California households' willingness to pay for 'green' electronics

Journal of Environmental Planning and Management

Volumn 50, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 113-133

  Saphores, Jean Daniel M ^a   Nixon, Hilary ^b   Ogunseitan, Oladele A ^a   Shapiro, Andrew A ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b SAN JOSE STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CONSUMPTION BEHAVIOR; ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS; ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY; EUROPEAN UNION; HOUSEHOLD SURVEY; STATE ROLE; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

CALIFORNIA; NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 33845781092     PISSN: 09640568     EISSN: 13600559     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09640560601048549     Document Type: Article

References (64)

1. Agar, J.(2003) Constant Touch: A Brief History of the Mobile Phone. Cambridge: Icon Books.
2. Alreck, P. and Settle, R.(1995) The Survey Research Handbook 2nd edn. Boston: Irwin McGraw-Hill.
3. Bergstrom, T. and Blume, C. and Varian, H. (1986) On the private provision of public goods Journal of Public Economics, 29, pp. 25-49.
4. Brant, R. (1990) Assessing proportionality in the proportional odds model for ordinal logistic regression Biometrics, 46, pp. 1171-1178.
5. Brown, C. (2003) Consumers' preferences for locally produced food: A study in southeast Missouri American Journal of Alternative Agriculture, 18, pp. 213-224.
6. Calcott, P. and Walls, M. (2005) Waste, recycling, and 'Design for Environment': Roles for markets and policy instruments Resource and Energy Economics, 27, pp. 287-305.
7. Cal/EPA.(2006) Potentially toxic household items no longer allowed in trash bins of California homes or businesses: State's New Waste Rule affects products in everyday use. California EnvironmentalbProtection Agency Press Release, 9 February, Sacramento CA: California Environmental Protection Agency Press Release. http://www.calepa.ca.gov/ pressroom/Releases/2006/PR7-020906.pdf
8. Calfee, J. and Winston, C. and Stempski, R. (2001) Econometric issues in estimating consumer preferences from stated preference data: A case study of the value of automobile travel time The Review of Economics and Statistics, 83, pp. 699-707.
9. CEA Market Research.(2004) The Senior Market for Consumer Technology: A Challenge Worth Taking. Arlington VA: Consumer Electronics Association.
10. Cette, G. and Lopez, J. and Noual, P. (2005) Investments in ICTs: An empirical analysis Applied Economics Letters, 12, pp. 309-312.
11. CIWMB.(2004) Best Management Practices for Electronic Waste #630-04-005. Sacramento CA: California Integrated Waste Management Board.
12. Choe, C. and Fraser, I. (1999) An economic analysis of household waste management Journal of Environmental Economics & Management, 38, pp. 234-246.
13. Chung, S. and Poon, C. (1996) The attitudinal differences in source separation and waste reduction between the general public and housewives in Hong Kong Journal of Environmental Management, 48, pp. 215-227.
14. Clark, C. and Kotchen, M. and Moore, M. (2003) Internal and external influences on pro-environmental behavior: Participation in a green electricity program Journal of Environmental Psychology, 23, pp. 237-246.
15. CTIA.(2005) Annualized wireless industry survey results: June 1985 to June 2005. In. Washington DC: CTIA-The Wireless Association. Available at http://files.ctia.org/pdf/CTIAMidYear2005Survey.pdf>3/16/06
16. De Pelsmacker, P. and Driesen, L. and Rayp, G. (2005) Do consumers care about ethics? Willingness to pay for fair-trade coffee Journal of Consumer Affairs, 39, pp. 363-385.
17. Diamantopoulos, A. and Schlegelmilch, B. and Sinkovics, R. and Bohlen, G. (2003) Can socio-demographics still play a role in profiling green consumers? A review of the evidence and an empirical investigation Journal of Business Research, 56, pp. 465-480.
18. Dunteman, G.(1989) Principal Components Analysis. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.
19. Enpocket, Inc.(2005) US reveals young adults value mobile more than traditional media. Enpocket Mobile Media Monitor Press Release.
20. Ek, K. (2005) Public and private attitudes towards 'green' electricity. The case of Swedish wind power Energy Policy, 33, pp. 1677-1689.
21. European Commission.(2006) REACH: A New Chemicals Policy for the EU. Available at http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/chemicals/pdf/ fact_sheet_reach.pdf>3/15/06
22. Fowler, F., Jr.(1988) Survey Research Methods 2nd edn. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.
23. Fransson, N. and Garling, T. (1999) Environmental concern: Conceptual definitions, measurement methods, and research findings Journal of Environmental Psychology, 19, pp. 369-382.
24. Freeman, A.(2003) The Measurement of Environmental and Resource Values: Theory and Methods 2nd edn. Washington DC: Resources for the Future.
25. Gamba, R. and Oskamp, S. (1994) Factors influencing community residents' participation in commingled curbside recycling programs Environment and Behavior 26, pp. 587-612.
26. Garrod, G. and Willis, K.(1999) Economic Valuation and the Environment: Methods and Case Studies. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
27. Gossling, S. and Kunkel, T. and Schumacher, K. and Heck, N. and Birkemeyer, J. and Froese, J. and Naber, N. and Schliermann, E. (2005) A target group-specific approach to 'green' power retailing: Students as consumers of renewable energy Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 9, pp. 69-83.
28. Guagnano, G. and Stern, P. and Dietz, T. (1995) Influences on attitude-behavior relationships: A natural experiment with curbside recycling Environment and Behavior, 27, pp. 699-718.
