Curbside

14,000,000 Leading Edge Experts on the ideXlab platform

Scan Science and Technology

Contact Leading Edge Experts & Companies

Scan Science and Technology

Contact Leading Edge Experts & Companies

The Experts below are selected from a list of 3345 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Arthur J. Caplan - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Curbside recycling: Waste resource or waste of resources?
    Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 2006
    Co-Authors: David Aadland, Arthur J. Caplan
    Abstract:

    In this paper, we address the often contentious debate over state and local recycling policy by carefully estimating the social net benefit of Curbside recycling. Benefits are estimated using household survey data from over 4,000 households across 40 western U.S. cities. We calibrate household willingnesstopay for hypothetical bias using an innovative experimental design that contrasts stated and revealed preferences. Cost estimates are compiled from previous studies by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Institute for Local Self Reliance, and from indepth interviews with recycling coordinators in our sampled cities. Across our sample of cities, we find that the estimated mean social net benefit of Curbside recycling is almost exactly zero. On a citybycity basis, however, our social netbenefit analysis often makes clear predictions about whether a Curbside recycling program is an efficient use of resources. Surprisingly, several Curbside recycling programs in our sample appear to be inefficient. © 2006 by the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management.

  • Curbside Recycling: Waste Resource Or Waste Of Resources?
    2004
    Co-Authors: David Aadland, Arthur J. Caplan
    Abstract:

    In this paper, we estimate the social net benefits of Curbside recycling. Benefits are estimated using survey data on household willingness to pay (WTP) from over 4,000 households across 40 western U.S. cities. We calibrate WTP for hypothetical bias using an experimental design that contrasts stated and revealed preferences. Cost estimates are compiled from previous studies by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the Institute for Local Self Reliance, as well as from in-depth interviews with recycling coordinators in our sampled cities. Remarkably, we find that the estimated mean social net benefit of Curbside recycling is almost exactly zero. Therefore, the decision of whether to implement or maintain a Curbside recycling program (CRP) must be done on a city-by-city basis.

  • Willingness to Pay for Curbside Recycling with Detection and Mitigation of Hypothetical Bias
    American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 2003
    Co-Authors: David Aadland, Arthur J. Caplan
    Abstract:

    In this article, we estimate willingness to pay for Curbside recycling. Using a unique data set, we also test for and detect significant hypothetical bias using stated- and revealed-preference data. A short-scripted “cheap-talk” statement is used to mitigate the bias and provide more efficient estimates of the welfare impacts of Curbside recycling programs. Copyright 2003, Oxford University Press.

  • Detection and mitigation of hypothetical bias in contingent valuation with an application to Curbside recycling
    2001
    Co-Authors: David Aadland, Arthur J. Caplan
    Abstract:

    In this paper, we use a unique Curbside-recycling data set to test the effectiveness of “cheap talk” and “preference uncertainty” in mitigating hypothetical bias in contingent valuation. The sample includes two types of ouseholds—those located in communities with Curbside recycling programs (mandatory or voluntary) and those in communities without Curbside recycling. Using stated and revealed preference data, detect significant hypothetical bias. Cheap talk and preference-uncertainty controls are partially effective in mitigating the bias.

  • Household Valuation of Curbside Recycling
    Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 1999
    Co-Authors: David Aadland, Arthur J. Caplan
    Abstract:

    This paper looks at the willingness to pay for, and participate in, a Curbside recycling programme based on a survey of 401 residents in Ogden, Utah. Modifying the Cameron & James (1987) econometric model to fit ordered-interval data, we estimate that the mean willingness to pay for Curbside recycling is US $2.05 per month, and that 72% of the residents would willingly participate in such a programme. Furthermore, females, young people, college-educated, those currently recycling without monetary reward, those regarding recycling as beneficial to the community and nation, and those with relatively high incomes are willing to pay the most for Curbside recycling.

Richard Arnott - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Downtown Curbside parking capacity
    Journal of Urban Economics, 2015
    Co-Authors: Richard Arnott, Eren Inci, John Rowse
    Abstract:

    Current debates on downtown parking policy have been concentrating on downtown parking pricing, while overlooking downtown parking capacity. This paper focuses on how much Curbside to allocate to parking when the private sector provides garage parking. In the first-best optimum, no cruising for parking occurs, and only Curbside parking is provided when demand is low relative to street capacity, both Curbside parking and garage parking are provided when demand in intermediate, and only garage parking is provided when demand is high. In the second-best optimum where Curbside parking is underpriced, cruising for parking occurs only when both Curbside and garage parking are both present. As the fee differential between garage and Curbside parking increases, cruising for parking becomes more severe, and the range of demand levels over which Curbside and garage parking are both present shrinks and eventually disappears.

  • On the optimal target Curbside parking occupancy rate
    Economics of Transportation, 2014
    Co-Authors: Richard Arnott
    Abstract:

    Donald Shoup, following Vickrey, has long advocated cashing out free and underpriced parking. How should this be implemented for Curbside parking in practice, considering the stochasticity of Curbside parking vacancies? Shoup has proposed adjusting meter rates such that, for each block and time period, a target (average) Curbside parking occupancy rate of 85% is achieved. This paper develops a simple structural model of stochastic steady-state Curbside parking in an isotropic space, solving for the surplus-maximizing occupancy rate and the corresponding meter rate. By increasing Curbside occupancy, a Curbside parker imposes a Curbside parking externality. The optimal meter rate internalizes this externality. The central comparative static result is that, ceteris paribus, the optimal occupancy and meter rates are higher, the higher is demand relative to Curbside parking capacity. This suggests that, in practice, the occupancy rate should be higher in more trafficked locations and at busier times of the day.

