An Exploration of the Impacts of Compulsory Source-Separated Policy in Improving Household Solid Waste-Sorting in Pilot Megacities, China: A Case Study of Nanjing
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Methodology and Data Collection
2.1. Study Area
2.2. Design of Household Survey
2.3. Data Analysis with a Hierarchical Tree-Based Regression Method
- (a)
- The maximum tree depth was not more than five levels.
- (b)
- The minimum number of survey samples of parent nodes was not less than 50, and the minimum number of survey samples of child nodes was not less than 20.
- (c)
- The significance levels of splitting nodes and merging categories were set to 0.05.
2.4. Evaluating the Effectiveness of the Compulsory Source-Separated Policy Implementation
2.4.1. Variable Selection
2.4.2. Empirical Model
2.5. Data Processing
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Mapping of Household Support Degree for the Mandatory Source-Separated Policy Using the HTBR Model
3.2. Estimating Effectiveness of the Mandatory Source-Separated Policy
3.3. Identification of Environmental Factors Affecting HSW Source-Separated Collection
4. Concluding Remarks
- (1)
- Because the mandatory HSW source-separated process is gradual, attention must be paid to education/publicity on HSW source-separated collection, enhancement of public awareness of the classification, exploration of new source-separated mechanisms of HSW management, and the introduction of demonstration community management methods of HSW sorting and disposal.
- (2)
- Relevant laws and regulations should be rationalized, the management system of communities should be improved, and the implementation, supervision, punishment, and incentive mechanisms of the system (such as “HSW source-separated management in a community scale”, “HSW source-separated incentive rules”, and “hazards and emergency response of waste disposal”) should be explored.
- (3)
- The indices on “HSW source-separated rate” and “HSW recycling rate” should be incorporated into the evaluation system of local governments and community management corporations. “HSW source-separated vouchers” and community alliances of scavengers and municipal cleaners should be introduced to encourage community residents to fulfill source-separated action and HSW recycling tasks satisfactorily. Additionally, investment in source-separated facilities should be enhanced. For example, visual HSW identification markers and intelligent classification techniques can help to optimize the source-separated process.
- (4)
- In the future, China should change the current industry chain of HSW, which only emphasizes the output of recyclable material and underestimated waste collection, as well as improve HSW sorting at home through source-separated policy.
Author Contributions
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Ali, M. Urban waste management as if people matter. Habitat Int. 2006, 4, 729–730. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hoornweg, D.; Bhada-Tata, P.; Kennedy, C. Environment: Waste production must peak this century. Nat. News 2013, 502, 615–617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chan, J.K.H. The ethics of working with wicked urban waste problems: The case of singapore’s semakau landfill. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2016, 154, 123–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, F.; Yang, B.; Ma, J.; Qu, J.; Liu, G. Decontamination of electronic waste-polluted soil by ultrasound-assisted soil washing. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2016, 23, 20331–20340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hird, M.J. Waste, landfills, and an environmental ethic of vulnerability. Ethics Environ. 2013, 18, 105–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zaman, A.U.; Lehmann, S. Urban growth and waste management optimization towards ‘zero waste city’. City Cult. Soc. 2011, 2, 177–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, F.; Yang, B.; Zhang, W.; Ma, J.; Lv, J.; Yang, Y. Enhanced recycling network for spent e-bicycle batteries: A case study in xuzhou, China. Waste Manag. 2017, 60, 660–665. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Johari, A.; Ahmed, S.I.; Hashim, H.; Alkali, H.; Ramli, M. Economic and environmental benefits of landfill gas from municipal solid waste in malaysia. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2012, 16, 2907–2912. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lu, C.; Zhang, L.; Zhong, Y.; Ren, W.; Tobias, M.; Mu, Z.; Ma, Z.; Geng, Y.; Xue, B. An overview of e-waste management in China. J. Mater. Cycles Waste Manag. 2015, 17, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rada, E. Effects of msw selective collection on waste-to-energy strategies. WIT Trans. Ecol. Environ. 2013, 176, 215–223. [Google Scholar]
