4.7 Article

E-waste bans and US households' preferences for disposing of their e-waste

Journal

JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
Volume 124, Issue -, Pages 8-16

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.03.019

Keywords

E-waste; Disposal bans; Multinomial logit; Public policy

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation [DMII 0223894]
  2. University of California Toxic Substances Research and Teaching Program [UC 44157]
  3. Research and Education in Green Materials (REGM) at UC-Irvine
  4. School of Social Ecology at UC-Irvine
  5. Newkirk Center for Science and Society

Ask authors/readers for more resources

To deal with the inadequate disposal of e-waste, many states have instituted bans on its disposal in municipal landfills. However, the effectiveness of e-waste bans does not seem to have been analyzed yet. This paper starts addressing this gap. Using data from a survey of U.S. households, we estimate multivariate logit models to explain past disposal behavior by households of broken/obsolete (junk) cell phones and disposal intentions for junk TVs. Our explanatory variables include factors summarizing general awareness of environmental issues, pro-environmental behavior in the past year, attitudes toward recycling small electronics (for the cell phones model only), socio-economic and demographic characteristics, and the presence of state e-waste bans. We find that California's Cell Phone Recycling Act had a significant and positive impact on the recycling of junk cell phones; however, state disposal bans for junk TVs seem to have been mostly ineffective, probably because they were poorly publicized and enforced. Their effectiveness could be enhanced by providing more information about e-waste recycling to women, and more generally to adults under 60. Given the disappointing performance of policies implemented to-date to enhance the collection of e-waste, it may be time to explore economic instruments such as deposit-refund systems. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available