Price and Substitution in Residential Solid Waste

Isely, Paul; Lowen, Aaron

doi:10.1111/j.1465-7287.2007.00048.x

Cited by 12 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…By combining published sources, the external marginal cost of landfilled MSW in Europe was estimated between $5.39 and $8.76 per ton (Kinnaman, 2006). Similarly, the external cost of incineration in the United States has been estimated at $5.26 per ton (Isely and Lowen, 2007). In comparison, the private marginal costs of waste collection and disposal are about $70 per ton in the United States and perhaps as high as $200 per ton in densely populated areas such as the Netherlands and Japan.…”

Section: The External Costs Of Waste Disposalmentioning

confidence: 99%

The economics of municipal solid waste management

Kinnaman

2009

Waste Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier. The attached copy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial research and education use, including for instruction at the authors institution and sharing with colleagues. Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party websites are prohibited. In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of the article (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website or institutional repository. Authors requiring further information regarding Elsevier's archiving and manuscript policies are

show abstract

Section: The External Costs Of Waste Disposalmentioning

confidence: 99%

The economics of municipal solid waste management

Kinnaman

2009

Waste Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Cross-sectional analysis can rely on administrative data, which makes it easier and less expansive to apply. A drawback, however, is that but there can be large differences between municipalities as municipalities with high fees likely have inhabitants with different environmental attitudes than those with low fees (see also Isely and Lowen, 2007). However, if cross-section data are available for several years, it should be possible to correct for this selection bias or so-called environmental activism effect.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Environmental activism and dynamics of unit-based pricing systems

Dijkgraaf

Gradus

2009

Resource and Energy Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

“…Rather, the (indirect) impact of policies through the expected cost of illegal disposal can be seen as a subset of the broader linkages which are suggested by the existing literature (e.g. Kinnaman and Fullerton, 2000;Isely and Lowen, 2007).…”

Section: Model Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%