IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i13p7412-d587233.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Market Structure of Urban Waste Treatment and Disposal: Empirical Evidence from the Italian Industry

Author

Listed:
  • Giacomo Di Foggia

    (Department of Business and Law, University of Milano-Bicocca, 20126 Milan, Italy)

  • Massimo Beccarello

    (Department of Business and Law, University of Milano-Bicocca, 20126 Milan, Italy)

Abstract

In light of the organizational dynamics of services of economic interest, the regulation of municipal solid waste management is a critical issue to deal with so as to achieve sustainability goals in the coming decades. The European circular economy targets limit the share of municipal waste in landfills to a maximum of 10% by 2035. Consequently, waste-to-energy plants may temporarily become the primary option for residual unsorted waste. The municipal waste management chain comprises two consequential stages: collection and transport, and the treatment and disposal stage, which characterizes as an oligopolistic market structure. After defining the relevant market and calculating market concentration measures, we analyze market power in the treatment and disposal of non-recyclable mixed waste, also known as residual waste. Our analyses are based on empirical data using well-known market concentration indices such as the Herfindahl–Hirschman index and concentration ratios. We report the results of three different market concentration scenarios based on alternative geographic and product market definitions. Considering only waste-to-energy as a product market, we present a situation of moderate concentration, typically involving the attention of competition authorities. On the contrary, considering both options as a single product market, no relevant evidence emerges due to the significant share of waste sent to landfills in 2019, i.e., 20.1% of the total municipal solid waste generated in Italy. Implications for future studies consist of new detailed information on the municipal waste treatment market structure in one of the leading European countries that may prompt comparative studies. Policy implications are derived from the possibility of taking cues from this paper to envisage appropriate regulatory models for an evolving sector in which market spaces are increasing.

Suggested Citation

  • Giacomo Di Foggia & Massimo Beccarello, 2021. "Market Structure of Urban Waste Treatment and Disposal: Empirical Evidence from the Italian Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-12, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:13:p:7412-:d:587233
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/13/7412/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/13/7412/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Di Foggia, Giacomo & Beccarello, Massimo, 2018. "Improving efficiency in the MSW collection and disposal service combining price cap and yardstick regulation: The Italian case," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 79, pages 223-231.
    2. Barbara ANTONIOLI & Antonio MASSARUTTO, 2012. "The Municipal Waste Management Sector In Europe: Shifting Boundaries Between Public Service And The Market," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 83(4), pages 505-532, December.
    3. Di Foggia, Giacomo, 2021. "Energy-Efficient Products and Competitiveness in the Manufacturing Sector," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 7(1).
    4. Benkovskis, Konstantins & Wörz, Julia, 2018. "What drives the market share changes? Price versus non-price factors," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 9-29.
    5. I. Brezina & J. Pekár & Z. Čičková & M. Reiff, 2016. "Herfindahl–Hirschman index level of concentration values modification and analysis of their change," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 24(1), pages 49-72, March.
    6. Leonardo J. Basso & Nicolás Figueroa & Jorge Vásquez, 2017. "Monopoly regulation under asymmetric information: prices versus quantities," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 48(3), pages 557-578, August.
    7. repec:hhs:bofitp:2013_018 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Massarutto, Antonio, 2007. "Municipal waste management as a local utility: Options for competition in an environmentally-regulated industry," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 9-19, March.
    9. Jan De Loecker & Jan Eeckhout & Gabriel Unger, 2020. "The Rise of Market Power and the Macroeconomic Implications [“Econometric Tools for Analyzing Market Outcomes”]," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 135(2), pages 561-644.
    10. Di Foggia, Giacomo & Beccarello, Massimo, 2021. "Designing waste management systems to meet circular economy goals: The Italian case," MPRA Paper 105959, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Packalen, Mikko & Sen, Anindya, 2013. "Static and dynamic merger effects: A market share based empirical analysis," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 12-24.
    12. Joskow, Paul L., 2007. "Regulation of Natural Monopoly," Handbook of Law and Economics, in: A. Mitchell Polinsky & Steven Shavell (ed.), Handbook of Law and Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 16, pages 1227-1348, Elsevier.
    13. Raymond Gradus & Martijn Schoute & Elbert Dijkgraaf, 2018. "The effects of market concentration on costs of local public services: empirical evidence from Dutch waste collection," Local Government Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(1), pages 86-104, January.
    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. Ukrit Suksanguan & Somsak Siwadamrongpong & Thanapong Champahom & Sajjakaj Jomnonkwao & Tassana Boonyoo & Vatanavongs Ratanavaraha, 2022. "Structural Equation Model of Factors Influencing the Selection of Industrial Waste Disposal Service in Cement Kilns," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-19, March.
    2. Simon Pröll & Heidelinde Grüneis & Franz Sinabell, 2022. "Market Concentration, Producer Organizations, and Policy Measures to Strengthen the Opportunities of Farmers for Value Addition—Empirical Findings from the Austrian Meat Supply Chain Using a Multi-Met," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-18, February.
    3. Massimo Beccarello & Giacomo Di Foggia, 2023. "Efficient scale and scope of business models used in municipal solid waste management," European Journal of Management and Business Economics, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 32(4), pages 492-508, April.
    4. Ugo Arrigo & Massimo Beccarello & Giacomo Di Foggia, 2023. "Strategic Response of European Airlines to Market Dynamics: A Comparative Analysis," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-14, December.
    5. Beccarello, Massimo & Di Foggia, Giacomo, 2023. "Defining the Organization of Municipal Solid Waste Management Based on Production Costs," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 7(2), pages 1-15.
    6. Tomasz Jedynak & Krzysztof Wąsowicz, 2021. "The Relationship between Efficiency and Quality of Municipally Owned Corporations: Evidence from Local Public Transport and Waste Management in Poland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-30, August.

