IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v7y2015i6p7417-7437d50902.html

Co-Benefits of Household Waste Recycling for Local Community’s Sustainable Waste Management in Thailand

Author

Listed:
  • Amornchai Challcharoenwattana

    (International Postgraduate Programs in Environmental Management, Graduate School, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok 10330, Thailand
    Center of Excellence on Hazardous Substance Management (HSM), Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok 10330, Thailand
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Chanathip Pharino

    (Center of Excellence on Hazardous Substance Management (HSM), Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok 10330, Thailand
    Department of Environmental Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok 10330, Thailand
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

Abstract

The study aimed to evaluate co-benefits in term of GHG reduction, and avoided landfill costs by implementing a community-based management (CBM) program for municipal solid waste (MSW). Two towns of peri-urban settlement in Thailand were investigated in case studies to compare eco-performance between the towns with and without implementation of the CBM program. MSW mass flows together with MSW utilization records were analyzed based on data in year 2013. Climate co-benefits from waste utilization activities were examined. Results from the study indicated that waste banks in the CBM program can effectively divert most of recyclables from entering landfills. The performance of “waste bank—recyclable recovery program” recycling rate from the case study with CBM is 172.20 kg per member per year, which is about 926% higher than average CBMs with MSW recycling in Thailand, and the success of CBM can be attributed to its curbside pickup service and fair-pricing of recyclables. The study also found that if the town decided to divert wastes from landfilling, carbon intensity of the MSW system would be 0.47 tons of CO 2 -eq per ton of collected MSW. The landfilling cost would be approximately 7.41 USD per ton of MSW as landfilling cost. With CBM programs, current MSW reutilization rate has achieved 9.68% of generated waste, and 16.80% of GHG emission has been avoided, along with a reduction in landfill costs of 11.57%. Two scenarios of waste utilization in Thailand were explored and compared, in terms of which scenarios yielded the highest co-benefits. The study demonstrates that by allowing local mechanism and community involvement programs to develop with operational waste banks, the efficiency of collecting recycling wastes increased. A similar system can be applied to other communities in other countries.

Suggested Citation

  • Amornchai Challcharoenwattana & Chanathip Pharino, 2015. "Co-Benefits of Household Waste Recycling for Local Community’s Sustainable Waste Management in Thailand," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(6), pages 1-21, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:7:y:2015:i:6:p:7417-7437:d:50902
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/7/6/7417/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/7/6/7417/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hite, Diane & Chern, Wen & Hitzhusen, Fred & Randall, Alan, 2001. "Property-Value Impacts of an Environmental Disamenity: The Case of Landfills," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 22(2-3), pages 185-202, March-May.
    2. Camelia Dewan & Aditi Mukherji & Marie-Charlotte Buisson, 2015. "Evolution of water management in coastal Bangladesh: from temporary earthen embankments to depoliticized community-managed polders," Water International, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(3), pages 401-416, May.
    3. Vellini, Michela & Savioli, Michela, 2009. "Energy and environmental analysis of glass container production and recycling," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 34(12), pages 2137-2143.
    4. Martin Medina, 2008. "The Informal recycling Sector in Developing Countries : Organizing Waste Pickers to Enhance their Impact," World Bank Publications - Reports 10586, The World Bank Group.
    5. Lombardi, Lidia & Carnevale, Ennio & Corti, Andrea, 2006. "Greenhouse effect reduction and energy recovery from waste landfill," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 31(15), pages 3208-3219.
    6. Deborah Vaughn Nestor, 1998. "Policy Evaluation with Combined Actual and Contingent Response Data," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 80(2), pages 264-276.
    7. 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.
    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. Sudipta Bhawal Mukherji & Makiko Sekiyama & Takashi Mino & Bharati Chaturvedi, 2016. "Resident Knowledge and Willingness to Engage in Waste Management in Delhi, India," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-14, October.
    2. Abiodun Olusola Omotayo, 2026. "Investigating the drivers of solid waste generation and disposal: evidence from South Africa," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 671-703, January.
    3. Nany Yuliastuti & Hadi Wahyono & S. Syafrudin & S. Sariffuddin, 2017. "Dimensions of Community and Local Institutions’ Support: Towards an Eco-Village Kelurahan in Indonesia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-19, February.
    4. Amornchai Challcharoenwattana & Chanathip Pharino, 2018. "Analysis of Socioeconomic and Behavioral Factors Influencing Participation in Community-Based Recycling Program: A Case of Peri-Urban Town in Thailand," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-16, November.
    5. Ionica Oncioiu & Sorinel Căpuşneanu & Dan Ioan Topor & Marius Petrescu & Anca-Gabriela Petrescu & Monica Ioana Toader, 2020. "The Effective Management of Organic Waste Policy in Albania," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-16, August.