29. Harris, B. and Burress, D.(2000) Demands for Local and Organic Produce: A Brief Review of the Literature. Lawrence KS: Institute for Public Policy and Business Research, University of Kansas.
30. Jackson, J.(1991) A User's Guide to Principal Components. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
31. Jenkins, R. and Martinez, S. and Palmer, K. and Podolsky, M. (2003) The determinants of household recycling: A material-specific analysis of recycling program features and unit pricing Journal of Environmental Economics & Management, 45, pp. 294-318.
32. Jensen, K. and Jakus, P. and English, B. and Menard, J. (2003) Market participation and willingness to pay for environmentally certified products Forest Science, 49, pp. 632-641.
33. Judge, R. and Becker, A. (1993) Motivating recycling: A marginal cost analysis Contemporary Policy Issues, 11, pp. 58-69.
34. Krystallis, A. and Chryssohoidis, G. (2005) Consumers' willingness to pay for organic food: Factors that affect it and variation per organic product type British Food Journal, 107, pp. 320-343.
35. Laroche, M. and Bergeron, J. and Barbaro-Forleo, G. (2001) Targeting consumers who are willing to pay more for environmentally friendly products Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18, pp. 503-520.
36. Lockie, S. and Lyons, K. and Lawrence, G. and Grice, J. (2004) Choosing organics: A path analysis of factors underlying the selection of organic food among Australian consumers Appetite, 43, pp. 135-146.
37. Long, J.(1997) Regression Models for Categorical and Limited Dependent Variables. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage Publications.
38. Long, J. and Freese, J.(2006) Regression Models for Categorical Dependent Variables Using Stata 2nd edn. College Station TX: Stata Press.
39. Loureiro, M. and Hine, S. (2004) Preferences and willingness to pay for GM labeling policies Food Policy, 29, pp. 467-483.
40. Menges, R. and Schroeder, C. and Traub, S. (2005) Altruism, warm glow and the willingness-to-donate for green electricity: An artefactual field experiment Environmental & Resource Economics, 31, pp. 431-458.
41. Messick, D. and Brewer, M.(1983) Solving social dilemmas: A review. In Review of Personality and Social Psychology. Beverly Hills CA: Sage Publications.
42. Mintel USA.(2005) Attitudes of Young Adults Towards Consumer Electronics. Chicago IL: Mintel USA.
43. Montgomery, C. and Helvoigt, T. (2006) Changes in attitudes about importance of and willingness to pay for salmon recovery in Oregon Journal of Environmental Management, 78(4), pp. 330-340.
44. Mourato, S. and Saynor, B. and Hart, D. (2004) Greening London's black cabs: A study of driver's preferences for fuel cell taxis Energy Policy, 32, pp. 685-695.
45. Nixon, H. and Saphores, J. (2007) Financing electronic waste recycling: Californian households' willingness to pay advanced recycling fees Journal of Environmental Management. (forthcoming)
46. Nomura, N. and Akai, M. (2004) Willingness to pay for green electricity in Japan as estimated through contingent valuation method Applied Energy, 78, pp. 453-463.
47. OECD.(2001) Extended Producer Responsibility: A Guidance Manual for Governments. Paris: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development.
48. Paulos, B. (1998) Green power in perspective: Lessons from green marketing of consumer goods The Electricity Journal, pp. 46-55.
49. Radman, M. (2005) Consumer consumption and perception of organic products in Croatia British Food Journal, 107, pp. 263-273.
50. Reed Business Information. (2005) What's RoHS cost? Purchasing Magazine, pp. 29.
51. Roe, B. and Teisl, M. and Levy, A. and Russell, M. (2001) US consumers' willingness to pay for green electricity Energy Policy, 29, pp. 917-925.
52. Saphores, J. and Nixon, H. and Ogunseitan, O. and Shapiro, A. (2006) Household willingness to recycle electronic waste: An application to California Environment and Behavior, 38, pp. 183-208.
53. Stavins, J. (1997) Estimating demand elasticities in a differentiated product industry: The personal computer market Journal of Economics and Business, 49, pp. 347-367.
54. Stewart, J.(1991) Econometrics. Cambridge: Philip Allan.
55. US Census.(1988) Computer Use in the United States: 1984 Current Population Reports, Series P-23, No. 155. Washington DC: US Government Printing Office.
56. US Census.(2005) Computer and Internet Use in the United States: 2003. (Washington DC: US Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration.)
57. Van Liere, K. and Dunlap, R. (1980) The social bases of environmental concern: A review of hypotheses, explanations and empirical evidence The Public Opinion Quarterly, 44, pp. 181-197.
58. Walls, M.(2003) The Role of Economics in Extended Producer Responsibility: Making Policy Choices and Setting Policy Goals. Discussion Paper 03-11 (Washington DC: Resources for the Future.)
59. Weaver, R. (1996) Prosocial behavior: Private contributions to agriculture's impact on the environment Land Economics, 72, pp. 231-247.
60. Werner, C. and Makela, E. (1998) Motivations and behaviors that support recycling Journal of Environmental Psychology, 18(4), pp. 373-386.
61. Wilson, D.(2006) WEEE and RoHS could be mere warm-up exercises for a new design culture (GreenSupplyLine.com). Available at http://www.greensupplyline.com/howto/bestpractices/178600941>3/14/2005
62. Wilson, M. and Chia, D. and Ehlers, B.(2006) Green Chemistry in California: A Framework for Leadership in Chemicals Policy and Innovation. Berkeley: California Policy Research Center, University of California Berkeley.
63. Wiser, R. and Fowlie, M. and Holt, E. (2001) Public goods and private interests: Understanding non-residential demand for green power Energy Policy, 29, pp. 1085-1097.
64. Zarnikau, J. (2003) Consumer demand for 'green power' and energy efficiency Energy Policy, 31, pp. 1661-1672.