Reviewing circular economy rebound effects: The case of online peer-to-peer boat sharing

Q1 Economics, Econometrics and Finance Resources, Conservation and Recycling: X Pub Date : 2020-01-01 DOI:10.1016/j.rcrx.2019.100028
Jon Warmington-Lundström , Rafael Laurenti
{"title":"Reviewing circular economy rebound effects: The case of online peer-to-peer boat sharing","authors":"Jon Warmington-Lundström ,&nbsp;Rafael Laurenti","doi":"10.1016/j.rcrx.2019.100028","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Renting instead of buying new products may be seen as the most efficient strategies of the circular economy. However, changes in the consumption inevitably liberates or binds scarce production or consumption factors such as raw materials, money and time which can potentially limit the potential to save resources. This phenomenon is known as environmental rebound effect and is currently under-researched in the context of resource sharing. This paper reviews the magnitude and tendency of environmental rebound effects of peer-to-peer boat sharing platform using a double-spending model (i.e. for lessors as well lessees). We found that environmental rebound effect was experienced by every lessee surveyed (n = 104) and in one-third of lessors (n = 29). 60 % of lessees experienced a rebound of over 20 %, losing one-fifth of the potential reductions in emissions through subsequent consumption behaviour enabled by the economic savings created by sharing resources. International air travel and increases in personal use of the boat were the biggest contributing factors towards environmental rebound effect. Users that increased consumption in these ways experienced a backfire effect in which their annual emissions actually increased. This backfire was experienced by 29 % of lessees with the worst scenario increasing emissions by a factor of over eight. We found statistically significant differences in the rebound of lessors and lessees. Greater awareness and non-economic mechanisms (such as symbolic rewards, information provision and nudging) tailored for lessors and lessees are needed to help prevent the likelihood of occurrence and the magnitude of environmental rebound effects from sharing resources.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":36714,"journal":{"name":"Resources, Conservation and Recycling: X","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.rcrx.2019.100028","citationCount":"35","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Resources, Conservation and Recycling: X","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590289X19300258","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Economics, Econometrics and Finance","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 35

Abstract

Renting instead of buying new products may be seen as the most efficient strategies of the circular economy. However, changes in the consumption inevitably liberates or binds scarce production or consumption factors such as raw materials, money and time which can potentially limit the potential to save resources. This phenomenon is known as environmental rebound effect and is currently under-researched in the context of resource sharing. This paper reviews the magnitude and tendency of environmental rebound effects of peer-to-peer boat sharing platform using a double-spending model (i.e. for lessors as well lessees). We found that environmental rebound effect was experienced by every lessee surveyed (n = 104) and in one-third of lessors (n = 29). 60 % of lessees experienced a rebound of over 20 %, losing one-fifth of the potential reductions in emissions through subsequent consumption behaviour enabled by the economic savings created by sharing resources. International air travel and increases in personal use of the boat were the biggest contributing factors towards environmental rebound effect. Users that increased consumption in these ways experienced a backfire effect in which their annual emissions actually increased. This backfire was experienced by 29 % of lessees with the worst scenario increasing emissions by a factor of over eight. We found statistically significant differences in the rebound of lessors and lessees. Greater awareness and non-economic mechanisms (such as symbolic rewards, information provision and nudging) tailored for lessors and lessees are needed to help prevent the likelihood of occurrence and the magnitude of environmental rebound effects from sharing resources.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
回顾循环经济的反弹效应:以在线点对点船舶共享为例
租赁而不是购买新产品可能被视为循环经济中最有效的策略。然而,消费的变化不可避免地释放或束缚了稀缺的生产或消费因素,如原材料、金钱和时间,这些因素可能限制节约资源的潜力。这种现象被称为环境反弹效应,目前在资源共享的背景下研究较少。本文采用双支出模型(即出租人和承租人)对p2p船舶共享平台的环境反弹效应的大小和趋势进行了研究。我们发现,所有被调查的承租人(n = 104)和三分之一的承租人(n = 29)都经历了环境反弹效应。60%的承租人经历了超过20%的反弹,由于共享资源创造的经济节约,随后的消费行为导致了五分之一的潜在减排损失。国际航空旅行和个人使用船只的增加是造成环境反弹效应的最大因素。以这些方式增加消费的用户经历了适得其反的效果,他们的年排放量实际上增加了。29%的承租人经历了这种适得其反的情况,最坏的情况下,排放量增加了8倍以上。我们发现出租人和承租人的反弹有统计学上的显著差异。需要为出租人和承租人提供更大的意识和非经济机制(如象征性奖励、信息提供和推动),以帮助防止共享资源产生的环境反弹效应的可能性和规模。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Resources, Conservation and Recycling: X
Resources, Conservation and Recycling: X Economics, Econometrics and Finance-Economics and Econometrics
CiteScore
14.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
17 weeks
期刊最新文献
Reconfiguring repair: Contested politics and values of repair challenge instrumental discourses found in circular economies literature WITHDRAWN: Development of an Input-output model for Food-Energy-Water Nexus in the Pacific Northwest, USA The re-direction of small deposit mining: Technological solutions for raw materials supply security in a whole systems context WITHDRAWN: Insights from combining techno-economic and life cycle assessment - a case study of polyphenol extraction from red wine pomace Being shown samples of composted, granulated faecal sludge strongly influences acceptability of its use in peri-urban subsistence agriculture
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1