IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/enreec/v67y2017i2d10.1007_s10640-015-9986-x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Extended Producer Responsibility and Green Marketing: An Application to Packaging

Author

Listed:
  • Brice Arnaud

    (Université de Bordeaux)

Abstract

Assuming a duopoly market where the producers use packaging recyclability to vertically differentiated their product, we analyse the efficiency of an extended producer responsibility (EPR) to deliver optimal choices of packaging. In this paper, the EPR means that the producers bear the social disposal cost of packaging waste resulting from households’ consumption of their product. Disposal of household packaging waste comprises sorting and treatment operations. Therefore, the social disposal cost is the sum of both the sorting and the dumping costs. We confirm that an EPR is not an optimal policy, and then we show that an optimal policy couples an EPR to two bonus/penalty systems: the first one reduces the sorting cost borne by the producers, the second one affects the dumping cost borne by the producers. This optimal policy entails that the producers bear a disposal cost higher (respectively lower) than the social disposal cost when improving packaging recyclability is cost-reducing (respectively costly).

Suggested Citation

  • Brice Arnaud, 2017. "Extended Producer Responsibility and Green Marketing: An Application to Packaging," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 67(2), pages 285-296, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:enreec:v:67:y:2017:i:2:d:10.1007_s10640-015-9986-x
    DOI: 10.1007/s10640-015-9986-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10640-015-9986-x
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10640-015-9986-x?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. Don Fullerton & Wenbo Wu, 2002. "Policies for Green Design," Chapters, in: Don Fullerton & Thomas C. Kinnaman (ed.), The Economics of Household Garbage and Recycling Behavior, chapter 5, pages 102-119, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Bansal, Sangeeta, 2008. "Choice and design of regulatory instruments in the presence of green consumers," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 345-368, August.
    3. Hiroaki Ino, 2007. "Extended producer responsibility in oligopoly," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 17(6), pages 1-9.
    4. Cremer, Helmuth & Thisse, Jacques-Francois, 1994. "Commodity Taxation in a Differentiated Oligopoly," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 35(3), pages 613-633, August.
    5. C. Lombardini-Riipinen, 2005. "Optimal Tax Policy under Environmental Quality Competition," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 32(3), pages 317-336, November.
    6. Crampes, Claude & Hollander, Abraham, 1995. "Duopoly and quality standards," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 71-82, January.
    7. Fleckinger, Pierre & Glachant, Matthieu, 2010. "The organization of extended producer responsibility in waste policy with product differentiation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 57-66, January.
    8. Yue, Chengyan & Hall, Charles R. & Behe, Bridget K. & Campbell, Benjamin L. & Dennis, Jennifer H. & Lopez, Roberto G., 2010. "Are Consumers Willing to Pay More for Biodegradable Containers Than for Plastic Ones? Evidence from Hypothetical Conjoint Analysis and Nonhypothetical Experimental Auctions," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 42(4), pages 757-772, November.
    9. Joonas Rokka & Liisa Uusitalo, 2008. "Preference for green packaging in consumer product choices : Do consumers care?," Post-Print hal-02313351, HAL.
    10. Marco Runkel, 2003. "Product Durability and Extended Producer Responsibility in Solid Waste Management," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 24(2), pages 161-182, February.
    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. Vilkaite-Vaitone Neringa & Skackauskiene Ilona, 2019. "Green marketing orientation: evolution, conceptualization and potential benefits," Open Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 2(1), pages 53-62, January.
    2. Karima AFIF & Bocar Samba BA & Eugénie JOLTREAU, 2024. "Tax-subsidy schemes for recycling when quantity and quality of waste matter," Working Papers 2024.02, FAERE - French Association of Environmental and Resource Economists.
    3. Giuseppe Crapa & Maria Elena Latino & Paolo Roma, 2024. "The performance of green communication across social media: Evidence from large‐scale retail industry in Italy," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(1), pages 493-513, January.
    4. Eugénie Joltreau, 2022. "Extended Producer Responsibility, Packaging Waste Reduction and Eco-design," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 83(3), pages 527-578, November.

