Waste management in the Spanish municipalitiesis commitment to Local Agenda 21 more than good intentions?

  1. José Luis Navarro Espigares 1
  2. José Aureliano Martín Segura 1
  3. César Pérez López 2
  4. Guillermo Maraver Tarifa 1
  1. 1 Universidad de Granada
    info
    Universidad de Granada

    Granada, España

    ROR https://ror.org/04njjy449

    Geographic location of the organization Universidad de Granada
  2. 2 Universidad Complutense de Madrid
    info
    Universidad Complutense de Madrid

    Madrid, España

    ROR https://ror.org/02p0gd045

    Geographic location of the organization Universidad Complutense de Madrid
Journal:
Investigaciones Regionales = Journal of Regional Research

ISSN: 1695-7253,  2340-2717

Year of publication: 2018

Issue: 40

Pages: 35-56

Type: Article

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

More publications in: Investigaciones Regionales = Journal of Regional Research

Sustainable development goals

info

SDG classification obtained using Aurora SDG artificial intelligence model.

Abstract

Spain is one of the European countries with more municipalities adhering to the Local Agenda 21 (LA21). Environmental spending exerts a great influence on implementing LA21. But some authors raise doubts about the firm commitment of local governments to LA21 objectives. Thus, the main objective of this paper is to verify whether political commitment is backed up with action towards meeting the objectives of sustainable development by means of budgetary support for waste management policies. To accomplish this, we applied the Difference in Differences technique for the period 2002-2012 in the Spanish municipalities. Our initial results confirmed the original hypotheses and showed that local governments that adhered to LA21 were genuinely committed to achieving at least one LA21 goal and offering greater budgetary support for waste management. However, the sensitivity analysis revealed unexpectedly ambiguous evidence about the research question, in that we observed a great volatility of results depending on the sample and dependent variables chosen.

View funding

Funding information

The paper has been carried out with the financial support of the research project: 014-ABEL-CM-2014A —Sustainable development as an innovation opportunity in management model of public organisations; evaluation and promotion of citizen participation towards sustainability; supported by a grant from Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway through the EEA Financial Mechanism and operated by Universidad Complutense de Madrid; Call ABEL-CM-2014A of NILS Mobility Program for Science and Sustainability.