- Zuberi, M.J.S.; Ali, S.F. Greenhouse effect reduction by recovering energy from waste landfills in pakistan. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015, 44, 117–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hotta, Y.; Aoki-Suzuki, C. Waste reduction and recycling initiatives in japanese cities: Lessons from yokohama and kamakura. Waste Manag. Res. 2014, 32, 857–866. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kuusiola, T.; Wierink, M.; Heiskanen, K. Comparison of collection schemes of municipal solid waste metallic fraction: The impacts on global warming potential for the case of the Helsinki metropolitan area, Finland. Sustainability 2012, 4, 2586–2610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wen, X.; Luo, Q.; Hu, H.; Wang, N.; Chen, Y.; Jin, J.; Hao, Y.; Xu, G.; Li, F.; Fang, W. Comparison research on waste classification between China and the EU, Japan, and the USA. J. Mater. Cycles Waste Manag. 2014, 16, 321–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abbott, A.; Nandeibam, S.; O’Shea, L. Explaining the variation in household recycling rates across the UK. Ecol. Econ. 2011, 70, 2214–2223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Matsumoto, S. Waste separation at home: Are japanese municipal curbside recycling policies efficient? Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2011, 55, 325–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Özkan, K.; Ergin, S.; Işık, Ş.; Işıklı, İ. A new classification scheme of plastic wastes based upon recycling labels. Waste Manag. 2015, 35, 29–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Inglezakis, V.J.; Moustakas, K. Household hazardous waste management: A review. J. Environ. Manag. 2015, 150, 310–321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Martin, M.; Williams, I.D.; Clark, M. Social, cultural and structural influences on household waste recycling: A case study. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2006, 48, 357–395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ramayah, T.; Lee, J.W.C.; Lim, S. Sustaining the environment through recycling: An empirical study. J. Environ. Manag. 2012, 102, 141–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Deng, J.; Xu, W.; Zhou, C. Investigation of waste classification and collection actual effect and the study of long acting management in the community of Beijing. Huan Jing Ke Xue 2013, 34, 395–400. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Tai, J.; Zhang, W.; Che, Y.; Feng, D. Municipal solid waste source-separated collection in China: A comparative analysis. Waste Manag. 2011, 31, 1673–1682. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zhuang, Y.; Wu, S.; Wang, Y.; Wu, W.; Chen, Y. Source separation of household waste: A case study in China. Waste Manag. 2008, 28, 2022–2030. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Han, H.; Zhang, Z. The impact of the policy of municipal solid waste source-separated collection on waste reduction: A case study of China. J. Mater. Cycles Waste Manag. 2017, 19, 382–393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Han, H.; Zhang, Z.; Xia, S. The crowding-out effects of garbage fees and voluntary source separation programs on waste reduction: Evidence from China. Sustainability 2016, 8, 678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reichenbach, J. Status and prospects of pay-as-you-throw in Europe—A review of pilot research and implementation studies. Waste Manag. 2008, 28, 2809–2814. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Skumatz, L.A. Pay as you throw in the us: Implementation, impacts, and experience. Waste Manag. 2008, 28, 2778–2785. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Chen, H.; Yang, Y.; Jiang, W.; Song, M.; Wang, Y.; Xiang, T. Source separation of municipal solid waste: The effects of different separation methods and citizens’ inclination—Case study of Changsha, China. J. Air Waste Manag. Assoc. 2017, 67, 182–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zhang, W.; Che, Y.; Yang, K.; Ren, X.; Tai, J. Public opinion about the source separation of municipal solid waste in Shanghai, China. Waste Manag. Res. 2012, 30, 1261–1271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Chu, Z.; Wang, W.; Wang, B.; Zhuang, J. Research on factors influencing municipal household solid waste separate collection: Bayesian belief networks. Sustainability 2016, 8, 152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tong, X.; Tao, D. The rise and fall of a “waste city” in the construction of an “urban circular economic system”: The changing landscape of waste in beijing. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2016, 107, 10–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, H.; Wen, Z. Residents’ household solid waste (hsw) source separation activity: A case study of Suzhou, China. Sustainability 2014, 6, 6446–6466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fu, H.; Li, Z.; Wang, R. Estimating municipal solid waste generation by different activities and various resident groups in five provinces of China. Waste Manag. 2015, 41, 3–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gu, B.; Wang, H.; Chen, Z.; Jiang, S.; Zhu, W.; Liu, M.; Chen, Y.; Wu, Y.; He, S.; Cheng, R.; et al. Characterization, quantification and management of household solid waste: A case study in China. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2015, 98, 67–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- NDRC. The Implementation Plan of the Classification System of Household Solid Waste. Available online: http://www.ndrc.gov.cn/gzdt/201703/t20170331_843112.html (accessed on 18 December 2017).
