IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v6y2014i1p416-435d32282.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Dynamic Model for Construction and Demolition (C&D) Waste Management in Spain: Driving Policies Based on Economic Incentives and Tax Penalties

Author

Listed:
  • Nuria Calvo

    (Jean Monnet Research Group of Competition and Development, Faculty of Economics and Business, Campus de Elviña, s/n, A Coruña 15071, Spain)

  • Laura Varela-Candamio

    (Jean Monnet Research Group of Competition and Development, Faculty of Economics and Business, Campus de Elviña, s/n, A Coruña 15071, Spain)

  • Isabel Novo-Corti

    (Jean Monnet Research Group of Competition and Development, Faculty of Economics and Business, Campus de Elviña, s/n, A Coruña 15071, Spain)

Abstract

According to the recent Spanish legislation, the amount of non-hazardous construction and demolition waste (C&D waste) by weight must be reduced by at least 70% by 2020. However, the current behavior of the stakeholders involved in the waste management process make this goal difficult to achieve. In order to boost changes in their strategies, we firstly describe an Environmental Management System (EMS) based on regulation measures and economic incentives which incorporate universities as a key new actor in order to create a 3Rs model (Reduce, Reuse and Recycle) in the C&D waste management with costs savings. The target areas are focused mainly on producer responsibility, promotion of low-waste building technologies and creation of green jobs to fulfill three main objectives: valorization of inert wastes, elimination of illegal landfills and stimulation of demand for recycled C&D wastes. To achieve this latter goal, we have also designed a simulation model—using the Systems Dynamic methodology—to assess the potential impact of two policies (incentives and tax penalties) in order to evaluate how the government can influence the behavior of the firms in the recycling system of C&D waste aggregates. This paper finds a broader understanding of the socioeconomic implications of waste management over time and the positive effects of these policies in the recycled aggregates market in order to achieve the goal of 30% C&D waste aggregates in 12 years or less.

Suggested Citation

  • Nuria Calvo & Laura Varela-Candamio & Isabel Novo-Corti, 2014. "A Dynamic Model for Construction and Demolition (C&D) Waste Management in Spain: Driving Policies Based on Economic Incentives and Tax Penalties," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(1), pages 1-20, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:6:y:2014:i:1:p:416-435:d:32282
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/6/1/416/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/6/1/416/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kemp, René & Pontoglio, Serena, 2011. "The innovation effects of environmental policy instruments — A typical case of the blind men and the elephant?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 28-36.
    2. Stavins, Robert N., 2003. "Experience with market-based environmental policy instruments," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 9, pages 355-435, Elsevier.
    3. Mario Reimer, 2013. "Planning Cultures in Transition: Sustainability Management and Institutional Change in Spatial Planning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(11), pages 1-21, November.
    4. Aerts, Kris & Schmidt, Tobias, 2008. "Two for the price of one?: Additionality effects of R&D subsidies: A comparison between Flanders and Germany," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 806-822, June.
    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. Lai Sheung Au & Seungjun Ahn & Tae Wan Kim, 2018. "System Dynamic Analysis of Impacts of Government Charges on Disposal of Construction and Demolition Waste: A Hong Kong Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-17, April.
    2. Ishardita Pambudi Tama & Willy Satrio Nugroho & Wayan Firdaus Mahmudy & Purnami Purnami, 2022. "The Evaluation of Technology Startup Role on Indonesian SMEs Industry 4.0 Adoption Using CLD-ABM Integrated Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-14, July.
    3. Luis Claudio A. Borja & Sandro Fábio César & Rita Dione A. Cunha & Asher Kiperstok, 2018. "A Quantitative Method for Prediction of Environmental Aspects in Construction Sites of Residential Buildings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-38, June.
    4. Larissa A. R. U. Freitas & Alessandra Magrini, 2017. "Waste Management in Industrial Construction: Investigating Contributions from Industrial Ecology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-17, July.
    5. Tianyu Ma & Zhuofu Wang & Jiyong Ding, 2018. "Governing the Moral Hazard in China’s Sponge City Projects: A Managerial Analysis of the Construction in the Non-Public Land," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-15, August.
    6. A. Sardi & E. Sorano, 2021. "Dynamic Performance Management: An Approach for Managing the Common Goods," Papers 2102.04090, arXiv.org.
    7. Ana Jiménez-Rivero & Ana De Guzmán-Báez & Justo García-Navarro, 2017. "Enhanced On-Site Waste Management of Plasterboard in Construction Works: A Case Study in Spain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-12, March.
    8. Luca Fraccascia & Ilaria Giannoccaro & Vito Albino, 2017. "Efficacy of Landfill Tax and Subsidy Policies for the Emergence of Industrial Symbiosis Networks: An Agent-Based Simulation Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-18, March.
    9. Alberto Sardi & Enrico Sorano, 2019. "Dynamic Performance Management: An Approach for Managing the Common Goods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-22, November.
    10. Carmen Díaz-López & Alessandra Bonoli & María Martín-Morales & Montserrat Zamorano, 2021. "Analysis of the Scientific Evolution of the Circular Economy Applied to Construction and Demolition Waste," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-22, August.
    11. Liu, Jingkuang & Li, Yuxuan & Wang, Zhenshuang, 2023. "The potential for carbon reduction in construction waste sorting: A dynamic simulation," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 275(C).
    12. Bakshan, Amal & Srour, Issam & Chehab, Ghassan & El-Fadel, Mutasem & Karaziwan, Jalal, 2017. "Behavioral determinants towards enhancing construction waste management: A Bayesian Network analysis," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 117(PB), pages 274-284.
    13. Zezhou Wu & Ann T.W. Yu & Chi Sun Poon, 2020. "Promoting effective construction and demolition waste management towards sustainable development: A case study of Hong Kong," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(6), pages 1713-1724, November.
    14. Xiangyun Chang & Junjie Fan & Yabing Zhao & Jie Wu, 2016. "Impact of China’s Recycling Subsidy Policy in the Product Life Cycle," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-21, August.
    15. Zhikun Ding & Wenyan Gong & Shenghan Li & Zezhou Wu, 2018. "System Dynamics versus Agent-Based Modeling: A Review of Complexity Simulation in Construction Waste Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-13, July.

