Charging for household garbage collection per unit of waste is becoming more popular. Discussions in the practical literature focus on unit pricing as a way to encourage diversion to recycling and reduction in waste, but the economics literature emphasizes welfare maximization through charging at the marginal social cost. In the present study unit pricing was examined from both perspectives through a case study on unit pricing by volume in Melbourne, Australia, using longitudinal data. The marginal social cost per unit weight was estimated using a custom costing model and a valuation of environmental externalities. This cost was applied to a derived regression equation for change in waste quantities with unit price. The results suggest a very weak link between marginal pricing and change in garbage quantities, with an arc elasticity of demand at the margin of —0.02. Small reductions in garbage may have been achieved by local governments that overtly used pricing systems to this end. Enforced reduction of standard bin sizes had much more impact on waste quantities and did not lead to any significant management or political problems.
Andersen, M. (1998) Assessing the effectiveness of Denmark's waste tax. Environment, 40, 10-15.
2.
Bartelings, H. & Sterner, T. (1999) Household waste management in a Swedish municipality: determinants of waste disposal, recycling and composting. Environmental and Resource Economics, 13, 473-491.
3.
Bartelings, H., Dellink, R.B. & van Ierland, E.C. (2004) Modeling market distortions in an applied general equilibrium framework: the case of flat-fee pricing in the waste market. In van den Bergh, J.C.J.M. and Janssen, M. (eds): Economics of Industrial Ecology: Materials, Structural Change, and Spatial Scales, pp. 255-286. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
4.
Bauer, S.D. & Miranda, M.L. (1996) The Urban Performance of Unit Pricing: An Analysis of Variable Rates for Residential Garbage Collection in Urban Areas. Prepared by the School of the Environment at Duke University for the United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC: http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/non-hw/payt/pdf/upaperf1.pdf(accessed17August2008).
5.
Chakrabarti, S. & Sarkhel, P. (2003) Economics of Solid Waste Management: A Survey of Existing Literature. Economic Research Unit, Indian Statistical Institute, Kolkata.
6.
Choe, C. & Fraser, I. (1998) The economics of household waste management: a review. Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics , 42, 269-302.
7.
Depa (2003) Advantages and Disadvantages of Differentiated Household Waste Collection Fees. Danish Environmental Protection Agency: http://www.2.mst.dk/udgiv/publikationer/2000/87-7944-317-6/pdf/87-7944-318-4.pdf-DanishwithEnglishSummary, (accessed 31 August 2008).
8.
Dijkgraaf, E. & Gradus, R.H.J.M. (2003) Cost Savings of Unit-Based Pricing of Household Waste: The Case of the Netherlands. Erasmus University, Rotterdam: http://129.3.20.41/eps/pe/papers/0409/0409001.pdf (accessed 17 August 2008).
9.
DSE (2004) Victoria in Future . Dept. of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne: http://www.dse.vic.gov.au/DSE/dsenres.nsf/LinkView/B9023E3BAACA5A6ACA256EF60019E55806C7DF80826B65674A256DEA002C0DCA (accessed 10 July 2006).
10.
Fullerton, D. & Kinnaman, T.C. (1995) Garbage, recycling, and illicit burning or dumping. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 29, 78-91.
11.
Fullerton, D. & Kinnaman, T.C. (1996) Household responses to pricing garbage by the bag. American Economic Review, 86, 971-984.
12.
Fullerton, D. & Raub, A. (2004) Economic analysis of solid waste policies. In: OECD: Addressing the Economics of Waste. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris.
13.
Goddard, H. (1995) The benefits and costs of alternative solid waste management policies. Resources, Conservation and Recycling , 13, 182-213.
14.
Hannequart, J.-P. & Radermaker, F. (2003) Methods, Costs and Financing of Waste Collection in Europe, General Review and Comparison of Various National Policies. Association of Cities and Regions for Recycling , Brussels.
15.
Hong, S. (1999) The effects of unit pricing system upon household solid waste management: the Korean experience. Journal of Environmental Management, 57, 1-10.
16.
