Assessment of economic instruments for countries with low municipal waste management performance: An approach based on the analytic hierarchy process.
Economic instruments provide significant potential for countries with low municipal waste management performance in decreasing landfill rates and increasing recycling rates for municipal waste. In this research, strengths and weaknesses of landfill tax, pay-as-you-throw charging systems, deposit-refund systems and extended producer responsibility schemes are compared, focusing on conditions in countries with low waste management performance. In order to prioritise instruments for implementation in these countries, the analytic hierarchy process is applied using results of a literature review as input for the comparison. The assessment reveals that pay-as-you-throw is the most preferable instrument when utility-related criteria are regarded (wb = 0.35; analytic hierarchy process distributive mode; absolute comparison) mainly owing to its waste prevention effect, closely followed by landfill tax (wb = 0.32). Deposit-refund systems (wb = 0.17) and extended producer responsibility (wb = 0.16) rank third and fourth, with marginal differences owing to their similar nature. When cost-related criteria are additionally included in the comparison, landfill tax seems to provide the highest utility-cost ratio. Data from literature concerning cost (contrary to utility-related criteria) is currently not sufficiently available for a robust ranking according to the utility-cost ratio. In general, the analytic hierarchy process is seen as a suitable method for assessing economic instruments in waste management. Independent from the chosen analytic hierarchy process mode, results provide valuable indications for policy-makers on the application of economic instruments, as well as on their specific strengths and weaknesses. Nevertheless, the instruments need to be put in the country-specific context along with the results of this analytic hierarchy process application before practical decisions are made.
BiPRO GmbH, Munich, Germany maximilian.kling@bipro.de.
Maximilian
M
Kling
BiPRO GmbH, Munich, Germany.
Nicole
N
Seyring
TUM School of Management, Freising, Germany.
Polia
P
Tzanova
D059027:Recycling / Q000191:economics / Q000379:methods*; D062611:Solid Waste / Q000032:analysis* / Q000191:economics; D064091:Waste Disposal Facilities / Q000191:economics*; D018505:Waste Management / Q000191:economics / Q000379:methods*
D062611:Solid Waste
Waste management; analytic hierarchy process; deposit–refund systems; economic instruments; extended producer responsibility; landfill tax; multi-criteria decision making; pay-as-you-throw (PAYT)