We want to sort! Assessing households' preferences for sorting waste

被引:95
作者
Czajkowski, Mikolaj [1 ]
Kadziela, Tadeusz [1 ]
Hanley, Nick [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Warsaw, Dept Econ Sci, PL-00325 Warsaw, Poland
[2] Univ Stirling, Econ Div, Stirling FK9 4LA, Scotland
关键词
Recycling; Choice modelling; G-MNL model; Solid waste management; SOLID-WASTE; ENVIRONMENT; DESIGN; ROLES;
D O I
10.1016/j.reseneeco.2013.05.006
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
There are two major ways in which solid waste can be sorted and recycled - at the household level, when households are required to sort waste into a given number of categories, or in specialised sorting facilities. Traditionally, it has been thought that sorting at the household level is an inconvenience, as it uses space and requires time and effort. Our study provides empirical evidence to the contrary, indicating that home sorting is a net source of utility for some people. Through a carefully designed choice experiment we collected stated choices from members of a Polish municipality with respect to the way their waste is sorted and how often it is collected. In the hypothetical scenario employed, respondents were informed that waste will be sorted anyway - if not at the household level then at a specialised sorting facility. Interestingly, analysis shows that a large group of people are willing to sort waste at the household level even if unsorted waste would be collected at no extra cost. For a minority, increased home sorting of waste would, however, impose a loss of utility. Overall, our results indicate that most respondents preferred to sort waste themselves if given the choice. We provide a few possible explanations of this perhaps surprising result, including the desire to promote a green external image, and a concern about the effectiveness of separation activities performed by others. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:290 / 306
页数:17
相关论文
共 24 条
[1]  
Bruvoll A., 2002, 316 RES DEP STAT NOR
[2]   Waste, recycling, and "Design for Environment": Roles for markets and policy instruments [J].
Calcott, P ;
Walls, M .
RESOURCE AND ENERGY ECONOMICS, 2005, 27 (04) :287-305
[3]   Assessing the effectiveness of voluntary solid waste reduction policies: Methodology and a Flemish case study [J].
De Jaeger, Simon ;
Eyckmans, Johan .
WASTE MANAGEMENT, 2008, 28 (08) :1449-1460
[4]   Designs with a priori information for nonmarket valuation with choice experiments:: A Monte Carlo study [J].
Ferrini, Silvia ;
Scarpa, Riccardo .
JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT, 2007, 53 (03) :342-363
[5]   The Generalized Multinomial Logit Model: Accounting for Scale and Coefficient Heterogeneity [J].
Fiebig, Denzil G. ;
Keane, Michael P. ;
Louviere, Jordan ;
Wasi, Nada .
MARKETING SCIENCE, 2010, 29 (03) :393-421
[6]   AN ECONOMIC-ANALYSIS OF HOUSEHOLD RECYCLING OF SOLID-WASTES - THE CASE OF PORTLAND, OREGON [J].
HONG, SH ;
ADAMS, RM ;
LOVE, HA .
JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT, 1993, 25 (02) :136-146
[7]   Managing Municipal Solid Waste with Unit-Based Pricing: Policy Effects and Responsiveness to Pricing [J].
Huang, Ju-Chin ;
Halstead, John M. ;
Saunders, Shanna B. .
LAND ECONOMICS, 2011, 87 (04) :645-660
[8]   Income effects and the inconvenience of private provision of public goods for bads: The case of recycling in Finland [J].
Huhtala, Anni .
ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS, 2010, 69 (08) :1675-1681
[9]   The determinants of household recycling: a material-specific analysis of recycling program features and unit pricing [J].
Jenkins, RR ;
Martinez, SA ;
Palmer, K ;
Podolsky, MJ .
JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT, 2003, 45 (02) :294-318
[10]   A comparison of household recycling behaviors in Norway and the United States [J].
Kipperberg, Gorm .
ENVIRONMENTAL & RESOURCE ECONOMICS, 2007, 36 (02) :215-235