Funders

Bibliographic References

  • Adolfsson, S. (2002): «Local Agenda 21 in Four Swedish Municipalities: A Tool towards Sustainability?», Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 45(2), 219-244.
  • Aguado, I., and Echebarría, C. (2004): «El gasto medioambiental en las Comunidades Autónomas y su relación con la Agenda Local 21: estudio mediante el empleo del análisis de correspondencias», Estudios Geográficos, 65(255), 195-228.
  • Angrist, J. D., and Pischke, J. (2009): Mostly Harmless Econometrics: An Empiricist’s Companion, Princenton, New Jersey, Princeton University Press.
  • Bel, G. (2002): «Privatización de servicios locales: algunas implicaciones sobre las tasas de usuarios y el presupuesto», Análisis local, 45, 45-58.
  • Bel, G. (2006): «Gasto municipal por el servicio de residuos sólidos urbanos», Revista de Economía Aplicada, XIV(41), 5-32.
  • Bel, G., and Costas, A. (2006): «Do Public Sector Reforms Get Rusty? Local Privatization in Spain», The Journal of Policy Reform, 9(1), 1-24.
  • Bel, G., and Fageda, X. (2006): «Between privatization and intermunicipal cooperation: small municipalities, scale economics and transaction costs», Urban Public Economics Review, 6, 13-31.
  • Bel, G. (2007): «Why do local governments privatize public services? A survey of empirical studies», Local Government Studies, 33(4), 517-534.
  • Bel, G. (2008): «Reforming the local public sector: economics and politics in privatization of water and solid waste», Journal of Economic Policy Reform, 11(1), 45-65.
  • Bel, G. (2009): «Factors explaining local privatization: a meta-regression analysis», Public Choice, 139(1-2), 105-119.
  • Bel, G. (2010): «Partial Privatization in Local Services Delivery: An Empirical Analysis of the Choice of Mixed Firms», Local Government Studies, 36(1), 129-149.
  • Bel, G., Fageda, X., and Mur, M. (2010): «¿Por qué se privatizan servicios en los municipios (pequeños)? Evidencia empírica sobre residuos sólidos y agua», Hacienda Pública Española, 192(1), 33-58.
  • Bel, G., Fageda, X., and Mur, M. (2013): «Why Do Municipalities Cooperate to Provide Local Public Services? An Empirical Analysis», Local Government Studies, 39(3), 435-454.
  • Bel, G., Fageda, X., and Warner, M. E. (2010): «Is Private Production of Public Services Cheaper than Public Production? A Meta-Regression Analysis of Solid Waste and Water Services», Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 29(3), 553-577.
  • Bel, G., and Miralles, A. (2003): «Factors Influencing the Privatization of Urban Solid Waste Collection in Spain», Urban Studies, 40(7), 1323-1334.
  • Bel, G., and Mur, M. (2009): «Intermunicipal cooperation, privatization and waste management costs: Evidence from rural municipalities», Waste Management, 29(10), 2772-2778.
  • Bel, G., and Warner, M. (2008): «Does privatization of solid waste and water services reduce costs? A review of empirical studies», Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 52(12), 1337-1348.
  • Callan, S. J., and Thomas, J. M. (2001): «Economies of Scale and Scope: A Cost Analysis of Municipal Solid Waste Services», Land Economics, 77(4), 548-560.
  • Cole, R. J., and Valdebenito, M. J. (2013): «The importation of building environmental certification systems: international usages of BREEAM and LEED», Building Research & Information, 41(6), 662-676.
  • Devuyst, D. (1999): «Sustainability assessment: the application of a methodological frame-work», Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management, 1(4), 459-487.
  • Dubin, J. A., and Navarro, P. (1988): «How Markets for Impure Public Goods Organize: The Case of Household Refuse Collection», Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 4(2), 217-241.
  • Echebarria, C., Barrutia, J. M., and Aguado, I. (2004): «Local Agenda 21: Progress in Spain», European Urban and Regional Studies, 11(3), 273-281.
  • Eckerberg, K., and Forsberg, B. (1998): «Implementing agenda 21 in local government: The Swedish experience», Local Environment, 3(3), 333-347.
  • European Sustainable Cities Platform-AALBORG +10. (2004): Retrieved 24 March 2016, from http://www.sustainablecities.eu/fileadmin/repository/Aalborg_Charter/Aalborg_ Charter_English.pdf.
  • Federación Española de Municipios y Provincias-FEMP and Observatorio de la Sostenibilidad en España-OSE (eds.) (2013): 20 años de Políticas Locales de Desarrollo Sostenible en España, Madrid.
  • Fidélis, T., and Pires, S. M. (2009): «Surrender or resistance to the implementation of Local Agenda 21 in Portugal: the challenges of local governance for sustainable development», Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 52(4), 497-518.
  • Foh Lee, K. (2001): «Sustainable tourism destinations: the importance of cleaner production», Journal of Cleaner Production, 9, 313-323.
  • Font, N., and Subirats, J. (2000): Local y sostenible: la Agenda 21 Local en España, Barcelona, Icaria Editorial.
  • Gertler, P. J., Martinez, S., Premand, P., Rawlings, L. B., and Vermeersch, C. M. J. (2011): Impact Evaluation in Practice. World Bank. Retrieved from https://openknowledge.world-bank.org/handle/10986/2550.
  • González Laxe, F., Martín Palmero, F., Fernández Francos, M. (2004): «Medición del desarrollo sostenible y análisis regional: diseño y aplicación de un índice sintético global a las comunidades autónomas españolas», Investigaciones Regionales, 5, 91-112.
  • Haapio, A., and Viitaniemi, P. (2008): «A critical review of building environmental assessment tools», Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 28(7), 469-482.
  • Hernández Aja, A. (2003): Informe sobre los indicadores locales de sostenibilidad utilizados por los municipios españoles firmantes de la Carta de Aalborg. Retrieved from http://www. habitat.aq.upm.es/indloc/aindloc.pdf.
