Valuation of externalities of selected waste management alternatives: A comparative review and analysis

Resources, Conservation and Recycling

Volumn 46, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 335-364

  Eshet, Tzipi ^a   Ayalon, Ofira ^b   Shechter, Mordechai ^b  

^a TECHNION ISRAEL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Israel)

^b UNIVERSITY OF HAIFA   (Israel)

Author keywords

Disamenities; Externalities; Incinerator; Landfill; Valuation; Waste management

Indexed keywords

COSTS; DECISION MAKING; MANAGERS; MAPPING; POLLUTION; REFUSE INCINERATORS; RESOURCE VALUATION;

CRITICAL ANALYSIS; DISAMENITIES; EXTERNALITIES; LANDFILL;

WASTE MANAGEMENT;

COSTS; DECISION MAKING; MANAGERS; MAPPING; POLLUTION; REFUSE INCINERATORS; RESOURCE VALUATION; WASTE MANAGEMENT;

INCINERATION; LANDFILL; WASTE MANAGEMENT;

AIR POLLUTION CONTROL; ANALYSIS; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; ECONOMIC ASPECT; ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR; GREENHOUSE EFFECT; HUMAN; INCINERATION; LANDFILL; MEDICAL INFORMATION; RELIABILITY; REVIEW; SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT;

