IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/recore/v99y2015icp63-71.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Incentives for waste cooking oil collection in South Korea: A contingent valuation approach

Author

Listed:
  • Cho, Sangmin
  • Kim, Jihyo
  • Park, Hi-Chun
  • Heo, Eunnyeong

Abstract

This study examines Korean households’ participation in waste cooking oil (WCO) collection when an incentive is provided, which has rarely been discussed in the existing literature. Using the contingent valuation method, we examine three issues. First, we investigate factors that can potentially increase participation in WCO collection, revealing that the collection system, expenditures on cooking oil, incentive levels, and the number of family members affect respondents’ participation in WCO collection. Second, we analyze the incentive level required to attract Korean households to participate in WCO collection. This level is approximated as the willingness to accept (WTA) the utility losses engendered by participation. The mean WTA value under a drop-off system is KRW 772 (USD 0.70) per liter of WCO, whereas the mean WTA under a curbside system is KRW 546 (USD 0.21) per liter. Finally, we consider the potential effects of providing an incentive for participation in WCO collection and show that this would be likely to increase WCO collection from households but would not significantly contribute to an increase in the volume of domestic feedstock for biodiesel.

Suggested Citation

  • Cho, Sangmin & Kim, Jihyo & Park, Hi-Chun & Heo, Eunnyeong, 2015. "Incentives for waste cooking oil collection in South Korea: A contingent valuation approach," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 63-71.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:recore:v:99:y:2015:i:c:p:63-71
    DOI: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2015.04.003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921344915000816
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.resconrec.2015.04.003?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Halstead, John M. & Luloff, A.E. & Stevens, Thomas H., 1992. "Protest Bidders In Contingent Valuation," Northeastern Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 21(2), pages 1-10, October.
    2. Cultice, Alyssa K. & Bosch, Darrell J. & Pease, James W. & Boyle, Kevin J., 2013. "Horticultural Producers' Willingness to Adopt Water Recirculation Technology in the Mid-Atlantic Region," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 150409, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    3. Horowitz, John K. & McConnell, Kenneth E., 2002. "A Review of WTA/WTP Studies," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 426-447, November.
    4. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    5. Keramitsoglou, Kiriaki M. & Tsagarakis, Konstantinos P., 2013. "Public participation in designing a recycling scheme towards maximum public acceptance," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 55-67.
    6. An, Mark Y. & Roberto Ayala, 1995. "A Mixture Model of Willingness to Pay Distributions," Working Papers 95-21, Duke University, Department of Economics.
    7. Kim, Jihyo & Park, Jooyoung & Kim, Jinsoo & Heo, Eunnyeong, 2013. "Renewable electricity as a differentiated good? The case of the Republic of Korea," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 327-334.
    8. Zhao, Jinhua & Kling, Catherine L., 2001. "A new explanation for the WTP/WTA disparity," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 73(3), pages 293-300, December.
    9. Werner, Megan, 1999. "Allowing for Zeros in Dichotomous-Choice Contingent-Valuation Models," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 17(4), pages 479-486, October.
    10. Tiller, Kelly & Jakus, Paul M. & Park, William M., 1997. "Household Willingness To Pay For Dropoff Recycling," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 22(2), pages 1-11, December.
    11. Cameron, Trudy Ann, 1988. "A new paradigm for valuing non-market goods using referendum data: Maximum likelihood estimation by censored logistic regression," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 355-379, September.
    12. Robert Gillespie & Jeff Bennett, 2011. "Willingness to pay for recycling food waste in the Brisbane Region," Environmental Economics Research Hub Research Reports 1096, Environmental Economics Research Hub, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    13. Ek, Kristina, 2005. "Public and private attitudes towards "green" electricity: the case of Swedish wind power," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(13), pages 1677-1689, September.
    14. Matsumoto, Shigeru, 2011. "Waste separation at home: Are Japanese municipal curbside recycling policies efficient?," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 55(3), pages 325-334.
    15. Kim, Jinsoo & Kim, Jihyo, 2015. "Korean public’s perceptions on supply security of fossil fuels: A contingent valuation analysis," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 301-309.
    16. Kahneman, Daniel & Knetsch, Jack L & Thaler, Richard H, 1990. "Experimental Tests of the Endowment Effect and the Coase Theorem," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(6), pages 1325-1348, December.
    17. Zhang, Huiming & Li, Lianshui & Zhou, Peng & Hou, Jianmin & Qiu, Yueming, 2014. "Subsidy modes, waste cooking oil and biofuel: Policy effectiveness and sustainable supply chains in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 270-274.
    18. Peter A. Groothuis & George Van Houtven & John C. Whitehead, 1998. "Using Contingent Valuation to Measure the Compensation Required to Gain Community Acceptance of a Lulu: the Case of a Hazardous Waste Disposal Facility," Public Finance Review, , vol. 26(3), pages 231-249, May.
    19. Krishna, Vijesh V. & Drucker, Adam G. & Pascual, Unai & Raghu, Prabhakaran T. & King, E.D. Israel Oliver, 2013. "Estimating compensation payments for on-farm conservation of agricultural biodiversity in developing countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 110-123.
    20. Ho, Sze-Hwee & Wong, Yiik-Diew & Chang, Victor Wei-Chung, 2014. "Evaluating the potential of biodiesel (via recycled cooking oil) use in Singapore, an urban city," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 117-124.