  • Hidalgo, L. A. (2008): «La implantación de la Agenda 21 Local en las diferentes Comunidades Autónomas: Orígenes, evolución y valoración global del proceso», Revista de Fomento Social, 250, 233-274.
  • Hirsch, W. Z. (1965): «Cost Functions of an Urban Government Service: Refuse Collection», The Review of Economics and Statistics, 47(1), 87-92.
  • Jiménez Herrero, L.M. (2008): Sostenibilidad local: una aproximación urbana y rural. Observatorio de la Sostenibilidad en España. Retrieved from http://www.magrama.gob.es/en/ceneam/recursos/materiales/sostenibilidad-local.aspx.
  • Kitchen, H. M. (1976): «A Statistical Estimation of an Operating Cost Function for Municipal Refuse Collection», Public Finance Quarterly, 4(1), 56-76.
  • Kveton, V., Louda, J., Slavik, J., and Pelucha, M. (2014): «Contribution of Local Agenda 21 to Practical Implementation of Sustainable Development: The Case of the Czech Republic», European Planning Studies, 22(3), 515-536.
  • Lafferty, W. M., and Eckerberg, K. (2013): From the Earth Summit to Local Agenda 21: Working Towards Sustainable Development, Oxford, Routledge.
  • Lawrence, D. P. (1997): «PROFILE: Integrating Sustainability and Environmental Impact Assessment», Environmental Management, 21(1), 23-42.
  • Lima Ribeiro, V. P., Aibar Guzmán, C., da Silva Monteiro, S. M., and Aibar Guzmán, B. (2012): «Determining factors of environmental management practices in Portuguese local entities», Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 23(5), 486-502.
  • Martínez, M., and Rosende, S. (2011): «Participación ciudadana en las agendas 21 locales: cuestiones críticas de la gobernanza urbana», Scripta Nova: Revista Electrónica de Geografía y Ciencias Sociales, 15, 348-386.
  • Moralejo, I. A., Legarreta, J. M. B., and Miguel, C. E. (2007): «La Agenda 21 Local en España», Ekonomiaz: Revista Vasca de Economía, 64, 174-213.
  • Navarro-Espigares, J. L., Buck, M., Maraver-Tarifa, G., Martín-Segura, J. A., Midtbø, T., Pérez-López, C., and Saethre, M. A. (2016): «Municipal services within the framework of Local Agenda 21. A comparison between Norway and Spain», European Review of Service Economics and Management, 2, 115-147.
  • Nijkamp, P., and Pepping, G. (1998): «A Meta-analytical Evaluation of Sustainable City Initiatives», Urban Studies, 35(9), 1481-1500.
  • Observatorio de la Sostenibilidad (2014): Informe Sostenibilidad en España 2014. Retrieved from http://www.observatoriosostenibilidad.com/sostenibilidad-en-espana-2014/.
  • Papadopoulos, A. M., and Giama, E. (2009): «Rating systems for counting buildings’ environmental performance», International Journal of Sustainable Energy, 28(1-3), 29-43.
  • Pérez-López, C., and Moral-Arce, I. (2015): Técnicas de evaluación de impacto, Madrid, Garceta Grupo Editorial.
  • Poveda, C. A., and Lipsett, M. (2011): «A Review of Sustainability Assessment and Sustainability/Environmental Rating Systems and Credit Weighting Tools», Journal of Sustainable Development, 4(6), 36-55.
  • Prado, J. M., and García, I. M. (2009): «Local Agenda 21: The effect that the organizational and political structures have on the social organization practices», Revista de Economía Mundial, 21, 195-226.
  • Ruiz-Villaverde, A., González-Gómez, F., Picazo-Tadeo, A. J., (2015): «The privatization of urban water services: theory and empirical evidence in the case of Spain», Investigaciones Regionales, 31, 157-174.
  • Rutherfoord, R., Blackburn, R. A., and Spence, L. J. (2000): «Environmental management and the small firm», International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 6(6), 310-326.
  • Singh, J., Laurenti, R., Sinha, R., and Frostell, B. (2014): «Progress and challenges to the global waste management system», Waste Management & Research, 32(9), 800-812.
  • Stakeholder Forum for a Sustainable Future. (2012): Review of implementation of Agenda 21 and the Rio Principles. Retrieved from http://www.stakeholderforum.org/index.php/our-publications-sp-1224407103/reports-in-our-publications/410-undesa-synthesis-review-of-agenda-21-and-the-rio-principles.
  • Stevens, B. J. (1978): «Scale, Market Structure, and the Cost of Refuse Collection», The Review of Economics and Statistics, 60(3), 438-448.
  • Thomas, I. G. (2010): «Environmental policy and local government in Australia», Local Environment, 15(2), 121-136.
  • Valentin, A., and Spangenberg, J. H. (2000): «A guide to community sustainability indicators», Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 20(3), 381-392.
  • Vickers, J., and Yarrow, G. (1991): «Economics perspectives on privatization», Journal of Economic. Perspectives, 5(5), 111-132.
  • Villa, J. (2012): Simplifying the estimation of difference in differences treatment effects with Stata (MPRA Paper), Germany, University Library of Munich.
  • Warner, M. E. (2010): «The Future of Local Government: Twenty-First-Century Challenges», Public Administration Review, 70, 145-147.
  • Warner, M. E., and Bel, G. (2008): «Competition or Monopoly? Comparing Privatization of Local Public Services in the Us and Spain», Public Administration, 86(3), 723-735.
  • Warner, M., and Hefetz, A. (2003): «Rural-Urban Differences in Privatization: Limits to the Competitive State», Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 21(5), 703-718.
  • Warner, M., and Hefetz, A. (2008): «Managing Markets for Public Service: The Role of Mixed Public-Private Delivery of City Services», Public Administration Review, 68(1), 155-166.
  • Wilson, D. C. (2007): «Development drivers for waste management», Waste Management & Research, 25(3), 198-207.
Data source: Dialnet