Behavioral Aspects of Solid Waste Management A Systematic Review

Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association
ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uawm20
Behavioral aspects of solid waste management: A

systematic review
Sumana Jagadeshi Raghu & Lewlyn L.R. Rodrigues
To cite this article: Sumana Jagadeshi Raghu & Lewlyn L.R. Rodrigues (2020): Behavioral
aspects of solid waste management: A systematic review, Journal of the Air & Waste Management
Association, DOI: 10.1080/10962247.2020.1823524
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/10962247.2020.1823524
Published online: 29 Oct 2020.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 55
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=uawm20
JOURNAL OF THE AIR & WASTE MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION
https://doi.org/10.1080/10962247.2020.1823524
REVIEW PAPER
Behavioral aspects of solid waste management: A systematic review

Sumana Jagadeshi Raghu and Lewlyn L.R. Rodrigues
Humanities and Management Department, Manipal Institute of Technology, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India
ABSTRACT PAPER HISTORY

Over the past three decades, research on the established linkages between solid waste manage Received August 5, 2019
ment and psychological models has progressed rapidly. This informs statutory bodies that wish to Revised September 2, 2020
design an effective solid waste management system. To further address this crucial task, this paper Accepted September 2, 2020
examined the existing literature on behavioral approaches applied to the study of solid waste.
Through a systematic literature review approach, we identified, analyzed, and synthesized available
literature across various geographical regions. Based on an analysis of 80 articles, we found that
high-income countries (61%) are overrepresented in the existing literature, in which the USA (44%)
has contributed the most. Most articles targeted recycling behavior (59%) by applying individual
behavior theories (90%), in which the theory of planned behavior was widely tested (46%). In
addition, 65% of the articles conducted model testing and 51% conducted empirical studies,
revealing a dearth of evaluation studies in the literature. Cluster analyses revealed that psycholo
gical factors, comprising 34 variables, were extensively used, allowing future researchers to explore
relevant variables from inter-disciplinary domains by adopting a pragmatic paradigm approach. In
summary, this review identified four research gaps, recommended paths for future research, and
concluded by highlighting the need of investigating social elements to tackle solid waste issues.
Implications: The systematic review presented in this paper is an original contribution to the
aforementioned body of knowledge. It makes the case for more researchers, teachers, and students
to undertake behavioral projects, thus creating awareness among citizens to participate in waste
management activities. The research gaps identified here also highlight the scope for future studies
in under-explored areas and in the implementation of pro-environmental models to build a clean
and green environment. Furthermore, the findings facilitate the formulation of pro-environmental
laws, regulations, and policies in developing countries, where there is a higher need for strict
environmental regulations focused on sustainability.
Introduction
the world’s population) and generated 3 million tons of SW
Technological advancement, economic growth, and urbani per day. The World Bank estimated that, by 2025, the
zation have resulted in an exponential increase in waste amount of SW generated globally would increase from
quantities, creating significant health and safety hazards 1.3 billion tons to 2.2 billion tons per year. In addition, the
globally. The change in patterns of industrialization and waste produced by metropolitan cities in developing regions
consumer-based lifestyles have led to a dramatic increase in is extremely high, with Asia alone generating 790 million
the quality and quantity of solid waste (SW), affecting our tons of waste (Pappu, Saxena, and Asolekar 2007) – four
environment substantially. Several studies have highlighted times the amount of SW it generated in 1997. These alarming
that SW is mainly an urban affair (Oabaldiston anf Schott statistics have prompted scientists from several countries to
2012: Sharholy et al. 2008; Stancu, Haugaard, and Liisa 2016; research effective SW management (SWM) strategies to
Swaim et al. 2014): as the process of global urbanization achieve a sustainable ecosystem.
