Abstract
This paper provides a comprehensive analysis of municipal and packaging waste generation dynamics, based on panel data for the EU15. The evidence provides some valuable policy implications since it analyses the extent to which decoupling has occurred for the two waste streams and if and how effectively EU waste policy has influenced the waste generation-income relationship since 1995. We demonstrate that although absolute decoupling is far from being generally achieved for both municipal and even packaging waste generation – both historically heavily regulated by EU directives – there are some first positive signs of stronger relative decoupling with respect to the past. Nevertheless, the impact of waste policies is negligible, probably due to the biased focus on waste disposal and recovery rather than waste reduction at source. Waste prevention should definitely become the core objective of future waste regulation efforts in the EU, even assigning targets in terms of waste generated per capita.
Keywords
References
- 1. (2006). Environmental Policy Performance, Economic Growth and Trade Liberalization: A Cross Country Empirical Analysis. Department of Economics, Bilkent University, mimeo Google Scholar
- 2. (2003). ‘An econometric analysis of global waste paper recovery and utilization’. Environmental & Resource Economics. 26, 3, 429-456 Google Scholar
- 3. (2008). ‘From Hubbert to Kuznets: on the sustainability of the current energy system’. International Journal of Global Environmental Issues. 8, 4, 425-444 Abstract, Google Scholar
- 4. (2003). ‘Industrial pollution, environmental suffering and policy measures: an index of environmental sensitivity performance’. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management. 5, 205-245 Google Scholar
- 5. (2006). ‘Degree of environmental stringency and the impact on trade patterns’. Journal of Economic Studies. 33, 1, 30-51 Google Scholar
- 6. (2006). ‘Endogenous pollution haves: does FDI influence environmental regulations?’. Scandinavian Journal of Economics. 108, 1, 157-178 Google Scholar
- 7. (1997). ‘The EKC: an empirical analysis’. Environment and Development Economics. 2, 401-416 Google Scholar
- 8. (2004). ‘Environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis: a survey’. Ecological Economics. 49, 431-455 Google Scholar
- 9. (2005).
Effectiveness of Packaging Waste Management Systems in Selected Countries: An EEA Pilot Study.
Copenhagen:European Environment Agency
,
EEA Report 3/2005 Google Scholar - 10. (2007). The Road from Landfilling to Recycling: Common Destination, Different Routes. Copenhagen:European Environment Agency Google Scholar
- 11. (2009). Diverting Waste from Landfill – Effectiveness of Waste-Management Policies in the European Union. Copenhagen:European Environmental Agency Google Scholar
- 12. (1997). ‘Environmental impacts of solid waste landfilling’. Journal of Environmental Management. 50, 1, 1-25 Google Scholar
- 13. (1998). Does Open Trade Result in a Race to the Bottom? Cross Country Evidence. The World Bank, mimeo Google Scholar
- 14. (2004). A Meta Analysis of Waste Management Externalities: A Comparative Study of Economic and Non Economic Valuation Methods. Israel:University of Haifa, mimeo Google Scholar
- 15. (2003a). Towards a Thematic Strategy for Waste Prevention and Recycling. Brussels:European Commission , COM(2003)301 Google Scholar
- 16. (2003b). Towards a Thematic Strategy on Sustainable Use of Natural Resources. Brussels:European Commission , COM(2003)572 Google Scholar
- 17. (2000). ‘The siting of hazardous waste facilities in federal systems’. Environmental & Resource Economics. 15, 75-87 Google Scholar
- 18. (2007). ‘Economic growth and the quality of the environment: taking stock’. Environment, Development and Sustainability. 9, 427-454 Google Scholar
- 19. (2008). ‘An econometric analysis of regional differences in household waste collection: the case of plastic packaging waste in Sweden’. Waste Management. 28, 10, 1720-1731 Google Scholar
- 20. (2009). ‘Norms and economic motivation in household recycling: empirical evidence from Sweden’. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 53, 3, 155-165 Google Scholar
- 21. (2004). ‘Methodology and indicators to measure decoupling, resource efficiency, and waste prevention’. ETC/WMF, European Topic Centre on Waste and Material Flows. Copenhagen:European Environment Agency Google Scholar
- 22. (2000). ‘The environmental Kuznets curve, environmental protection policy and income distribution’. Ecological Economics. 32, 431-443 Google Scholar
- 23. (2008). ‘The link between economic growth and environmental quality: what is role of demographic change?’. International Journal of Global Environmental Issues. 8, 4, 365-391 Abstract, Google Scholar
- 24. Mazzanti, M. Montini, A. (2009). Waste & Environmental Policy. London:Routledge Google Scholar
- 25. (2010). Carbon Abatement Leaders and Laggards, nota di lavoro 149. Milan:FEEM Google Scholar
- 26. (2006). ‘Economic instruments and induced innovation: the EU policies on end of life vehicles’. Ecological Economics. 58, 2, 318-338 Google Scholar
- 27. (2008). ‘Waste generation, waste disposal and environmental policy effectiveness: evidence from the EU’. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 52, 1221-1234 Google Scholar
- 28. (2009). ‘Municipal waste Kuznets curves: evidence on socio-economic drivers and policy effectiveness from the EU’. Environmental and Resource Economics. 44, 203-230 Google Scholar
- 29. (2008). ‘Municipal waste generation, socio-economic drivers and waste management instruments’. Journal of Environment & Development. 17, 51-69 Google Scholar
- 30. (2010).
‘Income inequality and the development of environmental technologies’.
Paper presented at the 7th International Conference ‘Development in Economic Theory and Policy’ ,July 2010 ,Bilbao Google Scholar - 31. (2004). ‘Does European Union waste policy pass a cost benefit test?’. World Economics. 5, 3, 115-137 Google Scholar
- 32. (1998). ‘EKC, real progress or passing the buck? A case for consumption based approaches’. Ecological Economics. 25, 177-194 Google Scholar
- 33. (2001). ‘The EKC hypothesis does not hold for direct material flows: EKC hypothesis tests for DMF in four industrial countries’. Population and the Environment. 23, 2, Google Scholar
- 34. (2010). ‘Decoupling waste generation from economic growth – a CGE analysis of the Swedish case’. Ecological Economics. 69, 1545-1552 Google Scholar
- 35. (1998). ‘Income, inequality, and pollution: a reassessment of the environmental Kuznets curve’. Ecological Economics. 25, 147-16 Google Scholar
- 36. (1992). World Development Report. New York:Oxford Univ. Press Google Scholar