    21. Michael Hanemann & John Loomis & Barbara Kanninen, 1991. "Statistical Efficiency of Double-Bounded Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 73(4), pages 1255-1263.
    22. Hanemann, W Michael, 1991. "Willingness to Pay and Willingness to Accept: How Much Can They Differ?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(3), pages 635-647, June.
    23. Shigeru Matsumoto, 2014. "The Opportunity Cost of Pro-Environmental Activities: Spending Time to Promote the Environment," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 119-130, March.
    24. Jones, N. & Evangelinos, K. & Halvadakis, C.P. & Iosifides, T. & Sophoulis, C.M., 2010. "Social factors influencing perceptions and willingness to pay for a market-based policy aiming on solid waste management," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 54(9), pages 533-540.
    25. Ian J. Bateman & Richard T. Carson & Brett Day & Michael Hanemann & Nick Hanley & Tannis Hett & Michael Jones-Lee & Graham Loomes, 2002. "Economic Valuation with Stated Preference Techniques," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2639.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Fontecha, John E. & Nikolaev, Alexander & Walteros, Jose L. & Zhu, Zhenduo, 2022. "Scientists wanted? A literature review on incentive programs that promote pro-environmental consumer behavior: Energy, waste, and water," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 82(PA).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Richard T. Carson, 2011. "Contingent Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2489.
    2. Henrik Andersson & James Hammitt & Gunnar Lindberg & Kristian Sundström, 2013. "Willingness to Pay and Sensitivity to Time Framing: A Theoretical Analysis and an Application on Car Safety," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 56(3), pages 437-456, November.
    3. Henrik Andersson & James K. Hammitt & Kristian Sundström, 2015. "Willingness to Pay and QALYs: What Can We Learn about Valuing Foodborne Risk?," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(3), pages 727-752, September.
    4. Kim, Jihyo & Kim, Jinsoo & Kim, Yoon Kyung, 2016. "Korean public's preference for supply security of oil and gas and the impact of protest bidders," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 202-213.
    5. Sardaro, Ruggiero & Faccilongo, Nicola & Roselli, Luigi, 2019. "Wind farms, farmland occupation and compensation: Evidences from landowners’ preferences through a stated choice survey in Italy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    6. Nayga, Rodolfo M., Jr. & Aiew, Wipon & Woodward, Richard T., 2004. "Willingness to Pay for Irradiated Food: A Non Hypothetical Market Experiment," 84th Seminar, February 8-11, 2004, Zeist, The Netherlands 24995, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    7. Richard T. Carson & Miko_aj Czajkowski, 2014. "The discrete choice experiment approach to environmental contingent valuation," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 9, pages 202-235, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    8. Richard Carson & Nicholas Flores & Norman Meade, 2001. "Contingent Valuation: Controversies and Evidence," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 19(2), pages 173-210, June.
    9. Henrik Andersson & Nicolas Treich, 2011. "The Value of a Statistical Life," Chapters, in: André de Palma & Robin Lindsey & Emile Quinet & Roger Vickerman (ed.), A Handbook of Transport Economics, chapter 17, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Amoah, Anthony & Ferrini, Silvia & Schaafsma, Marije, 2019. "Electricity outages in Ghana: Are contingent valuation estimates valid?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    11. Nick Hanley & Sergio Colombo & Bengt Kriström & Fiona Watson, 2009. "Accounting for Negative, Zero and Positive Willingness to Pay for Landscape Change in a National Park," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(1), pages 1-16, February.
    12. José L Oviedo & Pablo Campos & Alejandro Caparrós, 2022. "Contingent valuation of landowner demand for forest amenities: application in Andalusia, Spain," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 49(3), pages 615-643.
    13. Christina McGranaghan & Steven G. Otto, 2022. "Choice uncertainty and the endowment effect," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 65(1), pages 83-104, August.
    14. Sayman, Serdar & Onculer, Ayse, 2005. "Effects of study design characteristics on the WTA-WTP disparity: A meta analytical framework," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 289-312, April.
    15. repec:ken:wpaper:0603 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Basu, Amita & Srinivasan, Narayanan, 2021. "A Modified Contingent Valuation Method Shrinks Gain-Loss Asymmetry," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    17. Breffle, William S. & Eiswerth, Mark E. & Muralidharan, Daya & Thornton, Jeffrey, 2015. "Understanding how income influences willingness to pay for joint programs: A more equitable value measure for the less wealthy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 17-25.
    18. Achilleas Vassilopoulos & Niki Avgeraki & Stathis Klonaris, 2020. "Social desirability and the WTP–WTA disparity in common goods," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(7), pages 6425-6444, October.
    19. Keramitsoglou, Kiriaki M. & Tsagarakis, Konstantinos P., 2013. "Public participation in designing a recycling scheme towards maximum public acceptance," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 55-67.
    20. Elisabetta Strazzera & Margarita Genius & Riccardo Scarpa & George Hutchinson, 2003. "The Effect of Protest Votes on the Estimates of WTP for Use Values of Recreational Sites," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 25(4), pages 461-476, August.
    21. Loomis, John & Peterson, George & Champ, Patricia & Brown, Thomas & Lucero, Beatrice, 1998. "Paired comparison estimates of willingness to accept versus contingent valuation estimates of willingness to pay," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 501-515, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:recore:v:99:y:2015:i:c:p:63-71. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kai Meng (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/resources-conservation-and-recycling .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.