continues unabated, the combination of increasing living Most studies conducted in this field have focused on
standards, insufficient infrastructure, and a lack of adequate aspects of waste generation (Alwaeli 2015), waste disposal
sanitation facilities has overburdened the SW disposal sys (Arıkan, Şimşit-Kalender, and Vayvay 2017), waste compo
tem, causing a series of environmental ramifications. The sition (Karak, Bhagat, and Bhattacharyya 2012), waste man
World Health Organization reported that, in 1900, the world agement (Kamaruddin et al. 2017), efficiency of
had 220 million urban residents who produced fewer than municipalities (Guerrero, Maas, and Hogland 2013), tech
300,000 tons of SW per day (Hoornweg and Bhada-Tata nology (Urena et al. 2012), environmental sustainability
2012); and, in 2000, 2.9 billion people lived in cities (49% of (Menikpura et al. 2013), socio-economic conditions
CONTACT Sumana Jagadeshi Raghu [email protected] Humanities and Management Department, Manipal Institute of Technology,
Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Karkala Road, Manipal – 571604, Udupi, Karnataka, India.
© 2020 A&WMA
2 J.R. SUMANA AND L.L. R. RODRIGUES
(Gordon-Wilson and Modi 2015), legal and policy implica adding to the body of knowledge within environmental
tions (Moh and Manaf 2014), and stakeholders’ role (Soltani protection.
et al. 2015). These studies discussed mitigation of garbage
issues and provided solutions to SW problems using a top-
Background
down approach in situations in which the waste had already
been generated. However, waste is not produced in a vacuum The most persisting avenue of research in SWM has explored
(Hargreaves 2011); it is generated owing to human needs and the influence of cognitive, sociological, and psychological vari
desires in diverse scenarios (Stern 2000). The chain of waste ables on environmental behavior. Several studies have exam
generation, consumption, and disposal is under the volitional ined the determinants of SWMB: waste separation (Ghani et al.
control of an individual who makes a conscious decision 2013; Pakpour et al. 2014), recycling (Arı and Yılmaz 2016;
about waste production or waste reduction. Therefore, it is Mahmud, Diyana, and Osman 2010), waste minimization
appropriate to adopt a root-cause analysis approach of envir (Radwan, Jones, and Minoli 2012), composting (Tih and
onmental psychology and examine the interconnected nat Zainol 2012), waste prevention (Bortoleto, Kurisu, and
ure of waste behaviors and their antecedents to reach a zero- Hanaki 2012; Stefan et al. 2008), social influences on the indi
waste goal. Exploring SWM behavior (SWMB) is imperative vidual (Comber and Thieme 2013; Jones et al. 2010; Young et al.
at this stage of globalization because the physical and social 2017), food separation (Mondéjar-Jiménez et al. 2016), and
factors of competitive trade between countries have created socio-economic characteristics of the environmental movement
great environmental risks. (Afroz et al., 2011; Swami et al. 2011). Traditionally, behavioral
Many studies have discussed the SWMB models that estab scientists have focused on theoretical frameworks and related
lish linkages between SWM and psychological models. methodologies to explore the antecedents of environmental
Although most of these studies offer similar assessments of behavior, which is considered an integrated and inter-
SW issues, all studies have reported different findings. Further, disciplinary facet of environmental psychology (Vining and
several studies have adopted diverse theories, research frame Ebreo 2002). Thus, there are clear advantages to applying
works, tools, and techniques to test the antecedents of SWMB. psychological theories to pro-environmental behaviors.