    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. Bergek, Anna & Berggren, Christian, 2014. "The impact of environmental policy instruments on innovation: A review of energy and automotive industry studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 112-123.
    2. Brautzsch, Hans-Ulrich & Günther, Jutta & Loose, Brigitte & Ludwig, Udo & Nulsch, Nicole, 2015. "Can R&D subsidies counteract the economic crisis? – Macroeconomic effects in Germany," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 623-633.
    3. Coria, Jessica & Sterner, Thomas, 2008. "Tradable Permits in Developing Countries: Evidence from Air Pollution in Santiago, Chile," RFF Working Paper Series dp-08-51, Resources for the Future.
    4. Christoph P. Kiefer & Pablo Del Río González & Javier Carrillo‐Hermosilla, 2019. "Drivers and barriers of eco‐innovation types for sustainable transitions: A quantitative perspective," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(1), pages 155-172, January.
    5. Sergio Afcha & Jose García-Quevedo, 2016. "The impact of R&D subsidies on R&D employment composition," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 25(6), pages 955-975.
    6. Sims, Katharine R.E. & Alix-Garcia, Jennifer M., 2017. "Parks versus PES: Evaluating direct and incentive-based land conservation in Mexico," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 8-28.
    7. Stavins, Robert, 2001. "Lessons From the American Experiment With Market-Based Environmental Policies," RFF Working Paper Series dp-01-53, Resources for the Future.
    8. Durán-Romero, Gemma & López, Ana M. & Beliaeva, Tatiana & Ferasso, Marcos & Garonne, Christophe & Jones, Paul, 2020. "Bridging the gap between circular economy and climate change mitigation policies through eco-innovations and Quintuple Helix Model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    9. Na Zhang & Jinqian Deng & Fayyaz Ahmad & Muhammad Umar Draz & Nabila Abid, 2023. "The dynamic association between public environmental demands, government environmental governance, and green technology innovation in China: evidence from panel VAR model," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(9), pages 9851-9875, September.
    10. Staffan Waldo & Anton Paulrud, 2017. "Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Fisheries: The Case of Multiple Regulatory Instruments in Sweden," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(2), pages 275-295, October.
    11. Tobias Schmidt & Julia Le Blanc, 2017. "Do homeowners save more? – Evidence from the Panel on Household Finances (PHF)," ERES eres2017_110, European Real Estate Society (ERES).
    12. Arguedas, Carmen & van Soest, Daan P., 2009. "On reducing the windfall profits in environmental subsidy programs," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 192-205, September.
    13. Stavins, Robert & Hahn, Robert & Cavanagh, Sheila, 2001. "National Environmental Policy During the Clinton Years," RFF Working Paper Series dp-01-38, Resources for the Future.
    14. Stavins, Robert, 2004. "Environmental Economics," RFF Working Paper Series dp-04-54, Resources for the Future.
    15. Wood, Peter John & Jotzo, Frank, 2011. "Price floors for emissions trading," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 1746-1753, March.
    16. Enrico Vanino & Stephen Roper & Bettina Becker, 2020. "Knowledge to Money: Assessing the Business Performance Effects of Publicly Funded R&D Grants," ifo DICE Report, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 17(04), pages 20-24, January.
    17. Rik L. Rozendaal & Herman R. J. Vollebergh, 2021. "Policy-Induced Innovation in Clean Technologies: Evidence from the Car Market," CESifo Working Paper Series 9422, CESifo.
    18. Stavins, Robert, 2004. "Can an Effective Global Climate Treaty Be Based on Sound Science, Rational Economics, and Pragmatic Politics?," RFF Working Paper Series dp-04-28, Resources for the Future.
    19. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/6d7es28iae9pjoil7092hs41h3 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Dragana Radicic & Geoffrey Pugh & Hugo Hollanders & René Wintjes & Jon Fairburn, 2016. "The impact of innovation support programs on small and medium enterprises innovation in traditional manufacturing industries: An evaluation for seven European Union regions," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 34(8), pages 1425-1452, December.
    21. McCauley, David & Anderson, Robert & Bowen, Richard & Elassiouty, Ibrahim & Mahdy, Elsayed & Soliman, Ibrahim, 2002. "Economic Instruments For Improved Water Resources Management In Egypt," MPRA Paper 40581, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 15 Feb 2002.

    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:6:y:2014:i:1:p:416-435:d:32282. 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.