An Analysis of Monopolistic and Competitive Take-Back Schemes for WEEE Recycling
We study two prevailing types of take‐back schemes for electrical and electronic equipment waste recycling: monopolistic and competitive. We address key market and operating factors that make one scheme preferable to the other from the viewpoints of recyclers, manufacturers, and consumers. To this e...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Production and operations management 2011-11, Vol.20 (6), p.805-823 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 823 |
---|---|
container_issue | 6 |
container_start_page | 805 |
container_title | Production and operations management |
container_volume | 20 |
creator | Toyasaki, Fuminori Boyacι, Tamer Verter, Vedat |
description | We study two prevailing types of take‐back schemes for electrical and electronic equipment waste recycling: monopolistic and competitive. We address key market and operating factors that make one scheme preferable to the other from the viewpoints of recyclers, manufacturers, and consumers. To this end, we model competitive decision making in both take‐back schemes as two‐stage sequential games between competing manufacturers and recyclers. Deriving and computing equilibria, we find that the competitive take‐back scheme often accomplishes a win–win situation, that is, lower product prices, and higher recycler and manufacturer profits. Exceptionally, recyclers prefer the monopolistic scheme when the substitutability level between the manufacturers' original products is high or economies of scale in recycling are very strong. We show that consolidation of the recycling industry could benefit all stakeholders when the economies of scale in recycling are strong, provided that manufacturer's products are not highly substitutable. Higher collection rates also render recycler consolidation desirable for all stakeholders. We also identify a potential free rider problem in the monopolistic scheme when recyclers differ in operational efficiency, and propose mechanisms to eliminate the discrepancy. We show that our results and insights are robust to the degree of competition within the recycling industry. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1111/j.1937-5956.2010.01207.x |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_906546420</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1111_j.1937-5956.2010.01207.x</sage_id><sourcerecordid>2522813681</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4567-788cd3fabae1dae587535cd4c82de0d4652fee621167f2d0cd45389f939455b83</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkV1PwjAUhhejiYj-h8b7YT_WdbsxQYJoMj4iGC6b0p3hYKy4gsK_t3MGb-nNOek573t6nnoeIrhD3HlYdUjMhM9jHnYodreYUCw6hwuvdSpcuhzz2CeBiK69G2tXGGPBKG55k26JuqUqjja3yGRoaEqzNUVud7lGqkxRz2y2sMt3-RegmVqD_6T0Gk31B2zAosxUaN7v99Eb6KMu8nJ5611lqrBw9xfb3vtzf9Z78ZPx4LXXTXwd8FD4Iop0yjK1UEBSBTwSnHGdBjqiKeA0CDnNAEJKSCgymmJX4iyKs5jFAeeLiLW9-8Z3W5nPPdidXJl95TaxMsYhD8KAYtcUNU26MtZWkMltlW9UdZQEyxqfXMmakqwpyRqf_MUnD0762Ei_8wKOZ-vkZDyc1qkz4I2BVUv4f9wZg_1G5_4ADqfBqlrLUDDB5Xw0kAkdBskI9yRnPyt7lBU</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>906546420</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>An Analysis of Monopolistic and Competitive Take-Back Schemes for WEEE Recycling</title><source>SAGE Publications</source><source>Wiley Journals</source><source>Business Source Complete</source><creator>Toyasaki, Fuminori ; Boyacι, Tamer ; Verter, Vedat</creator><creatorcontrib>Toyasaki, Fuminori ; Boyacι, Tamer ; Verter, Vedat</creatorcontrib><description>We study two prevailing types of take‐back schemes for electrical and electronic equipment waste recycling: monopolistic and competitive. We address key market and operating factors that make one scheme preferable to the other from the viewpoints of recyclers, manufacturers, and consumers. To this end, we model competitive decision making in both take‐back schemes as two‐stage sequential games between competing manufacturers and recyclers. Deriving and computing equilibria, we find that the competitive take‐back scheme often accomplishes a win–win situation, that is, lower product prices, and higher recycler and manufacturer profits. Exceptionally, recyclers prefer the monopolistic scheme when the substitutability level between the manufacturers' original products is high or economies of scale in recycling are very strong. We show that consolidation of the recycling industry could benefit all stakeholders when the economies of scale in recycling are strong, provided that manufacturer's products are not highly substitutable. Higher collection rates also render recycler consolidation desirable for all stakeholders. We also identify a potential free rider problem in the monopolistic scheme when recyclers differ in operational efficiency, and propose mechanisms to eliminate the discrepancy. We show that our results and insights are robust to the degree of competition within the recycling industry.