Some studies have even utilized concepts from fields other than According to Darley and Gilbert (1985), environmental
psychology, such as consumer culture (Izagirre-Olaizola, psychology is characterized by “mid-range theories” that aim
Fernández-Sainz, and Vicente-Molina 2015), agriculture to provide solutions for a wide range of socio-economic and
(Wang et al. 2018), biomass (Miafodzyeva and Brandt 2013), environmental problems. Thus, there has been an increasing
and economics and finance (Cecere, Mancinelli, and Mazzanti focus on interventions that investigate the parameters of beha
2014). These attempts to comprehend SWMB concepts, vior and its change. The Medical Research Council (2000)
research methodology, and theories have led to theoretical mentions three phases of developing and evaluating complex
fragmentation and methodological inconsistencies. Moreover, interventions: (i) the theory phase (collection of evidence, for
most studies appear one-dimensional in nature, which is pro mation of theory, and conceptual model development), (ii) the
blematic since SWM is a multi-faceted issue affecting various modeling phase (hypothesis formation and testing of target
levels of environment and society. The behavior that facilitates behavior through different research techniques), and (iii) the
or impedes effective SWM among individuals requires a deeper experimental phase (conducting trials and experiments and
understanding. In this context, it is vital to understand existing obtaining results). The theory phase is important because it
research on the theoretical frameworks that have contributed to provides a framework to understand the causal determinants of
addressing waste issues. behavior (Eastman and Marzillier 1984; Schwartz 1968). It
Therefore, this paper presents a systematic literature review provides a mechanism that can be tested and evaluated to
(SLR) to answer specific behavioral questions within the accomplish research objectives. Moreover, theory-based evalua
domain of SWM. SLRs differ from other types of reviews by tions and analysis aid in understanding what works and how
adopting a replicable, logical, and transparent process. The focus a situation could be improved by strengthening theory, across
is on minimizing bias through an exhaustive method to identify various ethnic backgrounds, diverse geographic regions, and
extant published and unpublished research and then critically different socio-economic conditions. Theory also provides
analyze and synthesize the literature to arrive at relevant proce a consolidated outline of the hypothesized causal processes of
dures, decisions, and conclusions (Cook, Mulrow, and Brian a particular behavior. Hence, theory-based studies are useful in
Haynes 1997). Since progressive research depends upon past understanding behavioral parameters by adopting an explicit
studies as well as on attempts to explore the strengths and causal pathway (Michie and Abraham 2004) and enabling the
weaknesses of experimental methods adopted in them, an researcher to avoid implicit causal assumptions that may lack
SLR acts as a guide to the current knowledge within the domain scientific evidence and evaluation.
of interest. Thus, we present this paper to identify and review In the context of SWM, there is an association
studies that have contributed to mitigating SWM problems by between past behaviors and the status of the
JOURNAL OF THE AIR & WASTE MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION 3
environment (Sommer 2011). Without a theoretical sociology, psychology, technology, and anthropology that
basis, even an extensive literature review of behavioral could be used as predictive tools to examine SWMB among
interventions may not provide adequate guidance citizens?” Thus, we examined the efficiency of those frame
(Marteau et al. 2006) on how to frame a research design works that promote environmental sustainability via behavioral
intervention for this global problem. Therefore, rather changes.
than reviewing SWMB literature, we examined social
science theories relevant to this topic. We presented
Individual behavior theories
research constructs from these theories and studies
that stand as examples of how they were applied to This category presents a set of theories that aid in under
SWMB. We then investigated additional relevant standing the nature and causes of individual WM beha
approaches that could be used to study the behavioral vior (IWMB) issues. It focused on human behavior and
aspects of SWM. changes influenced by the social context.
Health belief model (HBM)

Theories of behavior and behavior change
The HBM was originally developed during the 1950s as
The importance of understanding theories and their advantages a cognitive framework to explain beliefs and threats regarding
has been highlighted by earlier researchers who suggested the individual well-being and the effectiveness and outcomes of
adoption of combined behavior change techniques within inter particular behaviors (Rosenstock 1974). It is an intervention
ventions to allow synergistic effects and enhance their effective model that has been applied in the behavioral analysis of pro-
ness (1999; Davis et al. 2015; Mitchell and Biglan 1971). environment, resource conservation, and WM. Earlier research
However, choosing a relevant theory can be challenging for revealed similarities between behavior toward maintaining
researchers given the many theories within behavioral psychol good health and behavior toward natural resource conservation,
ogy and their similar or overlapping constructs (Michie and which suggests they may be related (Janz and Becker 1984).
