IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i8p3525-d1634959.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Waste Management Hybridization and Social Mechanisms: The Unpredictable Effects of a Socio-Technical Assemblage

Author

Listed:
  • Claudio Marciano

    (Department of Political and International Sciences, University of Genoa, Piazzale Brignole 2, 16136 Genoa, Italy
    Department of Cultures, Politics and Society, University of Turin, Lungo Dora Siena 100, 10128 Turin, Italy)

  • Alessandro Sciullo

    (Department of Cultures, Politics and Society, University of Turin, Lungo Dora Siena 100, 10128 Turin, Italy
    Department of Economics, Society and Politics, University of Urbino, 61029 Urbino, Italy)

Abstract

Reducing total waste generation, increasing the rate of separate collection, and ensuring efficient material recovery are three key objectives recognized at the UN, EU, and national levels for achieving a sustainable waste management system. The policy and scientific debate has traditionally been polarized around two main collection systems: door-to-door and street collection, each with its own strengths and weaknesses. However, in recent years, hybrid waste collection models, which aim to integrate the advantages of both systems, have gained increasing attention. The impact of these models on sustainability, as well as the social mechanisms underlying their success or failure, remain underexplored. This paper analyzes a case study of a hybrid waste collection innovation implemented in eight small and medium-sized municipalities in Piedmont, Italy. The study has a twofold objective: (1) assessing the economic and environmental impacts of the system and (2) hypothesizing the social mechanisms that generate these effects. To address these research gaps, we develop a theoretical framework that combines the socio-technical system approach with analytical sociology. The framework is then operationalized through a quasi-experimental research design, which allows us to measure the effects of the hybrid innovation on a set of 17 indicators. The analysis is conducted by comparing the treated municipalities with a control group selected for its similarity. Empirical evidence reveals an unexpected and partially contradictory outcome: while the total amount of waste decreases, this reduction is not offset by a proportional increase in separate collection rates. Moreover, the quality of waste separation worsens. To explain this emerging pattern, we formulate a set of hypotheses—grounded in our theoretical framework—on the key factors influencing individual behavioral responses. Our provisional conclusion, which requires further qualitative validation, suggests that the interplay between economic incentives and social control in a context of imperfect awareness leads to ambiguous effects of hybridization in waste collection systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Claudio Marciano & Alessandro Sciullo, 2025. "Waste Management Hybridization and Social Mechanisms: The Unpredictable Effects of a Socio-Technical Assemblage," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(8), pages 1-23, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:8:p:3525-:d:1634959
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/8/3525/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/8/3525/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Joshua D. Angrist & Jörn-Steffen Pischke, 2009. "Mostly Harmless Econometrics: An Empiricist's Companion," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 8769.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Gabriele Ruiu & Giovanna Gonano, 2020. "Religious Barriers to the Diffusion of Same-sex Civil Unions in Italy," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 39(6), pages 1185-1203, December.
    2. Wright, Austin L. & Sonin, Konstantin & Driscoll, Jesse & Wilson, Jarnickae, 2020. "Poverty and economic dislocation reduce compliance with COVID-19 shelter-in-place protocols," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 544-554.
    3. Guido de Blasio & Daniela Vuri, 2019. "Effects of the Joint Custody Law in Italy," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(3), pages 479-514, September.
    4. Graves Jennifer & McMullen Steven & Rouse Kathryn, 2018. "Teacher Turnover, Composition and Qualifications in the Year-Round School Setting," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 18(3), pages 1-27, July.
    5. Alston Lee J. & Mueller Bernardo, 2018. "Priests, Conflicts and Property Rights: the Impacts on Tenancy and Land Use in Brazil," Man and the Economy, De Gruyter, vol. 5(1), pages 1-26, June.
    6. S Anukriti & Catalina Herrera‐Almanza & Praveen K. Pathak & Mahesh Karra, 2020. "Curse of the Mummy‐ji: The Influence of Mothers‐in‐Law on Women in India†," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 102(5), pages 1328-1351, October.
    7. Ellison, Richard B. & Ellison, Adrian B. & Greaves, Stephen P. & Sampaio, Breno, 2017. "Electronic ticketing systems as a mechanism for travel behaviour change? Evidence from Sydney’s Opal card," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 80-93.
    8. Cruzatti C., John & Bjørnskov, Christian & Sáenz de Viteri, Andrea & Cruzatti, Christian, 2024. "Geography, development, and power: Parliament leaders and local clientelism," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    9. Yusuke Matsuki, 2016. "A Distribution-Free Test of Monotonicity with an Application to Auctions," Working Papers e110, Tokyo Center for Economic Research.
    10. Peppel-Srebrny, Jemima, 2021. "Not all government budget deficits are created equal: Evidence from advanced economies' sovereign bond markets," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    11. Eichengreen, Barry & Aksoy, Cevat Giray & Saka, Orkun, 2021. "Revenge of the experts: Will COVID-19 renew or diminish public trust in science?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    12. Shvartsman, Elena & Beckmann, Michael, 2015. "Stressed by your job: What is the role of personnel policy?," Working papers 2015/15, Faculty of Business and Economics - University of Basel.
    13. MacDonald, Peter, 2013. "Labour substitution and the scope for military outsourcing," MPRA Paper 46688, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Matteo Migheli, 2021. "Green purchasing: the effect of parenthood and gender," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(7), pages 10576-10600, July.
    15. Yuyang Li & Jiahui Li & Xinjie Li & Qian Lu, 2024. "Does Participation in Digital Supply and Marketing Promote Smallholder Farmers’ Adoption of Green Agricultural Production Technologies?," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(1), pages 1-24, December.
    16. Sant’Anna, Pedro H.C. & Zhao, Jun, 2020. "Doubly robust difference-in-differences estimators," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 219(1), pages 101-122.
    17. Laurent Didier, 2017. "South-South Trade and Geographical Diversification of Intra-SSA Trade: Evidence from BRICs," African Development Review, African Development Bank, vol. 29(2), pages 139-154, June.
    18. Bahar, Dany & Rosenow, Samuel & Stein, Ernesto & Wagner, Rodrigo, 2019. "Export take-offs and acceleration: Unpacking cross-sector linkages in the evolution of comparative advantage," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 48-60.
    19. Bono, Pierre-Henri & David, Quentin & Desbordes, Rodolphe & Py, Loriane, 2022. "Metro infrastructure and metropolitan attractiveness," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    20. Marie Bjørneby & Annette Alstadsæter & Kjetil Telle, 2018. "Collusive tax evasion by employers and employees. Evidence from a randomized fi eld experiment in Norway," Discussion Papers 891, Statistics Norway, Research Department.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:8:p:3525-:d:1634959. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.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.