IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/enreec/v68y2017i3d10.1007_s10640-016-0027-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

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

Author

Listed:
  • Elbert Dijkgraaf

    (Erasmus University Rotterdam)

  • Raymond Gradus

    (VU University Amsterdam)

Abstract

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.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:enreec:v:68:y:2017:i:3:d:10.1007_s10640-016-0027-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s10640-016-0027-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10640-016-0027-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10640-016-0027-1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Ida Ferrara & Paul Missios, 2005. "Recycling and Waste Diversion Effectiveness: Evidence from Canada," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 30(2), pages 221-238, February.
    3. Gorm Kipperberg, 2007. "A Comparison of Household Recycling Behaviors in Norway and the United States," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 36(2), pages 215-235, February.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Abbott, Andrew & Nandeibam, Shasikanta & O'Shea, Lucy, 2013. "Recycling: Social norms and warm-glow revisited," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 10-18.
    7. Kinnaman, Thomas C. & Shinkuma, Takayoshi & Yamamoto, Masashi, 2014. "The socially optimal recycling rate: Evidence from Japan," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 54-70.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. Scott J. Callan & Janet M. Thomas, 1997. "The Impact of State and Local Policies on the Recycling Effort," Eastern Economic Journal, Eastern Economic Association, vol. 23(4), pages 411-423, Fall.
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. Usui, Takehiro, 2008. "Estimating the effect of unit-based pricing in the presence of sample selection bias under Japanese Recycling Law," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(2-3), pages 282-288, June.
    14. 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.
    15. Thomas C. Kinnaman & Kenji Takeuchi (ed.), 2014. "Handbook on Waste Management," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 14571.
    16. Jan K. Brueckner, 2003. "Strategic Interaction Among Governments: An Overview of Empirical Studies," International Regional Science Review, , vol. 26(2), pages 175-188, April.
    17. Thomas C. Kinnaman & Don Fullerton, 2002. "Garbage and Recycling with Endogenous Local Policy," Chapters, in: Don Fullerton & Thomas C. Kinnaman (ed.), The Economics of Household Garbage and Recycling Behavior, chapter 6, pages 120-143, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    18. 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.
    19. Scott J. Callan & Janet M. Thomas, 2001. "Economies of Scale and Scope: A Cost Analysis of Municipal Solid Waste Services," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 77(4), pages 548-560.
    20. 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.
    21. Ruslana Rachel Palatnik & Sharon Brody & Ofira Ayalon & Mordechai Shechter, 2014. "Greening Household Behaviour and Waste," OECD Environment Working Papers 76, OECD Publishing.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ishimura, Yuichi, 2022. "The effects of the containers and packaging recycling law on the domestic recycling of plastic waste: Evidence from Japan," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    2. Raymond Gradus, 2020. "Postcollection Separation of Plastic Recycling and Design-For-Recycling as Solutions to Low Cost-Effectiveness and Plastic Debris," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-12, October.
    3. Florian Fizaine, 2019. "The Economics of Recycling Rate: new insights from a Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment," Policy Papers 2019.01, FAERE - French Association of Environmental and Resource Economists.
    4. Carattini, Stefano & Baranzini, Andrea & Lalive, Rafael, 2018. "Is Taxing Waste a Waste of Time? Evidence from a Supreme Court Decision," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 131-151.
    5. Elbert Dijkgraaf & Raymond Gradus, 2019. "More bottle banks only imply a small increase in recycling of glass in the Netherlands," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 19-088/V, Tinbergen Institute.
    6. Hirotaka Kumamaru & Kenji Takeuchi, 2023. "The recycled content of plastic products: estimating the impact of a recycling law on the input mix," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 25(3), pages 355-376, July.
    7. Elbert Dijkgraaf & Raymond Gradus, 2020. "Post-collection Separation of Plastic Waste: Better for the Environment and Lower Collection Costs?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 77(1), pages 127-142, September.
    8. Yilmaz Bayar & Marius Dan Gavriletea & Stefan Sauer & Dragos Paun, 2021. "Impact of Municipal Waste Recycling and Renewable Energy Consumption on CO 2 Emissions across the European Union (EU) Member Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-12, January.
    9. Fizaine, Florian, 2020. "The economics of recycling rate: New insights from waste electrical and electronic equipment," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    10. Lucian Ionel Cioca & Navarro Ferronato & Paolo Viotti & Elena Magaril & Marco Ragazzi & Vincenzo Torretta & Elena Cristina Rada, 2018. "Risk Assessment in a Materials Recycling Facility: Perspectives for Reducing Operational Issues," Resources, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-10, December.
    11. Elbert Dijkgraaf & Raymond Gradus, 2016. "Post Separation of Plastic Waste: Better for the Environment and Lower Collection Costs," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 16-103/VI, Tinbergen Institute.
    12. Raymond (R.H.J.M.) Gradus & Elbert (E.) Dijkgraaf, 2017. "Dutch Municipalities are Becoming Greener: Some Political and Institutional Explanations," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 17-086/VIII, Tinbergen Institute.
    13. Tharaka Gunaratne & Joakim Krook & Hans Andersson, 2020. "Current Practice of Managing the Waste of the Waste: Policy, Market, and Organisational Factors Influencing Shredder Fines Management in Sweden," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-18, November.
    14. Ek, Claes & Söderberg, Magnus, 2021. "Norm-based feedback on household waste: Large-scale field experiments in two Swedish municipalities," Working Papers in Economics 804, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    15. Raymond Gradus & Rick van Koppen & Elbert Dijkgraaf & Paul Nillesen, 2016. "A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis for Incineration or Recycling of Dutch Household Plastics," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 16-039/VI, Tinbergen Institute.
    16. Elbert Dijkgraaf & Raymond Gradus, 2021. "Are Bottle Banks Sufficiently Effective for Increasing Glass Recycling Rates?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-11, August.
    17. Ishimura, Yuichi & Shinkuma, Takayoshi & Takeuchi, Kenji & Hosoda, Eiji, 2024. "The effects of regional goal setting on household waste," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 215(C).
    18. Katarzyna Bernat, 2023. "Post-Consumer Plastic Waste Management: From Collection and Sortation to Mechanical Recycling," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(8), pages 1-14, April.

