Incentives vs. Potential Incentives

For residential incentives, the best that I've seen is RECYCLE BANK, check it out at www.recyclebank.com I understand it gives residents coupons from area businesses as payment for the weight of the recycables they place at the curb. In a volume-based residential collection program, the cost of recycling is usually covered under property taxes or the fee for garbage service. The fee for garbage is based on the amount of garbage you place at your curb (i.e. a tag on one bag of garbage may be $2 - If you create 3 bags of material, but two of the bags are recyclables that you put in recycling bins, you save $4 each week). The volume-based programs typically have higher recycling participation rates. A few years back, in a business setting, we gave employees a pizza party using the revenue from the recycling program - the company got paid for their paper and cans at the time. We also gave all employees a mug to use in the cafeteria and whenever they used it, they got a discount on coffee or soda pop. This seemed to encourage most of the employees to recycle and use a refillable beverage container.

Marta Keane,

Recycling Program Specialist
Will County Land Use 
Waste Services
58 E. Clinton Street, Suite 500
Joliet, IL 60432
815-774-4343
[email protected]

Hello Derrick,

Have a look at Recycle Bank. www.recyclebank.com They started in Philadelphia, and are growing quickly. Credits towards Starbucks, etc. Sort of an "Airmiles for Recycling" scheme.

Norm Ruttan

iWasteNot Systems
www.iwastenotsystems.com
1-800-630-7864

Derrick,

You might find the following article helpful: Diamond, W.D. & Loewy, B.Z. (1991). Effects of Probabilistic Rewards on Recycling Attitudes and Behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 21(19) 1590-1607. The article indicated that subjects rewarded with lottery tickets recycled glass and newspaper more frequently than subjects receiving other individual or group rewards. If there is an academic library located near you, they are likely to have this journal.

Regards,
Jan

Jan Aceti
Aceti Associates
40 Stanton Road
Brookline, MA 02445-6839
Ph: 781-646-4593
Cell: 781-510-1215
Fax: 914-931-2038
[email protected]
www.acetiassociates.com

Hi Folks,

I wonder if providing incentives for recycling is addressing the end goal of reducing consumption and overall waste generation (including recyclables). Though certainly better than landfilling, recycling is energy intensive and at I would argue our primary goal should really be to reduce the amount of stuff that we churn through society. Do incentives for recycling encourage consumption, so long as it's of recyclables? Has anyone compared this type of positive re-inforcement vs. a more negative reinforcement for waste generation. For example charging people for the waste that must be collected at differential rates for landfill destined materials and recyclables (ex. Recyclables could be free but landfill wastes have a fee). I suppose the worry would be people resorting to illegal dumping if the rates were too high. I'd be interested in the lists collective wisdom on these points.

Cheers,
Ramsey Hart MSc

Environmental Consulting
Baie Verte, NB

Hi Rosemary,

I wonder if providing incentives for recycling is addressing the end goal of reducing consumption and overall waste generation (including recyclables). Though certainly better than landfilling, recycling is energy intensive and at I would argue our primary goal should really be to reduce the amount of stuff that we churn through society. The Gospel According to the Environment says it succinctly: "Thus abideth Reduce, Re-use, Re-cycle, these three, but the greatest of these is Reduce." The idea that Re-cycling is the answer to environmental prayer is analogous to the fat adult who believes that slimming products will make one get slim, so eats ever such a lot in order to get slim quickly. Do incentives for recycling encourage consumption, so long as it's of recyclables? Certainly they can do. George Monbiot had some punchy things to say about the bad allures of the "green cult" in an affluent, spend-hungry society. Has anyone compared this type of positive re-inforcement vs. a more negative reinforcement for waste generation. For example charging people for the waste that must be collected at differential rates for landfill destined materials and recyclables (ex. Recyclables could be free but landfill wastes have a fee). I suppose the worry would be people resorting to illegal dumping if the rates were too high. I spent my childhood on a farm where there were no garbage collections, so one grew up being very economical about what had to be thrown away. While the same practices are obviously not available to town-dwellers, it's surprising how inventive necessity can make one. An interesting "necessity" arises when the garbage-collectors go on strike. Perhaps they should do so more often; we make it too easy to throw things away. Society has become so proficient at clearing up and taking care of our discards, that we grow up expecting to behave just as we want and that someone else (e.g. Mother Earth) will take care of what we don't want to be bothered with. In the same vein, by having lights that switch themselves off we teach people to forget about taking care of their own lighting responsibilities. At the same time, the *producers* of what ends up as waste do need to come into the picture. However hard one tries, it can be difficult (unless one spends oodles of time and petrol travelling to certain stores) to find goods that have not been double-wrapped or boxed unnecessarily. I honestly believe that cbsm needs to tackle this issue from both ends if we are to create a sustainable reduction in waste for land-fills. It would be a good thing to reduce the amount generated for recyling too, since that is an industry of power-expenditure *created* by greening, if ever there was one.

Elizabeth Griffin
(Victoria, Canada)

PS. On the subject of re-cycling, please would list-writers NOT attach a their messages to a long string of others that have accumulated? It creates unnecessary duplications, and is tedious to delete! Thank you.

Derrick,

be careful when considering incentives, especially if they're extrinsically motivated. If the reward scheme can not be continued or sustained over time, participation rates will decline rapidly once it is gone. For more on this, I recommend you read Deci & Ryan's work on Self Determination Theory - they make clear distinctions between intrinsic and extrinsic reward schemes...let me know if you want more clarification or article sources.