Abraham 2004). In addition, there is a lack of guidance in Both constitute volitional behavior performed to prevent nega
choosing an appropriate theory for a particular purpose, such tive states, poor health, and environmental degradation. Thus,
as intervening the behavioral patterns of SWM. psychologists have used the HBM to predict patterns of IWMB.
Earlier studies have highlighted that theories may be applied Lindsay and Strathman (1997) applied the HBM to study
to environmental and behavior change interventions, which citizens’ recycling behavioral patterns. Their results were con
generally emphasized individual and inter-personal relation sistent with HBM – as perceived threats, probability of negative
ships within society and the environment. Moreover, these consequences, and self-efficacy were positively related to recy
theories often concluded that interventions are more effective cling behavior.
when variables are targeted at different levels (Davis et al. 2014), Although the HBM provides a useful framework for beha
such as individuals, communities, specific groups, and societies. vioral findings in the literature, the relationships between cog
They also stressed the benefits of considering a wide range of nitive factors are not well explained. Jackson and Waters (2005)
theories for reviewing a specific discipline, before the selection of argue that the model is inadequate to explain human behavior
a particular theory (Marx and Cronan-Hillix 1987). Thus, to owing to its insufficient attention to social norms and habitual
improve the selection and application of theory, we need to factors. Moreover, Lindsay and Strathman (1997) stressed the
consider those theories that may be beneficial in tackling specific importance of including variables such as social norms, which
questions within a particular discipline. In addition, by compre may prove useful in understanding SWMB.
hending various theories, we can assess what theories may have
potential applicability regarding environmental behavior and Learning theory (LT)
public health. In behavioral psychology, LT describes how individuals
SWMB is an environmental sustainability issue that affects absorb, process, and retain knowledge, as well as the
the quality of citizens’ surroundings, health, social well-being, actions they exhibit during learning. According to LT,
economic status, and lifestyle. It is also a dynamic discipline individual behavior is a learning process influenced by
encompassing cutting-edge technologies, techniques, methods, reward (such as lottery tickets, prizes, money, incentives,
and processes. Considering all these factors, we undertook an and coupons) or punishment (e.g., penalties or fines;
elaborate review of theories within behavioral sciences, sociol Geller 1989). Thus, LT postulates that individuals behave
ogy, psychology, technology, and anthropology. We categorized pro-environmentally when they are exposed to environ
theories as individual behavior theories, social behavior theories, mental stimuli that serve as facilitators of target behaviors.
and technology behavior theories. The scoping review exercise Behaviorists argue that external factors have a significant
fundamentally aimed to address the following question: “What influence on individual behavior (Diamond and Loewy
theories exist across the disciplines of behavioral sciences, 1991; Katzev and Johnson 1987; Katzev and Pardini
1988). In that context, Needleman and Scott Geller (1992) external intervention may affect the norms of an indivi
found that a recycling rewards program could prompt dual; thus, the hypothesis of MCT is questionable.
changes in individual behavior. Similarly, Wang and Additional studies that evaluate and establish the useful
Katzev (1990) reported a significant improvement in ness of MCT in the context of SWM are required.
paper recycling when incentives were introduced.
The approach of LT in establishing extrinsic motiva Norm activation theory (NAT)
tion as the sole criterion for behavioral modification has NAT, derived from LT, describes the process and significance of
drawn some criticism. Although extrinsic motivation is examining altruistic behavior in the context of environmental
helpful for short-term behavioral goals, it is not a viable protection. It endorses the idea that social norms are developed
option for long-term behavioral goals (Schultz, Oskamp, owing to the interactions of individuals within society and that
and Mainieri 1995). This is because rewards are tempor personal norms develop from their moral obligations, guilt, and
ary and become obsolete as time goes by. Participants pride. According to Schwartz (1977), norms are activated when
may lose interest after the termination of incentives, thus two conditions are met: when people believe that their negative
undoing any changes in behavior. In addition, not every actions have hazardous repercussions on the environment
one would be attracted to an SWM reward program, and (awareness of consequences), and when they are personally
exploring a person’s environmental behavior from the responsible for the ecological crisis (ascribed responsibility).