    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. Brice ARNAUD, 2014. "Extended Producer Responsibility and Green Marketing: an Application to Packaging," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2014-04, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    2. Li, Yi, 2020. "Competing eco-labels and product market competition," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    3. Alexander Haupt & Magdalena Stadejek, 2010. "The Choice of Environmental Policy Instruments: Energy Efficiency and Redistribution," CESifo Working Paper Series 2986, CESifo.
    4. Brzeskot, Magdalena & Haupt, Alexander, 2013. "Environmental policy and the energy efficiency of vertically differentiated consumer products," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 444-453.
    5. Bernard, Sophie, 2015. "North–south trade in reusable goods: Green design meets illegal shipments of waste," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 22-35.
    6. Asuncion Arner Guerre, 2022. "The Extended Producer Responsibility for Waste Oils," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 12(2), pages 210-217, March.
    7. Marie-Laure Nauleau & Louis-Gaëtan Giraudet & Philippe Quirion, 2015. "Energy Efficiency Policy with Price-quality Discrimination," Working Papers 2015.33, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    8. Fleckinger, Pierre & Glachant, Matthieu, 2010. "The organization of extended producer responsibility in waste policy with product differentiation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 57-66, January.
    9. Kinokuni, Hiroshi & Ohori, Shuichi & Tomoda, Yasunobu, 2021. "Advance disposal fee vs. disposal fee: A monopolistic producer’s durability choice model," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    10. M. Dubois & J. Eyckmans, 2015. "Efficient Waste Management Policies and Strategic Behavior with Open Borders," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 62(4), pages 907-923, December.
    11. Dissemin, uploaded via & Nauleau, Marie-Laure & Giraudet, Louis-Gaëtan & Quirion, Philippe, 2018. "Energy efficiency subsidies with price-quality discrimination," OSF Preprints 5emgn, Center for Open Science.
    12. Eugénie Joltreau, 2022. "Extended Producer Responsibility, Packaging Waste Reduction and Eco-design," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 83(3), pages 527-578, November.
    13. Arner Güerre, Asunción, 2018. "La eficiencia de la responsabilidad ampliada del productor en la gestión de aceites usados con diferenciación del producto/The Efficiency of Extended Producer Responsibility in Waste Oil Management wi," Estudios de Economia Aplicada, Estudios de Economia Aplicada, vol. 36, pages 789-810, Septiembr.
    14. Giulia Ceccantoni & Ornella Tarola & Cecilia Vergari, 2023. "Tax and pollution in a vertically differentiated duopoly: When consumers matter," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(2), pages 416-445, May.
    15. Nauleau, Marie-Laure & Giraudet, Louis-Gaëtan & Quirion, Philippe, 2015. "Energy efficiency subsidies with price-quality discrimination," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(S1), pages 53-62.
    16. Jason Walter & Yang-Ming Chang, 2017. "Green certification, heterogeneous producers, and green consumers: a welfare analysis of environmental regulations," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 52(3), pages 333-361, December.
    17. Massarutto, Antonio, 2014. "The long and winding road to resource efficiency – An interdisciplinary perspective on extended producer responsibility," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 11-21.
    18. Hiroshi Kinokuni & Shuichi Ohori & Yasunobu Tomoda, 2019. "Optimal Waste Disposal Fees When Product Durability is Endogenous: Accounting for Planned Obsolescence," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 73(1), pages 33-50, May.
    19. Bansal, Sangeeta, 2008. "Choice and design of regulatory instruments in the presence of green consumers," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 345-368, August.
    20. Andr, Francisco J. & Gonzlez, Paula & Porteiro, Nicols, 2009. "Strategic quality competition and the Porter Hypothesis," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 182-194, March.

    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:kap:enreec:v:67:y:2017:i:2:d:10.1007_s10640-015-9986-x. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.