- Ando, A.W.; Gosselin, A.Y. Recycling in multifamily dwellings: Does convenience matter? Econ. Inq. 2005, 43, 426–438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bruvoll, A.; Halvorsen, B.; Nyborg, K. Households’ recycling efforts. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2002, 36, 337–354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jakus, P.M.; Tiller, K.H.; Park, W.M. Generation of recyclables by rural households. J. Agric. Resour. Econ. 1996, 21, 96–108. [Google Scholar]
- Matsumoto, S. The opportunity cost of pro-environmental activities: Spending time to promote the environment. J. Fam. Econ. Issues 2014, 35, 119–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lansana, F.M. A comparative analysis of curbside recycling behavior in urban and suburban communities. Prof. Geogr. 1993, 45, 169–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, L.; Li, Z.-S.; Fu, H.-Z. Model of municipal solid waste source separation activity: A case study of beijing. J. Air Waste Manag. Assoc. 2011, 61, 157–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Halvorsen, B. Effects of norms and opportunity cost of time on household recycling. Land Econ. 2008, 84, 501–516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hornik, J.; Cherian, J.; Madansky, M.; Narayana, C. Determinants of recycling behavior: A synthesis of research results. J. Socio-Econ. 1995, 24, 105–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sidique, S.F.; Lupi, F.; Joshi, S.V. The effects of behavior and attitudes on drop-off recycling activities. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2010, 54, 163–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ekere, W.; Mugisha, J.; Drake, L. Factors influencing waste separation and utilization among households in The Lake Victoria Crescent, Uganda. Waste Manag. 2009, 29, 3047–3051. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zhang, S.; Zhang, M.; Yu, X.; Ren, H. What keeps chinese from recycling: Accessibility of recycling facilities and the behavior. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2016, 109, 176–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guerrero, L.A.; Maas, G.; Hogland, W. Solid waste management challenges for cities in developing countries. Waste Manag. 2013, 33, 220–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Seejeen, P.; Frances, S.B. Analyzing effective municipal solid waste recycling programs: The case of county-level msw recycling performance in Florida, USA. Waste Manag. Res. 2013, 31, 896–901. [Google Scholar]
- Lakhan, C. The relationship between municipal waste diversion incentivization and recycling system performance. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2016, 106, 68–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, F.; Luo, Z.; Yang, Y.; Liu, G.; Ma, J. Enhancing municipal solid waste recycling through reorganizing waste pickers: A case study in Nanjing, China. Waste Manag. Res. 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Blanche, M.T.; Blanche, M.J.T.; Durrheim, K.; Painter, D. Research in Practice: Applied Methods for the Social Sciences, 3rd ed.; UCT Press: Cape Town, South Africa, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Viljoen, K.; Blaauw, P.; Schenck, R. “I would rather have a decent job”: Potential barriers preventing street-waste pickers from improving their socio-economic conditions. S. Afr. J. Econ. Manag. Sci. 2016, 19, 175–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stewart, J. Applications of classification and regression tree methods in roadway safety studies. Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board 1996, 1542, 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Friedman, J.; Hastie, T.; Tibshirani, R. The Elements of Statistical Learning; Springer Series in Statistics; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2001; Volume 1. [Google Scholar]
