Since only population is factored into the diversion rate equivalent calculation using per resident disposal, what is the impact of excluding economic factors?
In either the old method or the new method, reported disposal is the metric, so reductions in disposal drive increases in diversion rates. In the old method, population, employment, and taxable sales were all used to estimate annual generation, which was the benchmark against which disposal was measured. The relative weighting was population (50 percent), employment (25 percent) and inflation corrected taxable sales (25 percent), so population has always been a key component. The inclusion of employment and taxable sales in the old method did introduce some adjustment for economics which are not included in the new method. However, per employee disposal is another indicator that can be used in the new method. For example, using employment data from the Employment Development Department (Excel, file size unknown), we calculated the 2008 statewide diversion rate equivalent at 58 percent. This is very close to the 59 percent rate derived from the per resident disposal method. Using per em
Related Questions
- What if a city has typically used its county population for the diversion rate calculation -- would it be able to continue to use countywide numbers in the per capita calculation?
- Since only population is factored into the diversion rate equivalent calculation using per resident disposal, what is the impact of excluding economic factors?
- How is the statewide per capita disposal rate calculation different than the old diversion rate system?
