IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/prt/dpaper/10_2011.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Household waste recycling: National survey evidence from Italy

Author

Listed:
  • Damiano Fiorillo

Abstract

The paper analyses the determinants of household recycling in Italy with particular emphasis on social behaviour. The econometric analysis is based on two waves - 1998 and 2000 - of the Multipurpose Household Survey conducted annually by the Italian Central Statistics Office. In Italy household recycling was substantially voluntary in the years from 1998 to 2000 with no monetary incentives or pecuniary sanctions. Five different materials are investigated: paper, glass, plastic, aluminium and food waste. The results of the probit regressions suggest that membership in organizations, church attendance, the habit of talking politics and reading newspapers are significantly correlated with household recycling behaviour, while gender, age and household income playing the biggest role. Our findings also show that the presence of recycling bins for waste improves household recycling behaviour for all materials whereas difficulty to reach recycling bins adversely affects household recycling outcomes. Household judgments on waste disposal charges have no effect on the recycling effort. As expected, residency in Southern Italy is associated with the lowest probability of recycling all materials.

Suggested Citation

  • Damiano Fiorillo, 2011. "Household waste recycling: National survey evidence from Italy," Discussion Papers 10_2011, D.E.S. (Department of Economic Studies), University of Naples "Parthenope", Italy.
  • Handle: RePEc:prt:dpaper:10_2011
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://economia.uniparthenope.it/ise/sito/DP/DES-DP_2011_10.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ida Ferrara & Paul Missios, 2005. "Recycling and Waste Diversion Effectiveness: Evidence from Canada," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 30(2), pages 221-238, February.
    2. Gorm Kipperberg, 2007. "A Comparison of Household Recycling Behaviors in Norway and the United States," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 36(2), pages 215-235, February.
    3. Fullerton, Don & Kinnaman, Thomas C, 1996. "Household Responses to Pricing Garbage by the Bag," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(4), pages 971-984, September.
    4. Durlauf, Steven N. & Fafchamps, Marcel, 2005. "Social Capital," Handbook of Economic Growth,in: Philippe Aghion & Steven Durlauf (ed.), Handbook of Economic Growth, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 26, pages 1639-1699 Elsevier.
    5. Hornik, Jacob & Cherian, Joseph & Madansky, Michelle & Narayana, Chem, 1995. "Determinants of recycling behavior: A synthesis of research results," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 105-127.
    6. Pretty, Jules & Ward, Hugh, 2001. "Social Capital and the Environment," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 209-227, February.
    7. Bente Halvorsen, 2008. "Effects of Norms and Opportunity Cost of Time on Household Recycling," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 84(3), pages 501-516.
    8. Van Ha, Nguyen & Kant, Shashi & Maclaren, Virginia, 2006. "Relative shadow prices of social capital for household-level paper recycling units in Vietnam," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(3), pages 520-533, May.
    9. Damiano Fiorillo, 2011. "Volunteer work and domain satisfactions: evidence from Italy," International Journal of Social Economics, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 39(1/2), pages 97-124, December.
    10. Damiano Fiorillo, 2011. "Do Monetary Rewards Crowd Out The Intrinsic Motivation Of Volunteers? Some Empirical Evidence For Italian Volunteers," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 82(2), pages 139-165, June.
    11. 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.
    12. Tsung-hsiu Tsai, 2008. "The impact of social capital on regional waste recycling," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(1), pages 44-55.
    13. Andreoni, James, 1990. "Impure Altruism and Donations to Public Goods: A Theory of Warm-Glow Giving?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 100(401), pages 464-477, June.
    14. Amy W. Ando & Anne Y. Gosselin, 2005. "Recycling in Multifamily Dwellings: Does Convenience Matter?," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 43(2), pages 426-438, April.
    15. Richardson, Robert A. & Havlicek, Joseph Jr., 1978. "Economic analysis of the composition of household solid wastes," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 103-111, March.
    16. van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2008. "Environmental regulation of households: An empirical review of economic and psychological factors," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(4), pages 559-574, July.
    17. Damiano Fiorillo, 2009. "Capitale sociale "robusto": analisi macro, evidenza micro," Rivista di Politica Economica, SIPI Spa, issue 1, pages 149-178, January-M.
    18. Hong Seonghoon & Adams Richard M. & Love H. Alan, 1993. "An Economic Analysis of Household Recycling of Solid Wastes: The Case of Portland, Oregon," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 136-146, September.
    19. Linderhof, Vincent & Kooreman, Peter & Allers, Maarten & Wiersma, Doede, 2001. "Weight-based pricing in the collection of household waste: the Oostzaan case," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(4), pages 359-371, October.
    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. FIORILLO, Damiano & SENATORE, Luigi, 2016. "Self Image and Environmental Attitude and Behavior," CELPE Discussion Papers 140, CELPE - Centre of Labour Economics and Economic Policy, University of Salerno, Italy.
    2. Massimiliano Agovino & Mariaconcetta Casaccia & Alessandro Crociata, 2017. "Effectiveness and efficiency of European Regional Development Fund on separate waste collection: evidence from Italian regions by a stochastic frontier approach," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 34(1), pages 105-137, April.
    3. S. Ferreira & M. Cabral & N.F. da Cruz & P. Simões & R.C. Marques, 2017. "The costs and benefits of packaging waste management systems in Europe: the perspective of local authorities," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 60(5), pages 773-791, May.
    4. Aprile, Maria Carmela & Fiorillo, Damiano, 2016. "Water Conservation Behavior and Environmental Concerns," MPRA Paper 75065, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Crociata, Alessandro & Agovino, Massimiliano & Sacco, Pier Luigi, 2015. "Recycling waste: Does culture matter?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 40-47.
    6. Chankrajang, Thanyaporn & Muttarak, Raya, 2017. "Green Returns to Education: Does Schooling Contribute to Pro-Environmental Behaviours? Evidence from Thailand," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 434-448.
    7. repec:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:4:p:1240-:d:141846 is not listed on IDEAS

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Household recycling; Social behaviour; Social capital; Recycling bins; Flat fee.;

    JEL classification:

    • C35 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models; Multiple Variables - - - Discrete Regression and Qualitative Choice Models; Discrete Regressors; Proportions
    • Q53 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Air Pollution; Water Pollution; Noise; Hazardous Waste; Solid Waste; Recycling
    • Z1 - Other Special Topics - - Cultural Economics

    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:prt:dpaper:10_2011. 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: (Antonietta Milano). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/isnavit.html .

    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.