Abstract
Recycling of packaging material has become more or less mandatory in many European countries, including Norway. Through so-called voluntary agreements quantitative targets are set for the proportion of total waste to be recycled. At the same time the strategic objective for Norwegian waste policy is that there should be a socio-economic balance between different waste treatment options. On the basis of a cost-benefit analysis it is questioned whether the Norwegian recycling policy for liquid board containers really is cost-effective. The calculations show that the net social costs of the recycling system in 1999 amounted to EUR3.5 million. The high cost is due to the fact that these containers constitute a small fraction of total waste from the household and that it is costly to separate it from other waste. The environmental costs from landfilling or incineration are small compared to the costs of recycling. The best alternative, according to our analysis, is to incinerate the containers with energy recovery.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
REFERENCES
Brisson, I. (1996). Assessing the “waste hierarchy,” a social cost-benefit analysis of MSW management in the European Union. Paper presented at the Seventh Annual Conference of the European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists (EAERE). Lisbon, June 27–29.
Bruvoll, A. (1998). The costs of alternative policies for paper and plastic waste. Oslo: Statistics Norway. Report 98/2.
Bruvoll, A., Halvorsen, B., & Nyborg, K. (2000). Household sorting of waste. Economic Survey 4/2000, pp. 26–35. Oslo: Statistics Norway.
ECON (2000). MiljØkostnader ved avfallsbehandling (Environmental costs of waste treatment). Oslo: ECON Analysis. Report 85/00.
ECON (2001). MiljØbegrunnede energiavgifter (Environmentally based energy taxes). Oslo: ECON Analysis. Report 69/01.
Finnveden, G., & Ekvall, T. (1998). Life-cycle assessment as a decision-support tool-The case of recycling vs. incineration of paper. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 24, 235–256.
Goddard, H. C. (1995). The benefits and costs of alternative solid waste management policies. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 13, 183–213.
Highfill, J., & McAsey, M. (2001). Landfilling versus “backstop”: Recycling when income is growing. Environmental and Resource Economics, 19, 37–52.
Hjellnes Cowi (2000). Avtaler om reduksjon, innsamling og gjenvinning av emballasjeavfall (Agreements on reduction, collection, and recycling of packaging waste). Report to the Norwegian Ministry of Environment.
Ibenholt, K. (1999). Effektiv stØtte til produsenter av brunt papir (Effective rate of assistance to producers of cardboard). Oslo: Statistics Norway. Økonomiske analyser 4/1999.
Ibenholt, K., & Lindhjem, H. (2002). Cost benefit analysis of liquid board containers in Norway. Oslo: ECON Analysis. Working Paper 12/02.
Jensen, J. M. (1997). LivslØpsanalyse for gjenvinning av drikkekartong (Life Cycle Analysis for recycling of liquid board containers). Trondheim: Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Department of Hydraulic and Environmental Engineering. Project thesis.
Konsumentverket (1997). Källsortering i fyra kommuner. Vad har producentansvaret betytt for hushållen? (Sorting of household waste in four municipalities. What has producer responsibility mattered to household?). Stockholm: Swedish Consumer Agency. Report 1997: 16.
Leach, M., Bauen, A., & Lucas, N. (1997). A systems approach to material flows in sustainable cities: A case study of paper. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 40, 705–723.
Marini, M. M., & Shelton, B. A. (1993). Measuring household work: Recent experience in the United States. Social Science Research, 22, 361–382.
NOU (1997). Nytte-kostnadsanalyser. Prinsipper for lØnnsomhetsvurderinger i offentlig sektor (Cost-benefit analysis. Principles for evaluation of profitability in the public sector). Oslo: Ministry of Finance. Norwegian Official Report No. 27/1997.
NOU (1998). Nytte-kostnadsanalyser. Veiledning i bruk av lØnnsomhetsvurderingar i offentlig sektor (Cost-benefit analysis. Guidelines for evaluation of profitability in the public sector). Oslo: Ministry of Finance. Norwegian Official Report No. 16/1998.
Radetzki, M. (2000). Fashions in the treatment of packaging waste: An economic analysis of the Swedish producer responsibility legislation. Brentwood, Essex: Multi-Science Publishing.
SFT (1996). Utslipp ved håndtering av kommunalt avfall (Emissions from treatment of municipal waste). Oslo: Norwegian Pollution Control Agency. Report 96/16.
Skjåk, K. K. (2001). Ja til miljØ, nei til miljØskatt (Yes to clean environment, no to environmental taxes). Brukermelding No. 2, pp. 8–9. Bergen: Norwegian Social Science Data Service.
Tellus Institute (1991). Disposal cost fee study, final report. Report prepared for California Integrated Waste Management Board. Boston, MA: Tellus Institute.
Tilton, J. E. (1999). The future of recycling. Resource Policy, 25, 197–204.
US EPA (2000). Guidelines for preparing economic analyses. Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Vennemo, H. (1995). MiljØkostnader knyttet til ulike typer avfall (Environmental costs for different types of waste). Oslo: ECON Analysis. Report 338/95.
White Paper No. 8 (1999–2000). Regjeringens miljØvernpolitikk og rikets miljØtilstand (The government's environmental policy and the state of the environment). English abstract available. Oslo: Ministry of Environment.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ibenholt, K., Lindhjem, H. Costs and Benefits of Recycling Liquid Board Containers. Journal of Consumer Policy 26, 301–325 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025628405865
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025628405865