The Displacement Effect of Convenience: The Case of Recycling

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)
83 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

In light of increasingly ambitious recycling targets it is important to analyse the potential displacement effect of improving access to kerbside provision on other forms of recycling. Do households view the different modes of recycling as substitutes or complements of each other? Does this perceived relationship depend on the type of material recycled? Using data for all of the UK's local governments from 2004Q2 to 2013Q3 we analyse the nature of the relationship between the two main channels of recycling. In the case of dry recycling, the empirical findings are ambiguous on the trade­off between kerbside and non-kerbside recycling. On the one hand, the findings suggest that there is no trade-off when considering the effect of expanding kerbside provision. On the other hand, the findings also suggest that there is a trade-off when we focus on the effect of expanding non­kerbside provision. However, putting together the empirical findings with theory (in particular, the symmetry property of the Hicksian substitution effect) suggests that there is a trade-off irrespective of whether we consider expansion of kerbside or non-kerbside provision. In the case of green (compost) recycling the empirical findings on their own or together with theory unambiguously suggest that there is a trade-off.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)159-168
Number of pages10
JournalEcological Economics
Volume136
Early online date24 Feb 2017
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jun 2017

Fingerprint

recycling
trade-off
effect
compost
local government
symmetry
substitution
Trade-offs

Keywords

  • Recycling
  • Substitutability
  • Gross substitutability
  • Waste policy

Cite this

The Displacement Effect of Convenience : The Case of Recycling. / Abbott, Andrew; Nandeibam, Shasikanta; O'shea, Lucy.

In: Ecological Economics, Vol. 136, 01.06.2017, p. 159-168.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{ef8bb51eb0b14a609e82353f275a77a9,
title = "The Displacement Effect of Convenience: The Case of Recycling",
abstract = "In light of increasingly ambitious recycling targets it is important to analyse the potential displacement effect of improving access to kerbside provision on other forms of recycling. Do households view the different modes of recycling as substitutes or complements of each other? Does this perceived relationship depend on the type of material recycled? Using data for all of the UK's local governments from 2004Q2 to 2013Q3 we analyse the nature of the relationship between the two main channels of recycling. In the case of dry recycling, the empirical findings are ambiguous on the trade­off between kerbside and non-kerbside recycling. On the one hand, the findings suggest that there is no trade-off when considering the effect of expanding kerbside provision. On the other hand, the findings also suggest that there is a trade-off when we focus on the effect of expanding non­kerbside provision. However, putting together the empirical findings with theory (in particular, the symmetry property of the Hicksian substitution effect) suggests that there is a trade-off irrespective of whether we consider expansion of kerbside or non-kerbside provision. In the case of green (compost) recycling the empirical findings on their own or together with theory unambiguously suggest that there is a trade-off.",
keywords = "Recycling, Substitutability, Gross substitutability, Waste policy",
author = "Andrew Abbott and Shasikanta Nandeibam and Lucy O'shea",
year = "2017",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.01.020",
language = "English",
volume = "136",
pages = "159--168",
journal = "Ecological Economics",
issn = "0921-8009",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The Displacement Effect of Convenience

T2 - The Case of Recycling

AU - Abbott, Andrew

AU - Nandeibam, Shasikanta

AU - O'shea, Lucy

PY - 2017/6/1

Y1 - 2017/6/1

N2 - In light of increasingly ambitious recycling targets it is important to analyse the potential displacement effect of improving access to kerbside provision on other forms of recycling. Do households view the different modes of recycling as substitutes or complements of each other? Does this perceived relationship depend on the type of material recycled? Using data for all of the UK's local governments from 2004Q2 to 2013Q3 we analyse the nature of the relationship between the two main channels of recycling. In the case of dry recycling, the empirical findings are ambiguous on the trade­off between kerbside and non-kerbside recycling. On the one hand, the findings suggest that there is no trade-off when considering the effect of expanding kerbside provision. On the other hand, the findings also suggest that there is a trade-off when we focus on the effect of expanding non­kerbside provision. However, putting together the empirical findings with theory (in particular, the symmetry property of the Hicksian substitution effect) suggests that there is a trade-off irrespective of whether we consider expansion of kerbside or non-kerbside provision. In the case of green (compost) recycling the empirical findings on their own or together with theory unambiguously suggest that there is a trade-off.

AB - In light of increasingly ambitious recycling targets it is important to analyse the potential displacement effect of improving access to kerbside provision on other forms of recycling. Do households view the different modes of recycling as substitutes or complements of each other? Does this perceived relationship depend on the type of material recycled? Using data for all of the UK's local governments from 2004Q2 to 2013Q3 we analyse the nature of the relationship between the two main channels of recycling. In the case of dry recycling, the empirical findings are ambiguous on the trade­off between kerbside and non-kerbside recycling. On the one hand, the findings suggest that there is no trade-off when considering the effect of expanding kerbside provision. On the other hand, the findings also suggest that there is a trade-off when we focus on the effect of expanding non­kerbside provision. However, putting together the empirical findings with theory (in particular, the symmetry property of the Hicksian substitution effect) suggests that there is a trade-off irrespective of whether we consider expansion of kerbside or non-kerbside provision. In the case of green (compost) recycling the empirical findings on their own or together with theory unambiguously suggest that there is a trade-off.

KW - Recycling

KW - Substitutability

KW - Gross substitutability

KW - Waste policy

U2 - 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.01.020

DO - 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.01.020

M3 - Article

VL - 136

SP - 159

EP - 168

JO - Ecological Economics

JF - Ecological Economics

SN - 0921-8009

ER -