    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. Elbert Dijkgraaf & Raymond Gradus, 2014. "The Effectiveness of Dutch Municipal Recycling Policies," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 14-155/VI, Tinbergen Institute.
    2. Bueno, Matheus & Valente, Marica, 2019. "The effects of pricing waste generation: A synthetic control approach," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 274-285.
    3. 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.
    4. Valente, Marica, 2023. "Policy evaluation of waste pricing programs using heterogeneous causal effect estimation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. Carattini, Stefano & Baranzini, Andrea & Lalive, Rafael, 2018. "Is Taxing Waste a Waste of Time? Evidence from a Supreme Court Decision," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 131-151.
    10. Damiano Fiorillo & Luigi Senatore, 2020. "Pro-social behaviours, waste concern and recycling behaviour in Italy at the end of the 1990s," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 22(2), pages 127-151, April.
    11. Degli Antoni, Giacomo & Vittucci Marzetti, Giuseppe, 2019. "Recycling and Waste Generation: An Estimate of the Source Reduction Effect of Recycling Programs," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 321-329.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. Matteo Picchio, 2023. "Microchipped bags and waste sorting," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 25(1), pages 1-30, January.
    15. Raymond (R.H.J.M.) Gradus & Elbert (E.) Dijkgraaf, 2017. "Dutch Municipalities are Becoming Greener: Some Political and Institutional Explanations," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 17-086/VIII, Tinbergen Institute.
    16. Elbert Dijkgraaf & Raymond Gradus, 2016. "Post Separation of Plastic Waste: Better for the Environment and Lower Collection Costs," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 16-103/VI, Tinbergen Institute.
    17. Alessandro Bucciol & Roberta Muri & Francesca Rossi, 2023. "Municipal Waste Policies and Spillover Effects," Working Papers 05/2023, University of Verona, Department of Economics.
    18. Ferrara, Ida & Missios, Paul, 2011. "A Cross-Country Study of Household Waste Prevention and Recycling: Assessing the Effective of Policy Instruments," MPRA Paper 70811, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Paul Missios & Ida Ferrara, 2011. "A Cross-Country Study of Waste Prevention and Recycling," Working Papers 028, Ryerson University, Department of Economics.
    20. Elbert Dijkgraaf & Raymond Gradus, 2020. "Post-collection Separation of Plastic Waste: Better for the Environment and Lower Collection Costs?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 77(1), pages 127-142, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Recycling; Waste policy; EU-target; Local government; Netherlands;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q18 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Policy; Food Policy; Animal Welfare Policy
    • Q38 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Nonrenewable Resources and Conservation - - - Government Policy (includes OPEC Policy)
    • R11 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General Regional Economics - - - Regional Economic Activity: Growth, Development, Environmental Issues, and Changes
    • R15 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General Regional Economics - - - Econometric and Input-Output Models; Other Methods

    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:kap:enreec:v:68:y:2017:i:3:d:10.1007_s10640-016-0027-1. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.