Major changes in municipal solid waste (MSW)-related services, such as the collection system, often require important initial investments, while the benefits on the output side typically occur over a longer time perspective. However, when analyzing the association between such policy choices and cost efficiency of MSW collection and disposal, the time horizon is often not taken into account. This article advocates the use of the Malmquist Productivity Index approach to measure and analyze cost efficiency changes over time after the introduction of the relative new weight-based waste collection and billing system in Flanders. The results and robustness checks indicate that introducing weight-based pricing does not lead to lower cost efficiency of MSW service provision.
BelGWarnerM (2008) Does privatization of solid waste and water services reduce costs? A review of empirical studies. Resources, Conservation and Recycling50: 1337–1348.
2.
BelloHSzymanskiS (1996) Compulsory competitive tendering for public services in the UK: The case of refuse collection. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting23: 881–903.
3.
BoschNPedrajaFSuarez-PandielloJ (2001) The efficiency of refuse collection services in Spanish municipalities: do non-controllable variables matter? Document de treball 2001/4. Barcelona: Institutd’Economia de Barcelona.
4.
CazalsCFlorensJSimarL (2002) Nonparametric frontier estimation: a robust approach. Journal of Econometrics106: 1–25.
5.
ChenYChenC (2012) The privatization effect of MSW incineration services by using data envelopment analysis. Waste Management32: 595–602.
6.
De JaegerSEyckmansJRoggeNVan PuyenbroeckT (2011) Wasteful waste-reducing policies? The impact of waste reduction policy instruments on collection and processing costs of municipal solid waste. Waste Management31: 1429–1440.
7.
De WitteKGeysB (2011) Evaluating efficient public good provision: Theory and evidence from a generalised conditional efficiency model for public libraries. Journal of Urban Economics69: 319–327.
8.
DijkgraafEGradusRHJM (2003) Cost savings of contracting out refuse collection. Empirica30: 149–161.
9.
FäreRGrosskopfSLindgrenBRoosP (1989) Productivity developments in Swedish hospitals: a Malmquist output index approach. In: Discussion Paper Series, 89, Carbondale: Southern Illinois University at Carbondale.
10.
FäreRGrosskopfSNorrisMZhangZ (1994) Productivity growth, technical progress, and efficiency change in industrialized countries. American Economic Review81: 66–83.
11.
FäreRGrosskopfSBrännlundR (1996) Intertemporal Production Frontiers: With Dynamic DEA. Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishing.
12.
FäreRGrosskopfSRoosP (1998) Malmquist productivity indexes: a survey of theory and practice. In: FäreRGrosskopfSRussellRR (eds) Index Numbers: Essays in Honour of Sten Malmquist. Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
13.
FäreRGrosskopfSMargaritisDWeberWL (2012) Technological change and timing reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. Journal of Productivity Analysis3: 205–216.
14.
FriedHOKnox LovellCASchmidtSS (2008) The Measurement of Productivity Efficiency and Productivity Growth. New York: Oxford University Press.
15.
KortelainenM (2008) Dynamic environmental performance analysis: A Malmquist index approach, Ecological Economics64: 701–715.
16.
MalmquistS (1953) Index numbers and indifference surfaces. Trabajos de Estadistica4: 209–242.
17.
MarquesRCSimõesP (2009) Incentive regulation and performance measurement of the Portuguese solid waste management services. Waste Management & Research27: 188–196.
18.
MarquesRCCruzNFCarvalhoP (2012) Assessing and exploring (in)efficiency in Portuguese recycling systems using non-parametric methods. Resources, Conservation and Recycling67: 34–43.
19.
MazzantiMZoboliR (2012) Resource taxation and regional planning: revenue recycling for local sustainability in the aggregates sector. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management. Epub ahead of print 2October2012. DOI:10.1080/09640568.2012.708651.
20.
MusgraveRA (1959) The Theory of Public Finance – A Study in Public Economy. New York: McGraw-Hill.
21.
OatesWE (2005) Toward a second-generation theory of fiscal federalism. Journal of International Tax and Public Finance12: 349–373.
ReevesEBarrowM (2000) The impact of contracting out on the costs of refuse collection services: the case of Ireland. The Economic and Social Review31: 129–150.
27.
RoggeNDe JaegerS (2012) Measuring and explaining the cost efficiency of municipal solid waste collection and processing services. Omega41: 653–664.
28.
SimõesPDe WitteKMarquesR C (2010) Regulatory structures and operational environment in the Portuguese waste sector. Waste Management30: 1130–1137.
29.
SimõesPMarquesRC (2012a) On the economic performance of the waste sector. A literature review. Journal of Environmental Management106: 40–47.
30.
SimõesPMarquesRC (2012b) Influence of regulation on the productivity of waste utilities. What can we learn with the Portuguese experience?Waste Management32: 1266–1275.
31.
VoDH (2010) The economics of fiscal decentralization. Journal of Economic Survey24: 657–679.