standpoint of materialism may not be a feasible solution NAT is a widely accepted model in environmental psychology,
since SWMB is altruistic by nature. Thus, other ways of which emphasizes that the activation of personal norms takes
comprehending intrinsic motivational factors according place when individuals feel that their quality of life, health, and
to eco-friendly morals, values, attitudes, beliefs, and community well-being are threatened. Matthies, Selge, and
intentions should be emphasized by LT behaviorists. Klöckner (2012) used the NAT model to explore the role of
parental behavior and investigate the development of recycling
Motivation crowding theory (MCT) and reuse habits among children. They concluded that envir
MCT, postulated in opposition to LT, posits that external onmental knowledge and awareness played a major role in
incentives may affect the strength of an individual’s internal establishing personal norms among children. Behavioral strate
motivation for pro-social behavior (Frey and Jegen 2001). MCT gists have expressed the practical desire to expand SWM parti
is viewed by psychologists as relevant because external reward cipation among residents and have argued that people
schemes and policy interactions may make certain policies less sometimes act because their personal norms override social
effective (crowd out) and others more effective (crowding in). norms. In that context, Hopper and McCarl Nielsen (1991)
Thus, MCT highlights that a person of high intrinsic motivation explored the transformation process of norms; they argued that
who does not expect external rewards will behave pro- personal norms have a positive association with recycling beha
environmentally. To evaluate this theory, Cecere, Mancinelli, vior when awareness of consequences was high. The authors
and Mazzanti (2014) conducted a study of 27 European coun also reported that social norms could significantly transform
tries to explore the association between the role of motivation a non-recycler into a recycler if an intervention took place.
and waste prevention. They reported that individual intrinsic Though social norms are relevant in predicting altruistic beha
motivation led to waste reduction. Comparative collaborative vior at a structural level, Oreg and Katz-Gerro (2006) claim that
research from 10 European countries, Australia, Canada, and pro-environmental behavior results from a set of beliefs that are
Korea, which examined the role of policy incentives and norms under threat and that actions resulting from those beliefs relieve
in recycling behavior, reported that monetary incentives had threat and reinstate personal values.
a negative impact on motivating individual pro-environmental Although NAT is a well-recognized model, research
behavior (Halvorsen 2012). ers have criticized it as a non-predictor of behavior since
Environmental instruments play a major role in people do not always report their norms (Darley and
encouraging safe and eco-friendly waste disposal pat Latane 1970). Further, the functions of pride and guilt,
terns among citizens. Deci and Ryan (1985) found that and their association with NAT, are not well under
external rewards hinder behavioral performance, redu stood. For instance, a non-working individual who
cing intrinsic motivation. In the case of SWM, higher always separates kitchen waste does not necessarily sepa
subsidies, tax punishments, and an incompatible gar rate it owing to pride or guilt; he/she may separate
bage fee system may reduce individual intrinsic motiva kitchen waste to make better use of organic waste. In
tion, leading to crowding-out effects. In addition, this case, personal norms are activated purely owing to
crowding out is more evident when a monetary element economic factors. Similarly, a pro-environmental trave
is introduced (Bowles 2008; Thøgersen and Folke 2003) ler may be forced to dispose of waste on the roadside
since citizens may indulge in SWM activities to derive owing to the non-provision of trash bins. Thus, norms
pleasure and satisfaction. Hence, the negative effect of an may not always be useful in assessing behavior.