    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. Maarten A. Allers & Corine Hoeben, 2010. "Effects of Unit-Based Garbage Pricing: A Differences-in-Differences Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 45(3), pages 405-428, March.
    2. 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.
    3. Woon, Kok Sin & Lo, Irene M.C., 2016. "An integrated life cycle costing and human health impact analysis of municipal solid waste management options in Hong Kong using modified eco-efficiency indicator," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 104-114.
    4. Kiani, Mehrdad & Houshfar, Ehsan & Ashjaee, Mehdi, 2019. "Experimental investigations on the flame structure and temperature field of landfill gas in impinging slot burners," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 170(C), pages 507-520.
    5. Hao, Xiaoli & Yang, Hongxing & Zhang, Guoqiang, 2008. "Trigeneration: A new way for landfill gas utilization and its feasibility in Hong Kong," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(10), pages 3662-3673, October.
    6. Pegels, Anna & Heyer, Stefanie & Ohlig, David & Kurz, Felix & Laux, Lena & Morley, Prescott, 2021. "¿Es sostenible el reciclaje? Propuestas para conciliar los aspectos sociales, ecológicos y económicos en Argentina," IDOS Discussion Papers 10/2021, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS).
    7. Tong, Xin & Tao, Dongyan, 2016. "The rise and fall of a “waste city” in the construction of an “urban circular economic system”: The changing landscape of waste in Beijing," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 10-17.
    8. Anna Barford & Saffy Rose Ahmad, 2021. "A Call for a Socially Restorative Circular Economy: Waste Pickers in the Recycled Plastics Supply Chain," Circular Economy and Sustainability, Springer, vol. 1(2), pages 761-782, September.
    9. Nath, Sanchayan & Shams, Jahin & van Laerhoven, Frank & Driessen, Peter, 2022. "The impact of decision-making on conflict: Rethinking the roles of technocrats and residents during Tidal River Management in coastal Bangladesh," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    10. David Brasington & Mika Kato & Willi Semmler, 2010. "Transitioning Out Of Poverty," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(1), pages 68-95, February.
    11. Briguglio, Marie & Delaney, Liam & Wood, Alex, 2018. "Partisanship, priming and participation in public-good schemes," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 136-150.
    12. Naila Kabeer, 2018. "Women Workers and the Politics of Claims Making: The Local and the Global," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 49(3), pages 759-789, May.
    13. Fontecha, John E. & Nikolaev, Alexander & Walteros, Jose L. & Zhu, Zhenduo, 2022. "Scientists wanted? A literature review on incentive programs that promote pro-environmental consumer behavior: Energy, waste, and water," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 82(PA).
    14. Brekke, Kjell Arne & Kipperberg, Gorm & Nyborg, Karine, 2009. "Reluctant Recyclers: Social Interaction in Responsibility Ascription," Memorandum 16/2007, Oslo University, Department of Economics.
    15. Nie, Rong & Song, Jinbo & Carneiro, Juliana, 2024. "Does emissions data disclosure of Waste-to-Energy incineration plants mitigate NIMBYism concerns? Evidence from the housing market," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 1527, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    16. Wenzhu Zhou & Yiwen Zhang & Yajun Tang, 2023. "Spatiotemporal Evolution and Mechanisms of Polder Land Use in the “Water-Polder-Village” System: A Case Study of Gaochun District in Nanjing, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-21, September.
    17. Aadland, David & Caplan, Arthur J., 2003. "Cheap Talk Revisited: New Evidence From Cvm," 2003 Annual meeting, July 27-30, Montreal, Canada 22112, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    18. 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.
    19. Ankinée Kirakozian, 2016. "The determinants of household recycling: social influence, public policies and environmental preferences," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(16), pages 1481-1503, April.
    20. Lynne Y. Lewis & Curtis Bohlen & Sarah Wilson, 2008. "Dams, Dam Removal, And River Restoration: A Hedonic Property Value Analysis," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 26(2), pages 175-186, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:gam:jsusta:v:7:y:2015:i:6:p:7417-7437:d:50902. 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.