  • Downtown Curbside Parking Capacity
    2013
    Co-Authors: Richard Arnott, Eren Inci, John Rowse
    Abstract:

    In downtown areas, what proportion of Curbside should be allocated to parking? In contrast to most previous work on the economics of parking, this paper focuses on optimal Curbside parking capacity in both first-best (where pricing is efficient) and second-best (where pricing is inefficient) environments. It first considers the situation where there is only Curbside parking, and then the situation where there may be both Curbside and private garage parking. For each situation, it examines the short run in which Curbside parking capacity is fixed and the long run in which it is a policy variable.

  • On the Optimal Target Curbside Parking Occupancy Rate
    2013
    Co-Authors: Richard Arnott
    Abstract:

    For many years, Donald Shoup has been advocating cashing out free and underpriced Curbside parking. How should this be implemented in practice, taking into account the stochasticity of Curbside parking vacancies? Shoup has proposed setting neighborhood/period of the day-specific meter rates such that a common target (average) Curbside parking occupancy rate is achieved. Taking as given how the average occupancy rate affects expected cruising-for-parking time and expected walking time (between parking space and destination), this paper investigates the optimal (surplus-maximizing) target Curbside parking occupancy rate. The principal result is that the rate should be higher, the higher is the level of demand.

  • Curbside Parking Time Limits
    2009
    Co-Authors: Richard Arnott, John Rowse
    Abstract:

    This paper investigates the economics of Curbside parking time limits. It argues that Curbside parking time limits provide a way to subsidize short-term parking without generating cruising for parking. The paper develops the argument in the context of the integrated model of downtown parking and traffic congestion presented in Arnott and Rowse (2009), extended to incorporate heterogeneity in value of time and parking duration.

David Aadland - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Curbside recycling: Waste resource or waste of resources?
    Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 2006
    Co-Authors: David Aadland, Arthur J. Caplan
    Abstract:

    In this paper, we address the often contentious debate over state and local recycling policy by carefully estimating the social net benefit of Curbside recycling. Benefits are estimated using household survey data from over 4,000 households across 40 western U.S. cities. We calibrate household willingnesstopay for hypothetical bias using an innovative experimental design that contrasts stated and revealed preferences. Cost estimates are compiled from previous studies by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Institute for Local Self Reliance, and from indepth interviews with recycling coordinators in our sampled cities. Across our sample of cities, we find that the estimated mean social net benefit of Curbside recycling is almost exactly zero. On a citybycity basis, however, our social netbenefit analysis often makes clear predictions about whether a Curbside recycling program is an efficient use of resources. Surprisingly, several Curbside recycling programs in our sample appear to be inefficient. © 2006 by the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management.

  • Curbside Recycling: Waste Resource Or Waste Of Resources?
    2004
    Co-Authors: David Aadland, Arthur J. Caplan
    Abstract:

    In this paper, we estimate the social net benefits of Curbside recycling. Benefits are estimated using survey data on household willingness to pay (WTP) from over 4,000 households across 40 western U.S. cities. We calibrate WTP for hypothetical bias using an experimental design that contrasts stated and revealed preferences. Cost estimates are compiled from previous studies by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the Institute for Local Self Reliance, as well as from in-depth interviews with recycling coordinators in our sampled cities. Remarkably, we find that the estimated mean social net benefit of Curbside recycling is almost exactly zero. Therefore, the decision of whether to implement or maintain a Curbside recycling program (CRP) must be done on a city-by-city basis.

  • Willingness to Pay for Curbside Recycling with Detection and Mitigation of Hypothetical Bias
    American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 2003
    Co-Authors: David Aadland, Arthur J. Caplan
    Abstract:

    In this article, we estimate willingness to pay for Curbside recycling. Using a unique data set, we also test for and detect significant hypothetical bias using stated- and revealed-preference data. A short-scripted “cheap-talk” statement is used to mitigate the bias and provide more efficient estimates of the welfare impacts of Curbside recycling programs. Copyright 2003, Oxford University Press.

  • Detection and mitigation of hypothetical bias in contingent valuation with an application to Curbside recycling
    2001
    Co-Authors: David Aadland, Arthur J. Caplan
    Abstract:

    In this paper, we use a unique Curbside-recycling data set to test the effectiveness of “cheap talk” and “preference uncertainty” in mitigating hypothetical bias in contingent valuation. The sample includes two types of ouseholds—those located in communities with Curbside recycling programs (mandatory or voluntary) and those in communities without Curbside recycling. Using stated and revealed preference data, detect significant hypothetical bias. Cheap talk and preference-uncertainty controls are partially effective in mitigating the bias.

  • Household Valuation of Curbside Recycling
    Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 1999
    Co-Authors: David Aadland, Arthur J. Caplan
    Abstract:

    This paper looks at the willingness to pay for, and participate in, a Curbside recycling programme based on a survey of 401 residents in Ogden, Utah. Modifying the Cameron & James (1987) econometric model to fit ordered-interval data, we estimate that the mean willingness to pay for Curbside recycling is US $2.05 per month, and that 72% of the residents would willingly participate in such a programme. Furthermore, females, young people, college-educated, those currently recycling without monetary reward, those regarding recycling as beneficial to the community and nation, and those with relatively high incomes are willing to pay the most for Curbside recycling.

Michelle Eller - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

Jim Robinson - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

Curbside - 15 days free trial to Access Experts & Abstracts