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1059-1478</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1937-5956</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/j.1937-5956.2010.01207.x</identifier><identifier>CODEN: POMAEN</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Malden, USA: Blackwell Publishing Inc</publisher><subject>Comparative analysis ; Competition ; Economies of scale ; Efficiency ; Electronic waste ; end-of-life products ; Equilibrium ; Legislation ; Monopolies ; Recycling ; Studies ; Supply chains ; take-back schemes ; WEEE</subject><ispartof>Production and operations management, 2011-11, Vol.20 (6), p.805-823</ispartof><rights>2011 The Authors</rights><rights>2010 Production and Operations Management Society</rights><rights>Copyright Blackwell Publishers Inc. Nov/Dec 2011</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4567-788cd3fabae1dae587535cd4c82de0d4652fee621167f2d0cd45389f939455b83</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4567-788cd3fabae1dae587535cd4c82de0d4652fee621167f2d0cd45389f939455b83</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1937-5956.2010.01207.x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1111/j.1937-5956.2010.01207.x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1416,21818,27923,27924,43620,43621,45573,45574</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Toyasaki, Fuminori</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boyacι, Tamer</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Verter, Vedat</creatorcontrib><title>An Analysis of Monopolistic and Competitive Take-Back Schemes for WEEE Recycling</title><title>Production and operations management</title><description>We study two prevailing types of take‐back schemes for electrical and electronic equipment waste recycling: monopolistic and competitive. We address key market and operating factors that make one scheme preferable to the other from the viewpoints of recyclers, manufacturers, and consumers. To this end, we model competitive decision making in both take‐back schemes as two‐stage sequential games between competing manufacturers and recyclers. Deriving and computing equilibria, we find that the competitive take‐back scheme often accomplishes a win–win situation, that is, lower product prices, and higher recycler and manufacturer profits. Exceptionally, recyclers prefer the monopolistic scheme when the substitutability level between the manufacturers' original products is high or economies of scale in recycling are very strong. We show that consolidation of the recycling industry could benefit all stakeholders when the economies of scale in recycling are strong, provided that manufacturer's products are not highly substitutable. Higher collection rates also render recycler consolidation desirable for all stakeholders. We also identify a potential free rider problem in the monopolistic scheme when recyclers differ in operational efficiency, and propose mechanisms to eliminate the discrepancy. We show that our results and insights are robust to the degree of competition within the recycling industry.</description><subject>Comparative analysis</subject><subject>Competition</subject><subject>Economies of scale</subject><subject>Efficiency</subject><subject>Electronic waste</subject><subject>end-of-life products</subject><subject>Equilibrium</subject><subject>Legislation</subject><subject>Monopolies</subject><subject>Recycling</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Supply chains</subject><subject>take-back schemes</subject><subject>WEEE</subject><issn>1059-1478</issn><issn>1937-5956</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2011</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkV1PwjAUhhejiYj-h8b7YT_WdbsxQYJoMj4iGC6b0p3hYKy4gsK_t3MGb-nNOek573t6nnoeIrhD3HlYdUjMhM9jHnYodreYUCw6hwuvdSpcuhzz2CeBiK69G2tXGGPBKG55k26JuqUqjja3yGRoaEqzNUVud7lGqkxRz2y2sMt3-RegmVqD_6T0Gk31B2zAosxUaN7v99Eb6KMu8nJ5611lqrBw9xfb3vtzf9Z78ZPx4LXXTXwd8FD4Iop0yjK1UEBSBTwSnHGdBjqiKeA0CDnNAEJKSCgymmJX4iyKs5jFAeeLiLW9-8Z3W5nPPdidXJl95TaxMsYhD8KAYtcUNU26MtZWkMltlW9UdZQEyxqfXMmakqwpyRqf_MUnD0762Ei_8wKOZ-vkZDyc1qkz4I2BVUv4f9wZg_1G5_4ADqfBqlrLUDDB5Xw0kAkdBskI9yRnPyt7lBU</recordid><startdate>201111</startdate><enddate>201111</enddate><creator>Toyasaki, Fuminori</creator><creator>Boyacι, Tamer</creator><creator>Verter, Vedat</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Inc</general><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>Blackwell Publishers Inc</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0U~</scope><scope>1-H</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>L.0</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201111</creationdate><title>An