Defining the Organization of Municipal Solid Waste Management Based on Production Costs

IF 2.1 Q3 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
M. Beccarello, Giacomo Di Foggia
{"title":"Defining the Organization of Municipal Solid Waste Management Based on Production Costs","authors":"M. Beccarello, Giacomo Di Foggia","doi":"10.3390/urbansci7020034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A long-lasting dilemma on the efficient provision of services of general economic interest has become increasingly important in the waste management industry: competition or monopoly in municipal solid waste management. Previous literature has primarily examined the economics of scale and scope to provide an adequate response. Here, we contribute by investigating subadditivity in municipal solid waste management service costs. Subadditivity is a critical concept used to justify imperfect competition, which encourages natural monopolies where one producer will function more effectively than more firms. To test the hypothesis that a subadditivity in costs in waste management exists, we design a simulation based on empirical data for Milan, Italy. We compared the total production cost of the incumbent firm with the alternative hypothesis built by dividing the city into four areas and assigning each area to a different hypothetical firm. The results suggest that the existence of subadditivity results in 6% lower production costs, primarily stemming from business synergies, lower transactional costs, and optimization of productive resources and facilities. The evidence justifies, ceteris paribus, that the provision by a single firm is preferable to multiple firms in the analysis case. Implications for policies are straightforward. The one-fit rule approach fails to set the best condition for policymakers to create a level playing field transparently and efficiently for industry operators to perform efficiently.","PeriodicalId":75284,"journal":{"name":"Urban science (Basel, Switzerland)","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urban science (Basel, Switzerland)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci7020034","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A long-lasting dilemma on the efficient provision of services of general economic interest has become increasingly important in the waste management industry: competition or monopoly in municipal solid waste management. Previous literature has primarily examined the economics of scale and scope to provide an adequate response. Here, we contribute by investigating subadditivity in municipal solid waste management service costs. Subadditivity is a critical concept used to justify imperfect competition, which encourages natural monopolies where one producer will function more effectively than more firms. To test the hypothesis that a subadditivity in costs in waste management exists, we design a simulation based on empirical data for Milan, Italy. We compared the total production cost of the incumbent firm with the alternative hypothesis built by dividing the city into four areas and assigning each area to a different hypothetical firm. The results suggest that the existence of subadditivity results in 6% lower production costs, primarily stemming from business synergies, lower transactional costs, and optimization of productive resources and facilities. The evidence justifies, ceteris paribus, that the provision by a single firm is preferable to multiple firms in the analysis case. Implications for policies are straightforward. The one-fit rule approach fails to set the best condition for policymakers to create a level playing field transparently and efficiently for industry operators to perform efficiently.
基于生产成本的城市生活垃圾管理组织界定
在废物管理行业,有效提供具有普遍经济利益的服务的长期困境变得越来越重要:城市固体废物管理的竞争或垄断。先前的文献主要研究了规模和范围的经济学,以提供充分的回应。在这里,我们通过调查城市固体废物管理服务成本的次相加性来做出贡献。次可加性是一个用来证明不完全竞争合理性的关键概念,它鼓励自然垄断,一个生产商将比多个公司更有效地运作。为了检验废物管理中存在成本次加性的假设,我们基于意大利米兰的经验数据设计了一个模拟。我们将现有企业的总生产成本与通过将城市划分为四个区域并将每个区域分配给不同的假设企业而建立的替代假设进行了比较。结果表明,次可加性的存在导致生产成本降低6%,主要源于业务协同效应、交易成本降低以及生产资源和设施的优化。在同等情况下,证据证明,在分析案例中,单个公司的规定比多个公司的规定更可取。对政策的影响是直接的。一刀切的规则方法未能为政策制定者创造一个透明、高效的公平竞争环境,让行业运营商高效运作创造最佳条件。
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
4.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
11 weeks
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信