ISWA (International Solid Waste Association, 2002) Fly-tipping increases with weight-based charges. Waste Management World, Mar.-Apr., 11-12.
17.
Jacobs, M. (1995) Sustainability and `the market': a typology of environmental economics. In Eckersely, R. (ed): Markets, the State and the Environment, MacMillan Education Australia, Melbourne .
18.
Kinnaman, T.C. and Fullerton, D. (1999) The Economics of Residential Solid Waste Management . National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.
19.
LGV (2005) Annual Community Satisfaction Survey 2005: Research Results. Prepared by Newton Wayman Chong for the Dept. for Victorian Communities, Melbourne : http://www.dvc.vic.gov.au/web20/rwpgslib.nsf/GraphicFiles/LG+Annual+Community+Satisfaction+Survey+2005+REport+no+6/$file/Annual+Community+Satisfaction+Survey+2005+-+Report+no+6.pdf (accessed 17 August 2008).
20.
Miranda, M.L. and Aldy, J.E. (1998) Unit pricing of residential municipal solid waste: lessons from nine case study communities. Journal of Environmental Management, 52, 79-93.
21.
Miranda, M.L., Bauer, S.D. and Aldy, J.E. (1996) Unit Pricing Programs for Residential Municipal Solid Waste: An Assessment of the Literature. Prepared by the School of the Environment at Duke University for the United States Environmental Protection Agency under Cooperative Agreement #CR822-927-010, Washington, DC.
22.
Morris, G.E. & Holthausen, D.M. (1994) The economics of household solid-waste generation and disposal. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 26, 215-234.
23.
Nolan-ITU (2004) Global Renewables: National Benefits of Implementation of UR-3R Process: A Triple Bottom Line Assessment. Prepared for Global Renewables , Sydney: http://www.globalrenewables.com.au/deposit/documents/0000000234/040903%20NolanITU%20national%20benefits%20study%20Final.pdf (accessed 17 August 2008).
24.
Oecd (2006) Impacts of Unit-based Waste Collection Charges. Prepared by Dominic Hogg for the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/51/28/36707069.pdf (accessed 17 August 2008).
Rasmussen, C. and Vigsø, D. (eds.) (2005) Rethinking the Waste Hierarchy. Environment Assessment Institute, Copenhagen:http://imv.net.dynamicweb.dk/Default.aspx?ID=493 (accessed 17 August 2008).
27.
Shinkuma, T. (2003) On the second-best policy of household's waste recycling. Environmental and Resource Economics, 24, 77-95.
28.
Skumatz, L.A. (2000) Measuring Source Reduction: Pay as You Throw / Variable Rates as an Example. Skumatz Economic Research Associates , Seattle. http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/non-hw/payt/sera.pdf (accessed 17 August 2008).
29.
Skumatz, L.A. & Green, K. (2002) "Pay-as-you-throw" Waste Management. Reason Public Policy Institute, 295, Los Angeles. http://www.reason.org/ps295.pdf (accessed 31 August 2008).
30.
Strathman, J.G., Rufolo, A.M. & Mildner, G.C.S. (1995) The demand for solid-waste disposal. Land Economics, 71, 57-64.
31.
Sustainability Victoria (2006) Local Government Data Collection 2004-2005. Melbourne: http://www.sustainability.vic.gov.au/resources/documents/SV_LocalGovtData04-05_web_version.pdf (accessed 17 August 2008).
32.
US EPA (1999) Rate Structure Design: Setting Rates for a Pay-As-You-Throw Program. United States Environmental Protection Agency, EPA530-R-99-006, Washington, DC: http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/non-hw/payt/pdf/rsdhandbook.pdf (accessed 17 August 2008).
33.
van Houtven, G.L. & Morris, G.E. (1999) Household behavior under alternative pay-as-you-throw systems for solid waste disposal. Land Economics, 75, 515-537.
34.
Warren, M. (1997) Australian Waste and Recycling Cost Model v. 1.0. Prepared for EcoRecycle Victoria, Recycle 2000 and the Cooperative Research Centre for Waste Management and Pollution Control , Melbourne .
