IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cpp/issued/v24y1998i4p453-470.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economic Analysis of Packaging Waste Reduction

Author

Listed:
  • Donald N. Dewees
  • Michael J. Hare

Abstract

This paper examines the rationale for regulating packaging waste and finds two goals that survive careful analysis: saving the social costs of waste disposal and reducing pollution from the manufacture of the packaging materials. We find that source reduction has reduced the disposal of soft drink packaging waste more than either mandatory deposit-refund programs or household recycling. The benefits of packaging reduction justify some well-run recycling programs but they do not justify mandatory deposit-refund programs. We suggest two policies that will promote efficient packaging waste reduction.

Suggested Citation

  • Donald N. Dewees & Michael J. Hare, 1998. "Economic Analysis of Packaging Waste Reduction," Canadian Public Policy, University of Toronto Press, vol. 24(4), pages 453-470, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:cpp:issued:v:24:y:1998:i:4:p:453-470
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0317-0861%28199812%2924%3A4%3C453%3AEAOPWR%3E2.0.CO%3B2-I
    Download Restriction: only available to JSTOR subscribers
    ---><---

    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. Eduardo Ley & Molly K. Macauley & Stephen W. Salant, "undated". "Spatially and intertemporally efficient waste management: The costs of interstate flow control," Working Papers 97-07, FEDEA.
    2. Don Fullerton & Thomas C. Kinnaman, 2002. "Garbage, Recycling, and Illicit Burning or Dumping," Chapters, in: Don Fullerton & Thomas C. Kinnaman (ed.), The Economics of Household Garbage and Recycling Behavior, chapter 2, pages 49-62, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Robin R. Jenkins, 1993. "The Economics Of Solid Waste Reduction," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 248.
    4. Marie Lynn Miranda & Jess W. Everett & Daniel Blume & Barbeau A. Roy, 1994. "Market-based incentives and residential municipal solid waste," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(4), pages 681-698.
    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. Keiko Yamaguchi & Kenji Takeuchi, 2011. "Consumer Preferences for Less Packaging: A Stated Preference Study," Discussion Papers 1117, Graduate School of Economics, Kobe University.
    2. Talip Arsu & Nurullah Umarusman, 2020. "Global Criterion Approach for the Solution of Multiple Criteria Data Envelopment Analysis Model: An Application at Packaging Waste Collection and Separation Facilities," Alphanumeric Journal, Bahadir Fatih Yildirim, vol. 8(1), pages 79-96, June.
    3. Afif, Karima & Rebolledo, Claudia & Roy, Jacques, 2022. "Evaluating the effectiveness of the weight-based packaging tax on the reduction at source of product packaging: The case of food manufacturers and retailers," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 245(C).
    4. Kawahara, Shinya, 2011. "Electoral competition with environmental policy as a second best transfer," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 477-495, September.
    5. Pickin, Joe, 2008. "Representations of environmental concerns in cost–benefit analyses of solid waste recycling," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 79-85.
    6. Travis Wagner, 2007. "Reframing Garbage: Solid Waste Policy Formulation in Nova Scotia," Canadian Public Policy, University of Toronto Press, vol. 33(4), pages 459-476, December.

    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. Thomas C. Kinnaman & Don Fullerton, 2002. "The Economics of Residential Solid Waste Management," Chapters, in: Don Fullerton & Thomas C. Kinnaman (ed.), The Economics of Household Garbage and Recycling Behavior, chapter 1, pages 1-48, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Don Fullerton & Wenbo Wu, 2002. "Policies for Green Design," Chapters, in: Don Fullerton & Thomas C. Kinnaman (ed.), The Economics of Household Garbage and Recycling Behavior, chapter 5, pages 102-119, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. Deborah Vaughn Nestor & Michael J. Podolsky, 1998. "Assessing Incentive‐Based Environmental Policies For Reducing Household Waste Disposal," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 16(4), pages 401-411, October.
    6. Yen-Lien Kuo & Charles Perrings, 2010. "Wasting Time? Recycling Incentives in Urban Taiwan and Japan," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 47(3), pages 423-437, November.
    7. Don Fullerton & Andrew Leicester & Stephen Smith, 2008. "Environmental Taxes," NBER Working Papers 14197, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Heleen Bartelings & Thomas Sterner, 1999. "Household Waste Management in a Swedish Municipality: Determinants of Waste Disposal, Recycling and Composting," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 13(4), pages 473-491, June.
    9. 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.
    10. Asunci n Arner G erre, 2018. "Oil Tax, Subsidies and Extended Producer Responsibility in the Used Oil Market," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 8(2), pages 47-58.
    11. 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.
    12. Vincent Linderhof & Heleen Bartelings, 2000. "Effective Landfill Taxation: a Case Study For the Netherlands," Regional and Urban Modeling 283600055, EcoMod.
    13. Leonzio Rizzo & Riccardo Secomandi, 2020. "Pay as you throw: evidence on the incentive to recycle," Working papers 88, Società Italiana di Economia Pubblica.
    14. 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.
    15. Scott, Sue & Watson, Dorothy, 2006. "Introduction of Weight-Based Charges for Domestic Solid Waste Disposal," MPRA Paper 107713, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. 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.
    17. Christophe Charlier & Ankinée Kirakozian, 2020. "Public policies for household recycling when reputation matters," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 523-557, April.
    18. 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.
    19. 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.
    20. Matthew Gunter, 2007. "Do Economists Reach a Conclusion on Household and Municipal Recycling?," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 4(1), pages 83-111, January.

    More about this item

    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:cpp:issued:v:24:y:1998:i:4:p:453-470. 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: Iver Chong (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.utpjournals.press/loi/cpp .

    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.