Self-determination theory (SDT) Some researchers noted that individuals with high self-efficacy
SDT explains two main types of human motivation: can become over-confident and may set themselves up for
intrinsic and extrinsic. SDT sources these motivations failure in a particular task (Teresa and Ormron 2008).
within a broad description of their roles in the field of Furthermore, in a complex problem like SWM, potential out
cognitive psychology and proposes that the mind med comes are far more complex. For example, if a person who
iates individual behavior (Ryan and Deci 2000). believes that recycling helps improve environmental quality
Skinner and Chi (2012) examined student motivation and cannot find a way to do so because office authorities have not
engagement in garden-based school programs, revealing that provided recycling bins, he/she may dispose of all items in the
autonomy, competence, and intrinsic motivation had common bin. Hence, high individual self-efficacy may not
a significant role in garden learning methods. SDT, unlike LT, guarantee positive outcomes.
posits that intrinsic motivation is a potential predictor of human
behavior. However, intrinsic motivation represents the internal Self-regulation theory (SRT)
characteristics of a person and is subjected to external stimuli. In SRT primarily focuses on controlling the ability of an individual
the case of SWM, the core concepts of SDT – autonomy, to exhibit a behavior through self-evaluation, motivation, and
competence, and relatedness – are not sufficient to predict the modification of emotions and perceptions of those behaviors.
role of motivation (Thøgersen and Folke 2003). For instance, According to SRT, individuals who resist mundane tasks will
a person walking on the road might see a poster of a child with create ways to make their tasks more interesting and positive.
a skin disease owing to unhealthy waste disposal methods, and To date, only two studies have applied this theory to SWM.
this may motivate them to separate waste. Hence, other external Werner and Makela (1998) applied this model to the study of
elements such as community groups; opportunities; conveni recycling behavior and found that, although residents found
ence factors; provision of WM maps; WM hoardings; and SWM to be an uninteresting task, they continued recycling for
internal potential elements such as environmental knowledge, personal and societal benefit by adopting creative ways of
feel-good factors, heritage, tradition, and culture may play a vital engagement. Zimmerman (1989) conducted a quantitative
role in defining motivation. As existent literature lacks empirical study and concluded that individuals should find a way to
examination, more cross-cultural studies are needed to reiterate organize themselves to support recycling behavior.
the concepts of SDT. Although SRT offers a powerful psychological tool for
controlling and altering behaviors, it has a major limita
Self-efficacy theory (SET) tion of operationalization, since it comprises a set of
SET posits that actions are determined primarily by individual functions, decision processes, constant monitoring, and
judgments and expectations of outcomes, and the opportunity cognitive approaches that are debated among research
to successfully master a skill or cope with a given situation to ers. Higgins (1996) asserted that consecutive self-
produce positive results in attaining a goal. According to regulation processes deplete further regulation, making
Bandura and Schunk (1981), people process and weigh various individuals act unfavorably in certain situations. In addi
sources of information regarding their ability to manage their tion, certain behaviors cannot be controlled as they are
behavior. Thus, SET conceptualizes that individuals are capable beyond conscious control, stemming from irresistible
of self-regulation and of being active participants in environ impulses. For example, some people indicate they
mental protection. Although researchers have not tested this spend too much time and money on clothes and perso
theory, the concept of self-efficacy is incorporated in household nal items simply because they cannot resist shopping.
WM such as garbage reduction (Taylor and Todd 1995), waste Thus, there is debate concerning the extent that self-
prevention (Karbalaei et al. 2013), composting (Taylor and regulation can be established as a main factor of SWM.
