EXPRESS: Consequences of Bottle Bills: How Bottle Deposit Return Schemes Affect Retail Prices and Lead Consumers to Larger Package Sizes

IF 11.5 1区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS
Kristopher O. Keller, Jonne Y. Guyt
{"title":"EXPRESS: Consequences of Bottle Bills: How Bottle Deposit Return Schemes Affect Retail Prices and Lead Consumers to Larger Package Sizes","authors":"Kristopher O. Keller, Jonne Y. Guyt","doi":"10.1177/00222429251347284","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Plastic waste has doubled in the past two decades, and less than 10% of plastic waste is recycled. “Bottle bills” are legislation to combat plastic waste by increasing recycling rates, by adding a per-bottle deposit that gets refunded to consumers who return empty containers. Industry experts are divided over the retail sales and price implications of such measures. To clarify the implications of such legislation, the current study uses a synthetic difference-in-differences approach to investigate how New York’s 2009 law, targeting pure bottled water in containers < 128 fl. oz., affected consumers and retailers in terms of whether prices of bottled beverages changed and whether the bottle bill affected sales of bottled beverages. The study also identifies three mechanisms that can drive such effects. The results reveal that retailers increased prices of items covered by the bottle bill by 4% while keeping prices of other items, outside the bottle bill’s scope, constant. Volume sales in the water category decreased by 6%. This study finds substantial differences in these effects across package sizes and provides suggestive evidence that consumers’ ideological aversion and retailers’ additional operational effort and holding costs are related to these sales and price changes.","PeriodicalId":16152,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Marketing","volume":"136 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":11.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Marketing","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00222429251347284","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Plastic waste has doubled in the past two decades, and less than 10% of plastic waste is recycled. “Bottle bills” are legislation to combat plastic waste by increasing recycling rates, by adding a per-bottle deposit that gets refunded to consumers who return empty containers. Industry experts are divided over the retail sales and price implications of such measures. To clarify the implications of such legislation, the current study uses a synthetic difference-in-differences approach to investigate how New York’s 2009 law, targeting pure bottled water in containers < 128 fl. oz., affected consumers and retailers in terms of whether prices of bottled beverages changed and whether the bottle bill affected sales of bottled beverages. The study also identifies three mechanisms that can drive such effects. The results reveal that retailers increased prices of items covered by the bottle bill by 4% while keeping prices of other items, outside the bottle bill’s scope, constant. Volume sales in the water category decreased by 6%. This study finds substantial differences in these effects across package sizes and provides suggestive evidence that consumers’ ideological aversion and retailers’ additional operational effort and holding costs are related to these sales and price changes.
快递:瓶子账单的后果:瓶子押金返还计划如何影响零售价格并导致消费者购买更大的包装尺寸
在过去的二十年里,塑料垃圾翻了一番,而只有不到10%的塑料垃圾被回收利用。“瓶子法案”是通过提高回收率来打击塑料垃圾的立法,通过增加每个瓶子的押金,退还给返回空容器的消费者。业内专家对此类措施对零售销售和价格的影响存在分歧。为了澄清这种立法的含义,目前的研究使用了一种综合的差异中的差异方法来调查纽约2009年的法律是如何针对容器中的纯瓶装水的。128液体盎司,影响消费者和零售商的瓶装饮料的价格是否发生变化,瓶子账单是否影响瓶装饮料的销售。该研究还确定了三种驱动这种效应的机制。结果显示,零售商将瓶子账单所涵盖的商品的价格提高了4%,而将瓶子账单范围之外的其他商品的价格保持不变。水类产品的销量下降了6%。本研究发现,这些影响在不同包装尺寸之间存在实质性差异,并提供了暗示性证据,表明消费者的意识形态厌恶、零售商的额外运营努力和持有成本与这些销售和价格变化有关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
24.10
自引率
5.40%
发文量
49
期刊介绍: Founded in 1936,the Journal of Marketing (JM) serves as a premier outlet for substantive research in marketing. JM is dedicated to developing and disseminating knowledge about real-world marketing questions, catering to scholars, educators, managers, policy makers, consumers, and other global societal stakeholders. Over the years,JM has played a crucial role in shaping the content and boundaries of the marketing discipline.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信