IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v140y2017icp58-65.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Inconvenience cost of waste disposal behavior in South Korea

Author

Listed:
  • Lee, Misuk
  • Choi, Hyunhong
  • Koo, Yoonmo

Abstract

Pro-environmental activities, such as waste sorting, are considered inconveniencing; the higher the inconvenience, the more difficult it becomes to encourage active public participation. This study defines waste sorting behavior considering certain attributes and estimates the inconvenience costs associated with each attribute. The definition also considers how and when waste is disposed of as well as the hygiene of a disposal spot. We apply a conjoint analysis for data collection and latent class logit model to calculate the inconvenience costs. The model incorporates consumers' heterogeneity as a finite number of homogenous groups. The results show that the inconvenience cost for the hygiene of the disposal spot is generally higher than that of sorting itself; this tendency is strongest among young women. Moreover, older people report lower inconvenience costs than do younger ones. Further, some groups prefer manual sorting to an automated sorting service for food waste. Our findings offer policy implications considering such inconvenience costs.

Suggested Citation

  • Lee, Misuk & Choi, Hyunhong & Koo, Yoonmo, 2017. "Inconvenience cost of waste disposal behavior in South Korea," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 58-65.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:140:y:2017:i:c:p:58-65
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.04.031
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800916313866
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    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. 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.
    2. Annegrete Bruvoll & Karine Nyborg, 2002. "On the value of households' recycling efforts," Discussion Papers 316, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    3. repec:ags:stataj:249812 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Lele, Sharachchandra M., 1991. "Sustainable development: A critical review," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 19(6), pages 607-621, June.
    5. Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Kądziela, Tadeusz & Hanley, Nick, 2014. "We want to sort! Assessing households’ preferences for sorting waste," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 290-306.
    6. Greene, William H. & Hensher, David A., 2003. "A latent class model for discrete choice analysis: contrasts with mixed logit," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 681-698, September.
    7. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555.
    8. Boyer, Tracy A., 2006. "Talking Trash: Valuing Household Preferences for Garbage and Recycling Services Bundles Using a Discrete Choice Experiment," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21074, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    9. Huhtala, Anni, 2010. "Income effects and the inconvenience of private provision of public goods for bads: The case of recycling in Finland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 1675-1681, June.
    10. Jenkins, Robin R. & Martinez, Salvador A. & Palmer, Karen & Podolsky, Michael J., 2003. "The determinants of household recycling: a material-specific analysis of recycling program features and unit pricing," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 294-318, March.
    11. Bob Giddings & Bill Hopwood & Geoff O'Brien, 2002. "Environment, economy and society: fitting them together into sustainable development," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(4), pages 187-196.
    12. Bill Hopwood & Mary Mellor & Geoff O'Brien, 2005. "Sustainable development: mapping different approaches," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(1), pages 38-52.
    13. Masanobu Ishikawa, 2001. "Optimum cost sharing of sorted waste collection between households and local authority considering consumer inconvenience: rational basis of shared responsibility," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 4(4), pages 235-251, December.
    14. Pacifico, Daniele & Yoo, Hong il, 2013. "lclogit: A Stata command for fitting latent-class conditional logit models via the expectation-maximization algorithm," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 13(3), pages 1-17.
    15. Michael Redclift, 2005. "Sustainable development (1987-2005): an oxymoron comes of age," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(4), pages 212-227.
    16. Cheng, Yung-Hsiang & Liu, Kuo-Chu, 2012. "Evaluating bicycle-transit users’ perceptions of intermodal inconvenience," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 46(10), pages 1690-1706.
    17. Berglund, Christer, 2006. "The assessment of households' recycling costs: The role of personal motives," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(4), pages 560-569, April.
    18. Guo, Zhan & Wilson, Nigel H.M., 2011. "Assessing the cost of transfer inconvenience in public transport systems: A case study of the London Underground," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 91-104, February.
    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. repec:eee:ecolec:v:149:y:2018:i:c:p:184-201 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. repec:eee:enepol:v:121:y:2018:i:c:p:13-24 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. repec:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:10:p:1921-:d:116212 is not listed on IDEAS

    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:ecolec:v:140:y:2017:i:c:p:58-65. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.