359-371, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Germà Bel & Raymond Gradus, 2014. "“Effects of unit-based pricing on the waste collection demand: a meta-regression analysis”," IREA Working Papers 201420, University of Barcelona, Research Institute of Applied Economics, revised Jun 2014.
    2. Takehiro Usui & Kenji Takeuchi, 2014. "Evaluating Unit-Based Pricing of Residential Solid Waste: A Panel Data Analysis," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 58(2), pages 245-271, June.
    3. Bel, Germà & Gradus, Raymond, 2016. "Effects of unit-based pricing on household waste collection demand: A meta-regression analysis," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 169-182.
    4. Starr, Jared & Nicolson, Craig, 2015. "Patterns in trash: Factors driving municipal recycling in Massachusetts," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 7-18.
    5. Elbert Dijkgraaf & Raymond Gradus, 2015. "Efficiency Effects of Unit-Based Pricing Systems and Institutional Choices of Waste Collection," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 61(4), pages 641-658, August.
    6. Elbert Dijkgraaf & Raymond Gradus, 2014. "The Effectiveness of Dutch Municipal Recycling Policies," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 14-155/VI, Tinbergen Institute.
    7. Heller, Marit H. & Vatn, Arild, 2017. "The divisive and disruptive effect of a weight-based waste fee," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 275-285.
    8. Brian Chi-ang Lin & Siqi Zheng & Ankinée Kirakozian, 2016. "One Without The Other? Behavioural And Incentive Policies For Household Waste Management," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(3), pages 526-551, July.
    9. Antonella Tomasi & Giovanna Messina, 2021. "Wasted in waste? The benefits of switching from taxes to Pay-As-You-Throw fees: The Italian case," ECONOMIA PUBBLICA, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2021(2), pages 7-38.
    10. Abbott, Andrew & Nandeibam, Shasikanta & O'Shea, Lucy, 2011. "Explaining the variation in household recycling rates across the UK," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 2214-2223, September.
    11. Ju-Chin Huang, & John M. Halstead, & Shanna B. Saunders, 2011. "Managing Municipal Solid Waste with Unit-Based Pricing: Policy Effects and Responsiveness to Pricing," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 87(4), pages 645-660.
    12. Thomas C. Kinnaman, 2006. "Policy Watch: Examining the Justification for Residential Recycling," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 20(4), pages 219-232, Fall.
    13. Elbert Dijkgraaf & Raymond Gradus, 2017. "An EU Recycling Target: What Does the Dutch Evidence Tell Us?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(3), pages 501-526, November.
    14. Brian Chi-ang Lin & Siqi Zheng & Marie Briguglio, 2016. "Household Cooperation In Waste Management: Initial Conditions And Intervention," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(3), pages 497-525, July.
    15. Slavik, Jan & Pavel, Jan, 2013. "Do the variable charges really increase the effectiveness and economy of waste management? A case study of the Czech Republic," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 68-77.
    16. Acuff, Kaylee & Kaffine, Daniel T., 2013. "Greenhouse gas emissions, waste and recycling policy," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 74-86.
    17. Tobias Erhardt, 2019. "Garbage In and Garbage Out? On Waste Havens in Switzerland," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 73(1), pages 251-282, May.
    18. Gellynck, Xavier & Verhelst, Pieter, 2007. "Assessing instruments for mixed household solid waste collection services in the Flemish region of Belgium," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 49(4), pages 372-387.
    19. Pfister, Naomi & Mathys, Nicole A., 2022. "Waste taxes at work: Evidence from the canton of Vaud in Switzerland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    20. Valente, Marica, 2023. "Policy evaluation of waste pricing programs using heterogeneous causal effect estimation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Unit-based pricing Selection bias Dynamics Learning effect;

    JEL classification:

    • H31 - Public Economics - - Fiscal Policies and Behavior of Economic Agents - - - Household
    • H71 - Public Economics - - State and Local Government; Intergovernmental Relations - - - State and Local Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue
    • Q38 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Nonrenewable Resources and Conservation - - - Government Policy (includes OPEC Policy)

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:resene:v:31:y:2009:i:1:p:13-23. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/505569 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.