    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. Antonio Massarutto, 2019. "Italian waste in the circular economy: A agenda for industry regulators in Italy," ECONOMIA PUBBLICA, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2019(1), pages 9-48.
    2. Di Foggia, Giacomo & Beccarello, Massimo, 2023. "Designing circular economy-compliant municipal solid waste management charging schemes," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    3. Monica Amici & Emmanuele Bobbio & Roberto Torrini, 2018. "Patterns of Convergence (Divergence) in the Euro Area: Profitability Versus Cost and Price Indicators," Italian Economic Journal: A Continuation of Rivista Italiana degli Economisti and Giornale degli Economisti, Springer;Società Italiana degli Economisti (Italian Economic Association), vol. 4(3), pages 367-384, November.
    4. Gregor Schwerhoff & Ottmar Edenhofer & Marc Fleurbaey, 2020. "Taxation Of Economic Rents," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(2), pages 398-423, April.
    5. Pranvera Shehaj & Martin Zagler, 2023. "Motor Vehicle Registration Taxes (MVRT) across EU countries: MNEs’ profitability and the role of market concentration," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 56(1), pages 155-198, August.
    6. Antonio Massarutto, 2020. "Economic regulation of waste management utilities: Taking stock of the Italian reform," ECONOMICS AND POLICY OF ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2020(2), pages 5-33.
    7. Ensar Yılmaz & Zeynep Kaplan, 2022. "Heterogeneity of market power: firm-level evidence," Economic Change and Restructuring, Springer, vol. 55(2), pages 1207-1228, May.
    8. Patrick Mellacher, 2021. "Growth, Inequality and Declining Business Dynamism in a Unified Schumpeter Mark I + II Model," Papers 2111.09407, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2023.
    9. Kuosmanen, Natalia & Valmari, Nelli, 2023. "Renewal of Companies Through Product Switching," ETLA Working Papers 104, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    10. Stephen Roper, 2023. "The changing landscape of firm-level productivity – anatomy and policy implications," Insight Papers 020, The Productivity Institute.
    11. Charles A.E. Goodhart & Dimitrios P. Tsomocos & Xuan Wang, 2023. "Support for small businesses amid COVID‐19," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 90(358), pages 612-652, April.
    12. Vallés, Javier & Salas Fumás, Vicente & San Juan, Lucio, 2022. "Corporate economic profits in the euro area: The relevance of cost competitive advantage," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 569-585.
    13. Andrew Foerster & Andreas Hornstein & Pierre-Daniel G. Sarte & Mark W. Watson, 2019. "Aggregate Implications of Changing Sectoral Trends," Working Paper 19-11, Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond.
    14. Kyoji Fukao & Cristiano Perugini, 2021. "The Long‐Run Dynamics of the Labor Share in Japan," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 67(2), pages 445-480, June.
    15. Joel M. David & Venky Venkateswaran, 2019. "The Sources of Capital Misallocation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(7), pages 2531-2567, July.
    16. Francis,David C. & Kubinec ,Robert, 2022. "Beyond Political Connections : A Measurement Model Approach to Estimating Firm-levelPolitical Influence in 41 Economies," Policy Research Working Paper Series 10119, The World Bank.
    17. Francesco Amodio & Nicolás de Roux, 2021. "Labor Market Power in Developing Countries: Evidence from Colombian Plants," Documentos CEDE 19267, Universidad de los Andes, Facultad de Economía, CEDE.
    18. Steven Bond‐Smith, 2022. "Discretely innovating: The effect of limited market contestability on innovation and growth," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 69(3), pages 301-327, July.
    19. Daan Freeman & Leon Bettendorf & Gerrit Hugo van Heuvelen & Gerdien Meijerink, 2024. "Business Dynamics and Productivity Growth in the Netherlands," CESifo Working Paper Series 11071, CESifo.
    20. Ufuk Akcigit & Sina T. Ates, 2023. "What Happened to US Business Dynamism?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 131(8), pages 2059-2124.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:13:p:7412-:d:587233. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.