Abstract
Abstract
Improper waste management carries social risks and dissipates high-value materials. Moreover, material market prices do not reflect these hidden costs and values. Two important questions are how prices can inform society about their resource use impact and how market-based policies optimize material circularity. This study adds to the literature by analyzing the effect of market-based policies aimed at promoting circular material reuse in a market defied by harmful waste but enhanced by recycling. The findings indicate that a landfill tax is a first-best policy since it targets the external costs of waste disposal, improves welfare, reduces damages, and boosts recycling. If a landfill tax is not feasible, other programs like taxes, subsidies, and a tax-subsidy scheme provide second-best results. Remarkably, recycling subsidies can stimulate higher raw material extraction and generate rebound effects. We also explore other non-market-based strategies to prevent waste and make recycling more cost-competitive and easier to recycle. The numerical results and sensitivity analysis of the lithium market illustrate the model's flexibility and prove why some policies are superior to others for reducing waste and creating value from used materials. Our study results serve as a guide to designing policies for optimal material circularity.
Funder
Norwegian University of Life Sciences
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference49 articles.
1. D. Pulido-Sanchez, I. Capellan-Perez, M. Mediavilla-Pascual, C. de-Castro-Carranza, and F. Frechoso-Escudero, “Analysis of the material requirements of global electrical mobility,” DYNA, vol. 96, no. 2, 2021, https://doi.org/10.6036/9893.
2. Lutkehaus H, Pade C, Oswald M, Brand U, Naegler T, Vogt T (2022) Measuring raw-material criticality of product systems through an economic product importance indicator: a case study of battery-electric vehicles. Int J LIFE CYCLE Assess 27(1):122–137. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-021-02002-z
3. Junne T, Wulff N, Breyer C, Naegler T (2020) Critical materials in global low-carbon energy scenarios: the case for neodymium, dysprosium, lithium, and cobalt. Energy 211:118532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.118532
4. V. Forti, C. P. Baldé, R. Kuehr, and G. Bel, “The Global E-waste Monitor 2020: quantities, flows and the circular economy potential,” Bonn/Geneva/Rotterdam, 2020. [Online]. Available: http://ewastemonitor.info/.
5. Walls M, Palmer K (2001) Upstream pollution, downstream waste disposal, and the design of comprehensive environmental policies. J Environ Econ Manage 41(1):94–108. https://doi.org/10.1006/jeem.2000.1135
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献