Download Disposal Practices and Policy Options in Santa Barbara

Pharmaceuticals in Wastewater Streams:
Behavior, Preferences, and
Willingness-to-Pay for a Disposal Program
James Kallaos, Matthew Kotchen, Kaleena Wheeler,
Crispin Wong, and Margaret Zahller
Presented by:
James Kallaos and Margaret Zahller
Overview
• Surveyed 1,005 randomly selected households on the
central coast of California
• Survey questions inquired about:
– general awareness of pharmaceutical pollution
– disposal practices
– willingness to participate in a disposal program
– willingness-to-pay (WTP) to establish a
pharmaceutical disposal program
Data collection
• Data collected as part of the Central Coast
Survey (CCS), an annual telephone survey
conducted by the Social Science Survey Center
at the University of California, Santa Barbara
• Covers Santa Barbara and Ventura counties
• Interviews conducted in English and Spanish
Data collection
• 1,657 households were contacted and 1,005
interviews were completed
• Compared to national averages, the results
show our sample to be older, with greater
income, and more highly educated
Awareness
• “Are you aware that medical compounds have
been found in treated wastewater and surface
water?”
43% of respondents are aware
Disposal habits
“How do you typically get rid of unwanted or expired prescription
or over-the-counter medications in your household?”
Other
4%
Store at Home
12%
Hazardous Waste Center
5%
Trash
45%
Pharmacy
6%
Toilet/Sink
28%
Age and disposal habits
• Older respondents are more likely to choose
disposal through the toilet/sink
• Older respondents more than twice as likely to
return unused medications to the pharmacy
• Both age groups more likely to choose trash as
the most common disposal method
Disposal program: contingent valuation
• “The presence of medicines in surface waters is a
growing environmental concern. To address this
concern, there is currently a proposal to add a surcharge
to prescription medication to fund a national disposal
program.”
• “To implement this program, would you be willing to pay
$_____ per prescription you purchase?”
YES/NO
• Bid Amounts: $0.05, $0.10, $0.25, $0.50, $1.00, $1.50,
$2.00, $2.50
Model coefficients and effects
Pr[YES] = f [bid, gender, age, awareness, political party, race]
Variable
Bid ($)
Gender (female)
Age
Awareness
Political party (Dem)
Statistical significant effects
–
+
–
–
+
Mean willingness-to-pay
• Logit model: Pr(Yesi)=a+b1(Bidi)+ei
• E(WTP) = a/b
Mean WTP
$1.53
90-percent confidence
interval
$1.14  $2.63
95-percent confidence
interval
$1.09  $2.97
Hanemann, W. M. (1984) Welfare evaluations in contingent valuation experiments with discrete responses. American
Journal of Agricultural Economics, 66(3), 332-341.
Willingness to participate
“If a disposal program was implemented at local pharmacies, how
likely would you be to return unwanted or expired medicines to
your pharmacy for disposal?”
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Very
unlikely
Somewhat
unlikely
Neutral
Somewhat
likely
Very likely
Prescriptions and out-of-pocket expenditures for 2004
Prescriptions per year
Age cohort
0 to 17
Mean
2.28
Median
0.0
18 to 24
25 to 44
45 to 64
65 and older
2.71
5.45
16.33
29.82
0.0
1.0
6.0
21.0
Out-of-pocket
expenditures
Mean
$31.69
$63.26
$134.91
$397.88
$929.90
Overall
9.22
1.0
$239.61
Source: Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (2004)
Annual benefits of establishing a
pharmaceutical disposal program
• Multiplying the mean WTP of $1.53 by the
average number of prescriptions per year of
9.22 yields a benefit of $14.11 per person per
year
• Summed over population >18 years of age
• An annual benefit of nearly $12.6 million per
year in Santa Barbara and Ventura counties
Caution with interpreting annual benefits
• “Yeah-saying”
• Extrapolation to other parts of the country would
be biased because WTP may differ regionally
• Respondents may not account for how many
prescriptions they actually fill per year
Annual benefits
• Conservative calculation:
– assume that the estimated mean WTP of
$1.53 applies for only one prescription per
individual per year
• Estimates an aggregate benefit of $1.36 million
per year for Santa Barbara and Ventura counties
and $320 million for the nation
• This estimate would affect the population more
equitably
Comparison of benefits and costs
• Substantial benefits that outweigh what would be the
costs of establishing disposal programs
• Special collection events
– Collection events held by the Northeast Recycling
Council ranged from $1,576 to $4,190
– The Bay Area Pollution Prevention Group event cost
$3,645 for disposal of the collected pharmaceuticals,
$86,360 for advertising, and 1,980 in staff hours
Rubinstein, L. (2006). Operating unwanted medication collections - A legal and safe approach. Brattleboro, VT:
Northeast Recycling Council, Inc. Available: http://www.nerc.org/adobe/setting.up.draftFINAL.pdf [2007, June 11]
BAPPG. Bay Area Pollution Prevention Group. (2006). Report on the San Francisco Bay Area's Safe Medicine Disposal
Days. Available: http://www.baywise.info/disposaldays/ SFBAY_SafeMeds_Report_August2006.pdf [2007, April 20].
Comparison of benefits and costs
• Washington State pilot program has required funding of
$251,000 to cover all costs, including one-time planning
and infrastructure costs, plus labor equivalent to one to
two full-time employees in its first two years
• The San Mateo County program, with drop off boxes at
police stations, has cost $1,900 in six months of
collection
• The state of Maine recently allocated one-time funding of
$150,000 for the Maine Drug Enforcement Agency to
establish a mail-back program
Gordon, R. (2007). Innovative clean-water plan a hit: Medicine disposal program elicits inquires from all over.
The Mercury News [2007, February 20].
Other issues
• A requisite component of all the aforementioned
disposal programs is a marketing or advertising
campaign
• Disposal programs will also encourage people to
dispose of their unwanted medications instead
of keeping them around the house, where there
is an increasing risk of misuse
• DEA regulations pose challenge
Conclusion
• People dispose of pharmaceuticals using
methods that may harm the environment
• Comparison of benefits and costs suggest ample
scope for establishing pharmaceutical disposal
programs that would yield positive net social
benefits
• Respondents are also likely to participate in a
disposal program if one were established
Acknowledgements
• Dr. Matthew Kotchen
• Community Environmental Council
– Jenny Phillips
– National Marine Sanctuaries Foundation
• County of Santa Barbara (Resource Recovery and
Waste Management Dept.)
– Leslie Robinson
• Santa Barbara Channelkeeper
– Kira Schmidt
• Dr. Trish Holden
• William Lee
• Paolo Gardinali, SSSC associate director