What evidence would strengthen the PAYT argument?

• A. Waste trends unchanged.
• B. Widespread complaints about the program.
• C. No measurable data.
• D. A substantial drop in waste after program adoption.

Answer: (D)

The main idea here is that PAYT works by changing the cost of disposing waste, so people respond to that price signal. A substantial drop in waste after the program is adopted shows that households actually change their behavior when faced with higher disposal costs—they throw away less, recycle more, or produce less waste overall. This provides direct, causal evidence that the per-unit charge is effective and that the policy achieves its intended outcome.

If waste levels stayed the same after adoption, you wouldn’t be seeing the behavioral response PAYT relies on, so that would weaken the argument’s support. Widespread complaints might indicate problems with how the program is run, but they don’t demonstrate that waste actually decreased. No measurable data means you can’t assess impact at all, so it cannot strengthen the case.

So, a substantial drop in waste after program adoption best strengthens the PAYT argument because it directly shows the economic incentive is changing behavior in the desired way.