Mr. Kelly G. Goyer

Waste Prevention Coordinator
University of Saskatchewan 
Facilities Mgmt. Division
110 Maintenance Road
Saskatoon, Sk. S7N 5C5 CANADA
Ph. (306) 966-1282

The definitive work on the topic of incentives and the harm they do is, in my opinion, Punished by Rewards by Alfie Kohn, published in 1993. See this for reviews, positive and negative: http://www.amazon.com/review/product/0618001816/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt/105 -8218785-2080462?%5Fencoding=UTF8&showViewpoints=1

Ranganath Nayak

Hi Derrick

Has anyone compared this type of positive re-inforcement vs. a more negative reinforcement for waste generation. I suppose the worry would be people resorting to illegal dumping if the rates were too high. I live in a town that has not collected rubbish since 1998, everybody having to bring their own rubbish to the landfill. This did cause some interest initially and anecdotally illegal dumping went up, (there had always been some illegal dumping however, but no studies were done prior or after waste collection was stopped to assess if there was an increase). To go along with this we charge a fee for waste disposal which is set to increase to $225 (NZ$) per tonne shortly. We do however have a free recycling collection from each house and free recycling disposal at the resource recovery centre. It has been very successful and our diversion of material from the landfill has increased to 56%, a rate we have been static at for several years now, and it has extended the life of the landfill by 11 years in the process. The driver was economic - the landfill had 4 years life left in 1998 and we could not afford to build a new one so to prevent this the community was convinced it was either recycle or their local taxes would have to increase dramatically. Now I'm not suggest that everywhere should stop collecting rubbish, we have a permanent population of only 3500! But it does demonstrate incentives do work. I wonder if providing incentives for recycling is addressing the end goal of reducing consumption and overall waste generation (including recyclables). Though certainly better than landfilling, recycling is energy intensive and at I would argue our primary goal should really be to reduce the amount of stuff that we churn through society. Like Elizabeth says the answer lies in the waste management hierarchy. Reduce, reuse, recycling and it is in that order for a reason. Kaikoura has focussed on recycling, turning the hierarchy upside down in the process. This has not stopped the material coming through the gate - our rate of recycling for example increase by 17% since 2000, but there was also a 4% increase in rubbish to landfill in the same period! I'm not suggesting that what Kaikoura has achieved is not valuable but if we are to achieve our goal of zero waste we are not going to do it by trying to recycle more! We need to go back up waste stream and address the question of reduce and reuse first and only if we can find no other use take it to the resource recovery centre. This does also come down to industry to look at their practises and how they can reduce. Interface Inc is a great example of a company doing just that. Government also needs to assist with appropriate regulations, and if you want to see a good example look at Austria. These aren't the only ones though there are other. So yes look at incentives to encourage recycling and waste reduction, but I think we also need to start swimming back up stream and looking at how we can reduce and reduce first.

Ian Challenger,

General Manager,
Innovative Waste Kaikoura
PO Box 107
Kaikoura
Ph 03 319 7148
Fax 03 319 7149
Mobile 0274 600 255

I am unable to cite a specific study but I know years ago that their was a survey asking people who they recycle their used oil if they were various sums up to several dollars for a gallon of used oil. Some of those surveyed said this would increase their participation. However, convenience is a greater incentive. If it is easy then folk will participate. Curbside used oil collection in California and other parts of the US proves this point. Rarely do you have any spills and existing trucks can easily pick-up these old crankcase drainings in plastic containers. Even some communities would provide used oil plastic containers to recycle their oil in. Also, major auto stores find that DIYers who bring back their used oil result in increased business around $20 per customer. I just asked my on Advance Auto in Woodstock, Virginia and they get at 15-20 consumer returns of used oil per month. The findings are clear for DIY used oil recycling collection programs. Increased public education and collection points can stimulate increased used oil recycling. Local governments rely on the volunteer efforts of private sector used oil collection as an invaluable public service to complement their municipal recycling programs. The draining and recycling of antifreeze, used oil and filters must be maintained. Unless there are numerous options, more incentives and increased awareness, recycling of used oil will not improve. Below is paper I gave last March on used oil recycling in the US at International Recycling Conference that gives the latest research and info. http://www.robarner.com/resource.html

Kindest regards,
Rob Arner

We've found a monetary incentive is not really necessary to motivate self-oil changers to recycle their used oil. A number of successful methods that our grantees have used to increase used oil recycling are summarized at http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/HHW/Grants/Profiles/.

The majority of the 2,700 certified used oil collection centers in CA are auto parts stores. All certified centers are required to prominently post "Recycle Used Oil Here" signs. A cost/benefit study we conducted a few years ago indicated that customers who bring their used oil to auto parts stores for recycling spend an average of $60 per visit. Although CA certified used oil collection centers are supposed to offer 16 cents per gallon of used oil brought in by customers, most decline it. The most effective local government used oil collection programs in CA feature: convenient oil collection sites (one per 10,000 residents); annual visits by grantee staff to used oil collection centers; ongoing public used oil recycling outreach/education (including Point-of-Purchase materials displayed at auto-related businesses); and targeted outreach to intensive self-oil changer audiences such as boaters, growers, immigrants, high school students and auto enthusiasts. Many of our grantees also periodically offer free used oil recycling incentives to self-oil changers such as oil collection containers, rags and funnels, quarts of oil, oil filters and oil absorbent bilge pads (for boaters only).