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...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Production and operations management 2011-11, Vol.20 (6), p.805-823
Hauptverfasser: Toyasaki, Fuminori, Boyacι, Tamer, Verter, Vedat
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 &amp; 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