EID: 33645328554     PISSN: 09213449     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2005.08.004     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. W. Adamowicz, J. Louviere, and M. Williams Combining revealed and stated preferences methods for valuing environmental amenities J Environ Econ Manage 26 1994 271 292
2. AEA Technology. In: Commission puts price on air pollution damage; 2002. ENDS website, issue 1312: http://www.environmentdaily.com/articles /.
3. H. Apsimon, D. Pearce, and E. Ozdemiroglu Acid rain in Europe: counting the cost 1997 Earthscan Publication London
4. O. Ayalon, Y. Avnimelech, and M. Shechter Issues in designing an effective solid waste policy: the Israeli experience T. Sterner The market and the environment: the effectiveness of market based instruments for environmental Reform 1999 Edward Elgar UK
5. I. Bateman, R. Carson, B. Day, m. HanemNN, N. Hanley, and T. Hett Economic Valuation with Stated Preference techniques a manual 2002 Edward Elgar UK
6. B.R. Beloff, E.R. Beaver, and H. Massin Assessing societal costs associated with environmental impacts Environ Qual Manage 2000 [winter]
7. Brisson I, Pearce D. Benefits transfer for disamenity from waste disposal. CSERGE working paper WM 95-06; 1995.
8. Broome A. Beyond the bin: the economics of recycling, report for Friends of the Earth and Waste Watch; 2000, http://www.wastewatch.org.
9. Brown K, Holland MR, Boyd RA, Thresh S, Jones H, Ogilvie SM. Economic evaluation of PVC waste management, Report produced for the European Commission Environment Directorate; June 2000.
10. Burtraw D, Toman M. The benefits of reduced air pollutants in the U.S. from Greenhouse Gas mitigation policies. Discussion paper 98-01-REV. Resources for the Future, Washington, DC; 1997.
11. Cambridge Econometrics, EFTEC, WRc, 2003. A study to estimate the disamenity costs of landfill in Great Britain; 2003. www.defra.gov.uk.
12. CSERGE, Warren Spring Laboratory, EFTEL. Externalities from landfill and incineration. Report to the Department of Environment, London: HMSO; 1993.
13. E. Dijkgraaf, and H. Vollebergh Burn or bury? A social comparison of final waste disposal methods SIEV 2003 Erasmus University Rotterdam and OCFEB Rotterdam
14. European Commission (EC). Cost-benefit analysis of the different municipal solid waste management systems: objectives and instruments for the year 2000. Final report to EC, by Cooper and Lybrand, CSERGE and EFTEC, 1996.
15. European Commission (EC), DG Environment. A study on Economic valuation of environment Externalities from landfill disposal and incineration of waste. Final Main Report; 2000a. http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/waste/studies/ econ_eva_landfill.htm.
16. European Commission (EC), DG Environment. A study on Economic valuation of environment Externalities from landfill disposal and incineration of waste. Final Appendix report; 2000b. http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/waste/ studies/econ_eva_landfill.htm.
17. ECON, Senter for Okonomosk analyse. Environmental costs of different types of waste. Final report (only available in Norwegian); 1995.
18. EMC. Waste disposal management, analyzing direct and indirect costs. Final report, Israel Hebrew; 1996. p. 70.
19. EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). Human health benefits from sulfate reductions under title IV of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments. Final report; 10 November; 1995.
20. ETSU. Economic evaluation of the draft incineration Directive. Report for the European Commission DG11. ETSU, Harwell Laboratory, Didcot, Oxfordshire OX11 0RA, UK; 1996.
21. Enosh, 1996. Solid waste management externalities. Final report, Israel Hebrew; 1996. p. 140.
22. Eshet T, Ayalon O, Shechter M. Valuation of waste management externalities: a comparison review and analysis. Rome: ISWA World Environment Congress; 2004.
23. Eunomia. Economic analysis of option for managing biodegradable municipal waste. Final report and appendices; 2002. http://europa.eu.int/comm/ environment/waste/compost/econanalysis_finalreport.pdf.
24. ExternE. Extern: externalities of energy. ISBN 92-827-5210-0. vol. 1: Summary; vol. 2: Methodology; vol. 3: Coal and lignite; vol. 5: Nuclear. Published by European Commission, Directorate-General XII. Luxembourg: Science Research and Development; 1995.
25. ExternE. Extern: externalities of energy. New results, to be published by Extern Program of European Commission, Directorate-General XII, Science Research and Development; 1998. p. 67.
26. Eyre N. Study on energy and the environment, environmental impacts of energy. Paper prepared by Eyre Energy Environment for Royal Commission Environmental Pollution, UK; 1998. p. 46.
27. Fankhoauser S. Valuing climate change: the economics of the Greenhouse, Earthscan, London, 1992.
28. Frankhauser S. Global warming damage costs: some monetary estimates. CSERGE working paper, 1993.
29. S. Hellweg, T.B. Hofstetter, and K. Hongerbuhler Discounting and the environment - should current impact be weighted differently than impacts harming future generation? Int J LCA 8 1 2003 8 18
30. S. Hirshfeld, P.A. Vesilind, and E. Pas Assessing the true costs of landfills Waste Manage Res 10 6 1992 471 484
31. D. Hite, W. Chern, F. Hitzhusen, and A. Randall Property-value impacts of an environmental disamenity: the case of landfills J Real Estate Finan Econ 22 2-3 2001 185 202
32. IPPC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). Climate Change 1995. Cambridge University Press; 1995.
33. ISWA. Industry as a partner for sustainable development. Waste Management, UK: ISWA; 2002. p. 71.
34. Josselyn E. The environmental external costs of post-consumer recycling and WTE combustion of municipal solid waste. Master's Thesis. Colorado School of Mines; 1993.
35. K.A. Kiel, and K.T. McClain House prices during siting decision stages: the case of an incinerator from rumor through operation J Environ Manage 28 1995 241 255
36. C.W. Kim, T.T. Phipps, and L. Anselin Measuring the benefits of air quality improvement: a spatial hedonic approach J Environ Econ Manage 45 2003 24 39
37. W. Krewitt, R. Friedrich, T. Heck, and P. Mayerhofer Assessment of environmental and health benefits from the implementation of the UN-ECE protocols on long-range transboundary air pollution J Hazard Mater 61 1998 239 247
38. M.L. Miranda, and B. Hale Waste not, want not: the private and social costs of waste-to-energy production Energy Policy 25 1997 587 600
39. S. Navrud Valuing health impacts from air pollution in Europe Environ Resour Econ 20 4 2001 305 329
40. Office of Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM). Valuing the external benefits of undeveloped land: a review of the economic literature; 2003. www.odpm.gov.uk.
41. Ostro B. Estimating health effects of air pollution: a method with an application to Jakarta, Policy research department, Working paper 1301, World Bank, Washington DC, 1994.
42. D.W. Pearce, and I. Brisson Using economic incentives for the control of municipal solid waste. A.Q. Curzio L. Prosperetti R. Zoboli The management of municipal solid waste in Europe. 1995 Elsevier Amsterdam 211 221
43. Pearce DW, Howarth A. Technical report on methodology: cost-benefit analysis and policy responses. Report 481505020 for RIVM, EFTEC, NTUA and IIASA; 2000. p. 72. http://search.msn.com/preview.aspx?&q=RIVM-Report+481505020.
44. Pearce DW, Turner RK, Powell JC, Brisson J, Baeton J, Holt G, et al. Externalities from landfill and incineration. London, HMSO; 1993.
45. Powell JC, Brisson I. The assessment of social costs and benefits of waste disposal. Working paper 0967-8875; 1994.
46. A. Rabl Discounting of long term costs: what would future generation prefer to do? Ecological Economics 17 1996 137 145
47. Rabl A, Spadaro JV, Desaigues B. Usefulness of damage cost estimates despite uncertainties: the example of regulations for incinerators. Environmental risk final report 1 Annex 7: COSTS (Pp 14); 1998.
48. RDC, PIRA. Evaluation of costs and benefits for the achievement of reuse and recycling targets for the different packaging materials in the frame of the packaging and packaging waste directive 94/62/EC. Proposed draft final report; 2001. http://www.scotland.gov.uk/library5/environment/pptc-00.asp.
49. K.E. Rosendahl Health effects and social costs of particulate pollution - a case study for Oslo Environ Model Assess 3 1998 47 61
50. Schall J. Does the solid waste management hierarchy make sense? A technical, economic and environmental justification for the priority of source deduction and recycling. Yale working papers on Solid Waste Policy; 1992. http://www.yale.edu/pswp/#schall.
51. K. Segeron Real estate and the environment: an introduction J Real Estate Finan Econ 22 2-3 2001 135 139
52. M. Shechter Valuing the environment principles of environmental and resource economics H. Folmer H.L. Gabel Edward A guide for students and decision-makers 1995 Elgar Pub 73 103 [Chapter 3]
53. Spadaro JV, Rabl A. External costs of energy: application of the Extern methodology in France. Ecole des Mines de Paris, Paris, France, 250 p. Final report for contract JOS3-CT95-0010 European Commission DG12; 1998.
54. SRI International. Data summary of MSW management alternatives, Vol. 1. Report text. NREL/TP-431-4988A, 1992; Oct.
55. Tellus Institute Tellus packaging study - assessing the impacts of production and disposal of packaging and public policy measures vol. 1 1992 Tellus Institute
56. Tol RSJ, Downing TE. The marginal damage costs of climate changing gases. Institute for Environmental studies D00/08, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam; 2000.
57. R.K. Turner, J. Paavola, P. Cooper, S. Farber, V. Jessamy, and S. Georgiou Valuing nature: lessons learned and future research direction Ecol Econ 46 2003 493 510
58. WHO (World Health Organization). Update and revision of the air quality guidelines for Europe (unedited), WHO, Regional Office for Europe; 1995.