Analysis of Monopolistic and Competitive Take-Back Schemes for WEEE Recycling</title><author>Toyasaki, Fuminori ; Boyacι, Tamer ; Verter, Vedat</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4567-788cd3fabae1dae587535cd4c82de0d4652fee621167f2d0cd45389f939455b83</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2011</creationdate><topic>Comparative analysis</topic><topic>Competition</topic><topic>Economies of scale</topic><topic>Efficiency</topic><topic>Electronic waste</topic><topic>end-of-life products</topic><topic>Equilibrium</topic><topic>Legislation</topic><topic>Monopolies</topic><topic>Recycling</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Supply chains</topic><topic>take-back schemes</topic><topic>WEEE</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Toyasaki, Fuminori</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boyacι, Tamer</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Verter, Vedat</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Global News & ABI/Inform Professional</collection><collection>Trade PRO</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Standard</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>One Business (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><jtitle>Production and operations management</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Toyasaki, Fuminori</au><au>Boyacι, Tamer</au><au>Verter, Vedat</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>An Analysis of Monopolistic and Competitive Take-Back Schemes for WEEE Recycling</atitle><jtitle>Production and operations management</jtitle><date>2011-11</date><risdate>2011</risdate><volume>20</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>805</spage><epage>823</epage><pages>805-823</pages><issn>1059-1478</issn><eissn>1937-5956</eissn><coden>POMAEN</coden><abstract>We study two prevailing types of take‐back schemes for electrical and electronic equipment waste recycling: monopolistic and competitive. We address key market and operating factors that make one scheme preferable to the other from the viewpoints of recyclers, manufacturers, and consumers. To this end, we model competitive decision making in both take‐back schemes as two‐stage sequential games between competing manufacturers and recyclers. Deriving and computing equilibria, we find that the competitive take‐back scheme often accomplishes a win–win situation, that is, lower product prices, and higher recycler and manufacturer profits. Exceptionally, recyclers prefer the monopolistic scheme when the substitutability level between the manufacturers' original products is high or economies of scale in recycling are very strong. We show that consolidation of the recycling industry could benefit all stakeholders when the economies of scale in recycling are strong, provided that manufacturer's products are not highly substitutable. Higher collection rates also render recycler consolidation desirable for all stakeholders. We also identify a potential free rider problem in the monopolistic scheme when recyclers differ in operational efficiency, and propose mechanisms to eliminate the discrepancy. We show that our results and insights are robust to the degree of competition within the recycling industry.</abstract><cop>Malden, USA</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Inc</pub><doi>10.1111/j.1937-5956.2010.01207.x</doi><tpages>19</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1059-1478 |
ispartof | Production and operations management, 2011-11, Vol.20 (6), p.805-823 |
issn | 1059-1478 1937-5956 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_906546420 |
source | SAGE Publications; Wiley Journals; Business Source Complete |
subjects | Comparative analysis Competition Economies of scale Efficiency Electronic waste end-of-life products Equilibrium Legislation Monopolies Recycling Studies Supply chains take-back schemes WEEE |
title | An Analysis of Monopolistic and Competitive Take-Back Schemes for WEEE Recycling |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-10T18%3A57%3A41IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=An%20Analysis%20of%20Monopolistic%20and%20Competitive%20Take-Back%20Schemes%20for%20WEEE%20Recycling&rft.jtitle=Production%20and%20operations%20management&rft.au=Toyasaki,%20Fuminori&rft.date=2011-11&rft.volume=20&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=805&rft.epage=823&rft.pages=805-823&rft.issn=1059-1478&rft.eissn=1937-5956&rft.coden=POMAEN&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/j.1937-5956.2010.01207.x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2522813681%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=906546420&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_sage_id=10.1111_j.1937-5956.2010.01207.x&rfr_iscdi=true |