Todd 1997), WM participation (Åberg et al. 1996), and recy
cling (Chu and Chiu 2003; De Young 1986; Seacat and Theory of reasoned action (TRA)
Northrup 2010; Thøgersen, 2003). Furthermore, Geller (1995) TRA posits that behavioral performance can be best
proposed an altruistic behavior framework – the “actively caring predicted from an individual’s intention or willingness
model” – and included self-efficacy as an important part of (e.g., “I intend to separate waste before disposal”),
environmental empowerment among the public. which is the most immediate and significant predictor
Although Bandura (1977) claims SET is a unifying theory, it of that behavior (Ajzen 1985, 1991). According to TRA,
has drawn criticisms for being unclear about the differential intention is determined by two independent compo
concepts of self-efficacy. Some researchers claim the conceptual nents: (1) attitude and (2) subjective norms (SNs).
framework is unclear, as the association between self-efficacy Environmental psychologists have studied the relation
and outcome expectations is problematic (Eastman and ship between attitude, intention, and SNs regarding
Marzillier 1984; Teasdale 1978). This is because the outcome waste behaviors. Goldenhar and Connell (1993) con
expectation varies across tasks and situations for each person. ducted a test on the TRA model and emphasized that
TRA is a rational decision-making model since socially transition from goal intention to implementation intention is
relevant recycling behaviors are under individuals’ voli cognitive in nature; hence, behavioral intention is guided by
tional control. Similarly, Jones (1989) studied the deter control beliefs such as the perceived difficulty of performing
minants of recycling behavior and concluded that a behavior and the perceived power of one’s research constructs
intention is the immediate antecedent of behavior to complete a task (e.g., “waste separation is easy for me;” Ajzen
since the individual considers the implications of 2005). Zhang et al. (2012) conducted a study at a public uni
actions before engaging in recycling activities. In addi versity of Hong Kong and found that attitude, SNs, and PBC
tion, support for SNs has been seen as relatively weak were significantly associated with intention. Those findings
by some researchers (Ajzen 1991; Taylor and Todd were consistent with Cheung, Chan, and Wong (1999), who
1997; Terry and Hogg 1996). Thøgersen (1994) inte revealed that variables such as awareness of consequences and
grated some variables with the TRA model and con convenience factors play an important role in intention.
cluded that ability and opportunity significantly Ramayah, Wai Chow Lee, and Mohamad (2010) examined
influence intention. However, a positive attitude had recycling behavior among students and found that attitude and
a significant influence on waste separation behavior, in social norms were positively associated with behavior. In addi
comparison with intention Thøgersen (1994). TRA has tion, to understand the significance of environmental awareness
been extensively studied and has received support from on attitude, Chu and Chiu (2003) conducted a test on TPB to
various researchers (Ajzen 1991, 2005). understand the behavioral determinants of recycling. They
While applying TRA to predict behavior, it has been argued found that SWMB was influenced positively by intention;
that intention cannot be the immediate determinant as there is however, SNs, PBC, and attitude were weakly associated with
a gap between measured intention-behavior and actual inten behavior. Those findings were inconsistent with those of Taylor
tion-behavior. While explaining variance in behavior, several and Todd (1995), in which attitude was the strongest determi
meta-analyses question the predictability power of this model, nant factor of intention.
since TRA can only predict behavior 19–38% of the time According to TPB, the more favorable the attitude, SNs, and
(Sutton 1998). Further, Couraeya and Edward (1993) addressed PBC, the stronger is the relationship between intention and
the unpredictability of Likert-type scale results while imple behavior. However, this thesis has varied significantly across
menting this model for repeated behaviors. Behaviors such as several studies. Moreover, considering the role of each variable
recycling, reusing, and waste composting are monotonous and across different population groups and behaviors, the combina
simply cannot be exhibited at the will of an individual. Skills, tion of all three components does not necessarily predict inten
resources, suitable planning, and convenience can directly influ tion-behavior, as only one or two variables may be required;
ence a person’s will. In such contexts, intention may act as thus, their relative importance remains unclear. Sutton (1998)
a mediating factor, while other parameters may directly influ conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the performance of TRA
ence behavior. These barriers specifically apply to contexts and TPB and concluded that both models do not always predict
where poor infrastructures, shortage of government funds, behavior owing to nine possible reasons. Researchers argued
and lack of resources exist. Hence, lack of exploring more that TPB applies to logical behavior and does not address group
parameters could be one of the reasons for the less predictable behaviors (Bagozzi, Dholakia, and Mookerjee 2006) such as
nature of TRA. recycling rallies, SWM debates and community gatherings, and
their influence on the individual. Manstead (1999) argued that
TPB has overlooked moral concerns. Similarly, Harland, Staats,
Theory of planned behavior (TPB) and Wilke (1999) reported that the inclusion of moral norms
TPB is a continuation of the TRA model, intended to improve increased the variance proportion of intention from 1% to 10%.
