IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hhs/umnees/1021.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Welfare effects of companies’ use of market power through spatial price discrimination: The case of the Swedish waste incineration market

Author

Listed:

Abstract

General features of waste treatment markets include comprehensive regulations and high fixed capital costs. Hence, firms operating in them have substantial local market power, which is used to mark up prices through spatial price discrimination (Granlund and Meens-Eriksson, 2023). This paper examines effects of waste treatment firms’ spatial price discrimination on Swedish municipalities’ welfare and costs of waste disposal, as well as the associated distributional implications. Results show that the Equivalent Variation is 3.3% of a municipality’s cost for residual waste disposal, on average. Further, the welfare loss disproportionately affects a small number of municipalities, with 10% accounting for 62% of consumer welfare loss. Nearly the entire loss in consumer welfare is redistributed to firms. Considering political ambitions to transform the waste management sector, an alternative scenario is simulated, involving closure of the smallest 20% of waste incineration plants. This would increase the disposal cost for about a quarter of municipalities, and the negative welfare effect within this group would be 12% of their cost of waste disposal.

Suggested Citation

  • Meens-Eriksson, Sef, 2024. "Welfare effects of companies’ use of market power through spatial price discrimination: The case of the Swedish waste incineration market," Umeå Economic Studies 1021, Umeå University, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:hhs:umnees:1021
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.usbe.umu.se/ues/ues1021.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomas C. Kinnaman & Don Fullerton, 2002. "Garbage and Recycling with Endogenous Local Policy," Chapters, in: Don Fullerton & Thomas C. Kinnaman (ed.), The Economics of Household Garbage and Recycling Behavior, chapter 6, pages 120-143, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. MacLeod, W.B. & Norman, G. & Thisse, J.-F., 1988. "Price discrimination and equilibrium in monopolistic competition," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 6(4), pages 429-446.
    3. Nathan H. Miller & Matthew Osborne, 2014. "Spatial differentiation and price discrimination in the cement industry: evidence from a structural model," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 45(2), pages 221-247, June.
    4. Katja Seim & Michael Sinkinson, 2016. "Mixed pricing in online marketplaces," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 129-155, June.
    5. Meghan R. Busse & Nathaniel O. Keohane, 2007. "Market effects of environmental regulation: coal, railroads, and the 1990 Clean Air Act," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 38(4), pages 1159-1179, December.
    6. Persson, Urban & Münster, Marie, 2016. "Current and future prospects for heat recovery from waste in European district heating systems: A literature and data review," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 116-128.
    7. Elbert Dijkgraaf & Raymond Gradus, 2015. "Efficiency Effects of Unit-Based Pricing Systems and Institutional Choices of Waste Collection," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 61(4), pages 641-658, August.
    8. AM Alvarez & EG Fidalgo & RJ Sexton & M Zhang, 2000. "Oligopsony power with uniform spatial pricing: theory and application to milk processing in Spain," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 27(3), pages 347-364, September.
    9. Pascal Lavergne & Vincent Réquillart & Michel Simioni, 2001. "Welfare Losses Due to Market Power: Hicksian versus Marshallian Measurement," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 83(1), pages 157-165.
    10. DeeVon Bailey & B. Wade Brorsen & Michael R. Thomsen, 1995. "Identifying Buyer Market Areas and the Impact of Buyer Concentration in Feeder Cattle Markets Using Mapping and Spatial Statistics," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 77(2), pages 309-318.
    11. Edgar M. Hoover, 1937. "Spatial Price Discrimination," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 4(3), pages 182-191.
    12. Hausman, Jerry A, 1981. "Exact Consumer's Surplus and Deadweight Loss," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(4), pages 662-676, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Meens-Eriksson, Sef, 2024. "The Economics of Residual Waste: Policies, Price discrimination, and Welfare," Umeå Economic Studies 1022, Umeå University, Department of Economics.
    2. Sesmero Juan, 2018. "Spatial Pricing in Uncontested Procurement Markets: Regulatory Implications," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 16(1), pages 1-14, January.
    3. Granlund, David & Meens-Eriksson, Sef, 2022. "Firms price discriminate based on suppliers’ relative distances to competitors," Umeå Economic Studies 1006, Umeå University, Department of Economics, revised 05 Feb 2024.
    4. Raymond (R.H.J.M.) Gradus & Elbert (E.) Dijkgraaf, 2017. "Dutch Municipalities are Becoming Greener: Some Political and Institutional Explanations," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 17-086/VIII, Tinbergen Institute.
    5. George Norman & Jacques‐François Thisse, 1999. "Technology Choice and Market Structure: strategic aspects of flexible manufacturing," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(3), pages 345-372, September.
    6. Elbert Dijkgraaf & Raymond Gradus, 2014. "The Effectiveness of Dutch Municipal Recycling Policies," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 14-155/VI, Tinbergen Institute.
    7. Ralph M. Braid, 2016. "Potential merger-forcing entry reduces maximum spacing between firms in spatial competition," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 95(3), pages 653-669, August.
    8. Marten Graubner, 2018. "Lost in space? The effect of direct payments on land rental prices," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 45(2), pages 143-171.
    9. Eleftheriou, Konstantinos & Michelacakis, Nickolas, 2015. "A Unified Model of Spatial Price Discrimination," MPRA Paper 66557, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Rodolphe Dos Santos Ferreira & Ehud Zuscovitch, 2010. "Jack of All Trades or Master of One? The Specialization–Flexibility Trade-off," Chapters, in: Jean-Luc Gaffard & Evens Salies (ed.), Innovation, Economic Growth and the Firm, chapter 7, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. David S. Bullock & Philip Garcia & Kie‐Yup Shin, 2005. "Measuring producer welfare under output price uncertainty and risk non‐neutrality," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 49(1), pages 1-21, March.
    12. Jonathan Vogel, 2011. "Spatial Price Discrimination with Heterogeneous Firms," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(4), pages 661-676, December.
    13. Chen, Natalie & Juvenal, Luciana, 2022. "Markups, quality, and trade costs," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    14. Braid, Ralph M., 2008. "Spatial price discrimination and the locations of firms with different product selections or product varieties," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 98(3), pages 342-347, March.
    15. Jinho Jung & Juan Sesmero & Ralph Siebert, 2022. "A structural estimation of spatial differentiation and market power in input procurement," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 104(2), pages 613-644, March.
    16. Carattini, Stefano & Baranzini, Andrea & Lalive, Rafael, 2018. "Is Taxing Waste a Waste of Time? Evidence from a Supreme Court Decision," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 131-151.
    17. Carlo Reggiani, 2014. "Spatial Price Discrimination in the Spokes Model," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(3), pages 628-649, September.
    18. Elbert Dijkgraaf & Raymond Gradus, 2017. "An EU Recycling Target: What Does the Dutch Evidence Tell Us?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(3), pages 501-526, November.
    19. Mingxia Zhang & Richard J. Sexton, 2001. "FOB or Uniform Delivered Prices: Strategic Choice and Welfare Effects," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(2), pages 197-221, June.
    20. Konstantinos Eleftheriou & Nickolas J. Michelacakis, 2020. "Location decisions and welfare under spatial price discrimination," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(7), pages 1202-1210, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Spatial price discrimination; welfare effects; equivalent variation; waste economics;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D43 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Oligopoly and Other Forms of Market Imperfection
    • D60 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - General
    • L11 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Production, Pricing, and Market Structure; Size Distribution of Firms
    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets
    • Q53 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Air Pollution; Water Pollution; Noise; Hazardous Waste; Solid Waste; Recycling

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:hhs:umnees:1021. 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: David Skog (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inumuse.html .

    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.