IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Post Separation of Plastic Waste: Better for the Environment and Lower Collection Costs

Listed author(s):
  • Elbert Dijkgraaf

    (Erasmus University Rotterdam, The Netherlands)

  • Raymond Gradus

    (VU University Amsterdam, The Netherlands)

The European Union (EU) advocates a plastic waste recycling rate of more than 55% through home separation by households. Even for the Netherlands, which has already invested heavily in plastic recycling policies, there is still a challenge to meet this target. We show that post separation is an advisable alternative with more separation of plastic waste and lower collection costs. Based on data for 2013-2014, Dutch municipalities with post-separation have 6.2 kilogram more plastic than municipalities with only bring locations. Moreover, the effectiveness of post separation increases significantly over time to 8.4 kilograms in 2014. Also curbside collection of plastic waste can be effective, if it is combined with an unit-based pricing system, but in such a case the collection costs are higher. Therefore, there are indications that the cost effectiveness of recycling plastic waste increases, if post separation is chosen.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://papers.tinbergen.nl/16103.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Tinbergen Institute in its series Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers with number 16-103/VI.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: 24 Nov 2016
Handle: RePEc:tin:wpaper:20160103
Contact details of provider: Postal:
Gustav Mahlerplein 117, 1082 MS Amsterdam

Phone: +31 (0)20 598 4580
Web page: http://www.tinbergen.nl/
Email:


More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as
in new window


  1. 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.
  2. Abbott, Andrew & Nandeibam, Shasikanta & O'Shea, Lucy, 2013. "Recycling: Social norms and warm-glow revisited," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 10-18.
  3. Kinnaman, Thomas C. & Shinkuma, Takayoshi & Yamamoto, Masashi, 2014. "The socially optimal recycling rate: Evidence from Japan," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 54-70.
  4. D'Amato, Alessio & Mancinelli, Susanna & Zoli, Mariangela, 2016. "Complementarity vs substitutability in waste management behaviors," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 84-94.
  5. 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.
  6. Elbert Dijkgraaf & Raymond Gradus, 2015. "Efficiency Effects of Unit-Based Pricing Systems and Institutional Choices of Waste Collection," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 61(4), pages 641-658, August.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:tin:wpaper:20160103. 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: (Tinbergen Office +31 (0)10-4088900)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.