IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/socarx/e2da7.html

Shaping Consumer Preferences: Policy Strategies for Reducing Single-Use Cup Waste and Promoting Reusables

Author

Listed:
  • Thompson, Bethan
  • Akaichi, Faical
  • Toma, Luiza

Abstract

Single-use disposable cups are a significant contributor to plastic waste due to their widespread use and limited recyclability. Policymakers worldwide are implementing measures to reduce their consumption and encourage reusable alternatives. This study evaluates the impact of regulatory measures (charges and discounts), persuasion (environmental information prompts), and consumer motivations (using Protection Motivation Theory) on preferences for single-use, refillable, and returnable cups. Using discrete choice experiments with a nationally representative sample, we find that a charge of 25–30 pence is required to reduce single-use cup selection by 50%, whereas a discount of at least 70 pence achieves a similar effect. Information prompts have minimal influence on choices, while environmentally motivated consumer segments demonstrate greater responsiveness to discounts. These findings provide actionable, evidence-based insights for policymakers and industry stakeholders, supporting the design of effective interventions to accelerate the transition from single-use to reusable systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Thompson, Bethan & Akaichi, Faical & Toma, Luiza, 2024. "Shaping Consumer Preferences: Policy Strategies for Reducing Single-Use Cup Waste and Promoting Reusables," SocArXiv e2da7, Center for Open Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:osf:socarx:e2da7
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/e2da7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/67446fece6c2308ae0fb55ee/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/e2da7?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Langbroek, Joram H.M. & Franklin, Joel P. & Susilo, Yusak O., 2016. "The effect of policy incentives on electric vehicle adoption," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 94-103.
    2. 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.
    3. David Revelt & Kenneth Train, 1998. "Mixed Logit With Repeated Choices: Households' Choices Of Appliance Efficiency Level," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(4), pages 647-657, November.
    4. Harris, B.K. & Probert, E.J., 2009. "Waste minimisation at a Welsh university: A viability study using choice modelling," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 53(5), pages 269-275.
    5. Hunter, Erik & Röös, Elin, 2016. "Fear of climate change consequences and predictors of intentions to alter meat consumption," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 151-160.
    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. repec:osf:socarx:e2da7_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Kruse, Tobias & Atkinson, Giles, 2022. "Understanding public support for international climate adaptation payments: Evidence from a choice experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    3. Paleti, Rajesh, 2018. "Generalized multinomial probit Model: Accommodating constrained random parameters," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 248-262.
    4. Gunnar Gutsche & Andreas Ziegler, 2016. "Are private investors willing to pay for sustainable investments? A stated choice experiment," MAGKS Papers on Economics 201640, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    5. Lai, Yufeng & Yue, Chengyan & Watkins, Eric & Barnes, Mike, 2023. "Investigating the Efficacy of Government Rebates: A Case of the Smart Irrigation System," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 48(3), September.
    6. Stefano Ceolotto & Eleanor Denny, 2021. "Putting a new 'spin' on energy labels: measuring the impact of reframing energy efficiency on tumble dryer choices in a multi-country experiment," Trinity Economics Papers tep1521, Trinity College Dublin, Department of Economics.
    7. Taro Ohdoko & Kentaro Yoshida, 2012. "Public preferences for forest ecosystem management in Japan with emphasis on species diversity," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 14(2), pages 147-169, April.
    8. Nordmeyer, Eike Florenz & Danne, Michael & Musshoff, Oliver, 2023. "Can satellite-retrieved data increase farmers' willingness to insure against drought? – Insights from Germany," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    9. Zhenshan Chen & Stephen K. Swallow & Ian T. Yue, 2020. "Non-participation and Heterogeneity in Stated: A Double Hurdle Latent Class Approach for Climate Change Adaptation Plans and Ecosystem Services," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 77(1), pages 35-67, September.
    10. Aßmann, Christian & Boysen-Hogrefe, Jens, 2011. "A Bayesian approach to model-based clustering for binary panel probit models," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 261-279, January.
    11. Domanski, Adam, 2009. "Estimating Mixed Logit Recreation Demand Models With Large Choice Sets," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49413, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    12. Qi Feng & J. George Shanthikumar & Mengying Xue, 2022. "Consumer Choice Models and Estimation: A Review and Extension," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(2), pages 847-867, February.
    13. Zhiwei Liu & Jianrong Liu, 2023. "Shared Autonomous Vehicles as Last-Mile Public Transport of Metro Trips," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-15, October.
    14. Stefania Troiano & Daniel Vecchiato & Francesco Marangon & Tiziano Tempesta & Federico Nassivera, 2019. "Households’ Preferences for a New ‘Climate-Friendly’ Heating System: Does Contribution to Reducing Greenhouse Gases Matter?," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-19, July.
    15. Dmitriy Li & Jeong-Hwan Bae & Meenakshi Rishi, 2022. "A Preference Analysis for a Peer-to-Peer (P2P) Electricity Trading Platform in South Korea," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(21), pages 1-20, October.
    16. Daniel A. Brent & Lata Gangadharan & Anke Leroux & Paul A. Raschky, 2014. "Putting One's Money Where One's Mouth is: Increasing Saliency in the Field," Monash Economics Working Papers 43-14, Monash University, Department of Economics.
    17. Olsthoorn, Mark & Schleich, Joachim & Guetlein, Marie-Charlotte & Durand, Antoine & Faure, Corinne, 2023. "Beyond energy efficiency: Do consumers care about life-cycle properties of household appliances?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    18. Hackbarth, André & Madlener, Reinhard, 2016. "Willingness-to-pay for alternative fuel vehicle characteristics: A stated choice study for Germany," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 89-111.
    19. Brent, Daniel A. & Gangadharan, Lata & Leroux, Anke D. & Raschky, Paul A., 2022. "Reducing bias in preference elicitation for environmental public goods," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 66(02), January.
    20. Bujosa Bestard, Angel & Font, Antoni Riera, 2009. "Environmental diversity in recreational choice modelling," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(11), pages 2743-2750, September.
    21. Gonçalves, Tânia & Pinto, Lígia M. Costa & Lourenço-Gomes, Lina, 2020. "Attribute non-attendance in wine choice: Contrasts between stated and inferred approaches," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 262-275.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:osf:socarx:e2da7. 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arabixiv.org .

    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.