- Staub, K.E. A causal interpretation of extensive and intensive margin effects in generalized tobit models. Rev. Econ. Stat. 2014, 96, 371–375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Uchida, E.; Xu, J.; Rozelle, S. Grain for green: Cost-effectiveness and sustainability of China’s conservation set-aside program. Land Econ. 2005, 81, 247–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, Y.; Xu, Q.; Huang, X.; Ling, C.; Zhong, T.; Li, J.; Zhang, X.; Du, G.; Zhang, B. Effects of land supervision on cultivated land requisition-compensation balance in China. Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Eng. 2012, 28, 1–7. [Google Scholar]
- Xu, D.; Li, B. Research on regional ecological compensation performance appraisal based on propensity score analysis. China Popul. Resour. Environ. 2015, 25, 34–42. [Google Scholar]
- Rosenbaum, P.R.; Rubin, D.B. The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika 1983, 70, 41–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abadie, A.; Imbens, G.W. Matching on the estimated propensity score. Econometrica 2016, 84, 781–807. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- StataCorp, L.P. Stata Survival Analysis and Epidemiological Tables: Reference Manual Release 14; Stata Corporation: College Station, TX, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Greene, W. Fixed effects and bias due to the incidental parameters problem in the tobit model. Econ. Rev. 2004, 23, 125–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Description | Community Type | ||
---|---|---|---|
I | II | III | |
General description | MSW source-separated demonstration communities | MSW source-separated pilot communities and some high-grade communities | Other communities |
Number of communities in Nanjing | 5 | 16 | 1394 |
Community facilities and services | Three types of trash cans, classified transportation vehicles, door-to-door service for hazardous article collection, and other services | Two types of trash cans | No classification facilities |
Community publicity and supervision | Informing check-in households, publicity with community electronic screens and APPs, periodic sampling–supervision, and organization of volunteer work | Publicity with bulletin boards and occasional propaganda | Public service advertising on newspaper or television |
Number of communities (households) in this study | 1 (56) | 3 (150) | 7 (281) |
Survey percentage of communities (households) in Nanjing | 20.0% (2.3%) | 18.8% (2.5%) | 0.5% (0.1‰) |
Variables | Abbreviation → Input Value | Summary Statistics | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Categories | Description | N | % | |
Independent Variables | ||||
Gender | The gender of the person in a household mainly dealing with HSW | G1 → female | 325 | 66.7 |
G2 → male | 162 | 33.3 | ||
Age (years) | The age of the person in a household mainly dealing with HSW | A1 → <35 | 104 | 21.4 |
A2 → 36–60 | 158 | 32.4 | ||
A3 → >60 | 225 | 46.2 | ||
Household size | Household size | H1 → not more than 2 | 97 | 19.9 |
H2 → 3–4 | 221 | 45.4 | ||
H3 → not less than 5 | 169 | 34.7 | ||
Number of education years | The number of education years of the highest educated person with an income in a household | E1 → <9 | 19 | 3.9 |
