Using data sets from Italian provinces that include rich northern and poorer southern regions, this article examines to what extent income and municipal waste generation are linked and at what level of income they become delinked. The analysis shows that the turning point occurs at very high levels of value added per capita (in the range of 22,586 to 31,611), exemplified by a very limited number of wealthy (northern) Italian provinces. The authors also find that some recently adopted waste policy and waste management instruments have influenced waste generation at source, independent of socioeconomic characteristics. This supports the argument that more effective waste management instruments that target waste prevention at the source need to be implemented in line with the stated priorities of the EU and member countries. The findings also imply that developing countries in particular should not wait to implement waste reduction policies until household incomes and consumption levels increase.
Andersen, F., Larsen, H., Skovgaard, M., Moll, S., & Isoard, S. (2007). A European model for waste and material flows . Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 49(4), 421-435.
2.
Andreoni, J., & Levinson, A. (2001). The simple analytics of the environmental Kuznets curve. Journal of Public Economics, 80, 269-286.
3.
Apat. (2002). Rapporto rifiuti 2002 [Waste report 2002]. Rome: Ministry of the Environment. Available from http://www.apat.it
4.
Apat. (2003). Rapporto rifiuti 2003 [Waste report 2003]. Rome: Ministry of the Environment. Available from http://www.apat.it
5.
Apat. (2004). Rapporto rifiuti 2004 [Waste report 2004]. Rome: Ministry of the Environment. Available from http://www.apat.it
6.
Apat. (2005). Rapporto rifiuti 2005 [Waste report 2005]. Rome: Ministry of the Environment. Available from http://www.apat.it
7.
Beede, D., & Bloom, D. (1995). Economics of the generation and management of MSW (NBER Working Paper No. 5116). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
8.
Berrens, R., Bohara, A., Gawande, K., & Wang, P. (1998). Testing the inverted U hypothesis for US hazardous waste. An application of the generalized gamma model. Economic Letters, 55(3), 435-440.
9.
Bringezu, S., Schütz, H., & Moll, S. (2003). Rationale for and interpretation of economy-wide material flow analysis and derived indicators. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 7(2), 43-64.
10.
Brock, W., & Taylor, S. (2003). The kindergarten rule of sustainable growth (NBER Working Paper No. 9597). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
11.
Brock, W., & Taylor, S. (2004). The Green Solow model (NBER Working Paper No. 10557). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
12.
Cagatay, S., & Mihci, H. (2006). Degree of environmental stringency and the impact on trade patterns. Journal of Economic Studies, 33(1), 30-51.
13.
Cole, M., Elliott, R., & Fredrikkson, P. (2006). Endogenous pollution haves: Does FDI influence environmental regulations? Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 108(1), 157-178.
14.
Cole, M., Rayner, A., & Bates, J. (1997). The EKC: An empirical analysis. Environment and Development Economics, 2, 401-416.
15.
Concu, N. (2000). La tirannia del trade off sconfitta? Turismo, ambiente naturale e rifiuti solidi urbani: La ricerca di una EKC [Is the tyranny of the trade-off defeated? Tourism, environment, and municipal solid waste: Finding an EKC]. Cagliari, Italy: CRENOS.
16.
Copeland, B.R., & Taylor, M.S. (2004). Trade, growth and the environment. Journal of Economic Literature, 42, 7-71.
17.
Department for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs. (2003). Sustainable consumption and production indicators . London: Author.
18.
Dinda, S. (2004). Environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis: A survey . Ecological Economics, 49, 431-455.
19.
European Commission. (2003a). Towards a thematic strategy for waste prevention and recycling (COM (2003) 301). Brussels, Belgium: Author .
20.
European Commission. (2003b). Towards a thematic strategy on sustainable use of natural resources (COM (2003) 572). Brussels, Belgium: Author .
21.
European Environment Agency. (2003a). Assessment of information related to waste and material flows. Copenhagen, Denmark: Author.
22.
European Environment Agency. (2003b). Europe's environment: The third assessment. Copenhagen , Denmark: Author.
23.
European Environment Agency. (2003c). Evaluation analysis of the implementation of the packaging directive. Copenhagen, Denmark: Author.
24.
Eurostat. (2003). Waste generated and treated in Europe. Data 1990—2001. Luxembourg : Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
25.
Fischer-Kowalski, M., & Amann, C. (2001). Beyond IPAT and Kuznets curves: Globalization as a vital factor in analyzing the environmental impact of socioeconomic metabolism . Population and the Environment, 23(1), 7-47.
26.
Fonkych, K., & Lempert, R. (2005). Assessment of environmental Kuznets curves and socioeconomic drivers in IPCC's SRES scenarios. Journal of Environment & Development, 14(1), 27-47.
27.
Jacobsen, H., Mazzanti, M., Moll, S., Simeone, M.G., Pontoglio, S., & Zoboli, R. (2004). Methodology and indicators to measure decoupling, resource efficiency, and waste prevention. Report of theEuropean Environment Agency, Copenhagen, Denmark.
28.
Johnstone, N., & Labonne, J. (2004). Generation of household solid waste in OECD countries: An empirical analysis using macroeconomic data. Land Economics , 80(4), 529-538.
29.
Karousakis, K. (2006, March). MSW generation, disposal and recycling: A note on OECD intercountry differences. Paper presented at ENVECON 2006: Applied Environmental Economics Conference, London.
30.
Lieb, C.M. (2004). The environmental Kuznets curve and flow versus stock pollution: The neglect of future damages. Environmental and Resource Economics, 29(4), 483-506.
31.
Lim, J. (1997). The effects of economic growth on environmental quality: Some empirical investigation for the case of South Korea. Seoul Journal of Economics, 10, 272-293.
32.
Mazzanti, M. (in press). Is waste generation delinking from economic growth?Applied Economics Letters.
33.
Mazzanti, M., & Zoboli, R. (2005). Delinking and environmental Kuznets curves for waste indicators in Europe. Environmental Sciences, 2(4), 409-425.
34.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2002). Indicators to measure decoupling of environmental pressure from economic growth. Paris: Author.
35.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2003). Response indicators for waste prevention within the OECD area (ENV/EPOC/WGWPR/SE(2003)2). Paris: Author.
36.
Pearce, D.W. (2004). Does European Union waste policy pass a cost benefit test? World Economics, 5, 115-137.
37.
Raymond, L. (2004). Economic growth as environmental policy? Reconsidering the environmental Kuznets curve. Journal of Public Policy , 24, 327-348.
38.
Seppala, T., Haukioja, T., & Kaivo-oja, J. (2001). The EKC hypothesis does not hold for direct material flows: Environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis tests for direct material flows in five industrial countries. Population and Environment, 23(2), 217-238.
39.
Stern, D. (1998). Progress on the environmental Kuznets curve? Environment and Development Economics, 3, 173-196.
40.
Stern, D. (2004). The rise and fall of the environmental Kuznets curve. World Development, 32(8), 1419-1438.
41.
Wang, P., Bohara, A., Berrens, R., & Gawande, K. (1998). A risk based environmental Kuznets curve for US hazardous waste sites. Applied Economics Letters, 5, 761-763.
42.
World Bank. (1992). Development and the environment. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