E2 → 9–12 | 58 | 11.9 | ||
E3 → 12–16 | 339 | 69.6 | ||
E4 → >16 | 71 | 14.6 | ||
Monthly income (CNY) | Household monthly income per capita | I1 → <3000 | 57 | 11.7 |
I2 → 3000–5000 | 153 | 31.4 | ||
I3 → 5000–9000 | 214 | 43.9 | ||
I4 → 9000–15000 | 42 | 8.6 | ||
I5 → > 15000 | 21 | 4.3 | ||
Knowledge | Person in the household mainly dealing with HSW’s knowledge about how to separate HSW | K1 → does not know the classification of MSW | 51 | 10.5 |
K2 → partly knows the classification of MSW | 197 | 40.5 | ||
K3 → substantially knows the classification of MSW | 166 | 34.1 | ||
K4 → completely knows the classification of MSW | 73 | 15.0 | ||
Target Variables | ||||
Degree of support for the new policy | – | S1 → totally unsupportive | 64 | 13.1 |
S2 → unsupportive | 68 | 14.0 | ||
S3 → neutral | 101 | 20.7 | ||
S4 → supportive | 173 | 35.5 | ||
S5 → advocating (fully supportive) | 81 | 16.6 |
Variable | Description | Expected Symbols |
---|---|---|
I | Monthly income per capita of the household (CNY) | +/− |
H | Population size | + |
E | The number of education years of the highest educated person with an income in a household | + |
A | Age of the person in a household mainly dealing with HSW | + |
G | Gender of the person in a household mainly dealing with HSW | + |
K | Know-how to separate collected HSW | + |
C | Community source-separated facilities and publicity investment (million CNY) | + |
S | Coverage of special supervision in communities (%) | + |
P | Policy dummy variable | + |
R | Percentage of classified HSW at the source (dependent variable) |
Explanatory Variable | Coefficient | Z Value | p Value |
---|---|---|---|
P | 0.49741 *** | ||
I | 0.00019 ** | 2.07 | 0.05 |
H | 0.23116 ** | 2.37 | 0.02 |
E | 0.01178 * | 1.65 | 0.09 |
A | 0.00013 | 0.63 | 0.51 |
G | 0.09456 * | 1.81 | 0.06 |
K | 0.01065 * | 1.72 | 0.07 |
R2 | 0.8347 | ||
Wald chi2 | 753.58 *** | ||
N | 487 × 6 |
Explanatory Variable | Coefficient | Z Value | p Value | Explanatory Variable |
---|---|---|---|---|
I | 0.00011 * | 0.00171 | 1.63 | 0.09 |
H | 0.29372 *** | 0.16784 | 3.28 | 0.01 |
E | 0.01465 | 0.02478 | 1.46 | 0.17 |
A | 0.00097 * | 0.00104 | 1.85 | 0.07 |
G | 0.15323 * | 0.29872 | 1.67 | 0.09 |
K | 0.01096 * | 0.02187 | 1.97 | 0.06 |
C | 1.14708 ** | 2.29372 | 2.41 | 0.03 |
S | 3.56234 *** | 7.15783 | 3.51 | 0.01 |
W2 | 21.4653 *** | 17.8435 | 7.24 | 0 |
W3 | 0.94572 * | 0.51471 | 1.87 | 0.07 |
W4 | 0.19142 | 0.29778 | 1.17 | 0.213 |
Constant | 18.9347 *** | 11.3024 | 3.85 | 0 |
R2 | 0.8031 | |||
Wald chi2 | 576.43 *** | |||
N | 487 × 4 |
© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Chen, F.; Li, X.; Ma, J.; Yang, Y.; Liu, G.-J. An Exploration of the Impacts of Compulsory Source-Separated Policy in Improving Household Solid Waste-Sorting in Pilot Megacities, China: A Case Study of Nanjing. Sustainability 2018, 10, 1327. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10051327
Chen F, Li X, Ma J, Yang Y, Liu G-J. An Exploration of the Impacts of Compulsory Source-Separated Policy in Improving Household Solid Waste-Sorting in Pilot Megacities, China: A Case Study of Nanjing. Sustainability. 2018; 10(5):1327. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10051327
Chicago/Turabian StyleChen, Fu, Xiaoxiao Li, Jing Ma, Yongjun Yang, and Gang-Jun Liu. 2018. "An Exploration of the Impacts of Compulsory Source-Separated Policy in Improving Household Solid Waste-Sorting in Pilot Megacities, China: A Case Study of Nanjing" Sustainability 10, no. 5: 1327. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10051327