its predictive power with the addition of a new determinant However, evidence shows that moral norms are not predictive
factor: perceived behavioral control (PBC). Similar to TRA, variables since they are represented within the attitudes of an
TPB hypothesizes that behavioral intention is the immediate individual (Kaiser et al., 2005). Although questions and chal
antecedent of behavior. Researchers have highlighted that the lenges have led to improvements in the model, the predictive
type of individual behavior (Davis et al. 2006; Sheeran 2002) power of this model is of limited scope since it ignores emo
governs the degree of intention-behavior stability; therefore, for tional components, such as environmental threats, sustainability
an intention to be translated into action, some degree of beha fear, and recycling satisfaction that set the tone for cognitive
vioral control (or control factors like knowledge, awareness, and reactions.
resources) is a pre-requisite. This control is integrated as PBC by
Ajzen (1991). TPB establishes PBC as a second determinant and Value belief norm (VBN) theory
posits that PBC produces mediating effects on behavior. Ajzen VBN theory, an integrated model of Schwartz’s NAT
(2005) suggests that the addition of more variables to TPB may model, establishes a link between individual values,
increase its predictive power of behavioral antecedents. The beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors. VBN theory assumes
that environmental values guide actions in developing demands a multitude of cognitive approaches. This section
beliefs and play a key role in attitude formation (Stern discusses related theories in sociology.
2000). In the process of behavior formation, a person’s
beliefs act as a mediator between attitude and values Rational choice theory (RCT)
(Daneshvary, Daneshvary, and Keith Schwer 1998), In RCT, mere imitational influence from other individuals is
leading toward behavior. Therefore, someone who not a social action – it is a rational choice of a person through
values the reuse of items above their desire to buy new careful and logical consideration of their own acts (Cockerham,
things may not compromise on environmental values, Abel, and Günther 1993). Roth and Weber (1976) believe that
since they accept the information that reusing methods every action has meaning, and that action without thinking
reduce stress on the environment and they support the cannot be considered a social action. They endorse the view that
belief that unnecessary waste disposal is environmen rational action is the key concept of RCT and identify three
tally harmful. Finally, according to VBN theory, value distinguishable factors to explain actions: (1) long-standing
orientation contributes to moral norms; thus, indivi traditions, which influence a person’s judgment when they
duals who possess environmentally conscious beliefs perform a task (e.g., handing down baby clothes between family
and an awareness of the consequences of pollution, members); (2) the emotional state of an individual, which can
and feel responsible in this process, behave in an eco- be characterized by love, hatred, sympathy, or compassion (e.g.,
friendly manner for the benefit of themselves and others. compassionate feelings toward other beings cultivate eco-
The key concept of VBN theory is the relationship between friendly waste disposal habits); and (3) personal values and
values and behavior. Researchers have conducted studies on actions rationally influencing SWMB (e.g., the belief that
SWM by focusing on waste separation (Daneshvary, waste reduction is a moral obligation to conserve natural
Daneshvary, and Keith Schwer 1998; Izagirre-Olaizola, resources). In the context of SWM, where individual actions
Fernández-Sainz, and Vicente-Molina 2015) and waste mini play a vital role, RCT explains the interconnection between
mization behavior (Xu et al. 2017). A study conducted in emotions and rationality of an individual within society.
Sweden by Nordlund and Garvill (2002), which explored envir Theorists argue that RCT ignores the wider social struc
onmental behavior among householders, reported that personal ture by providing importance to subjective cases (Boudon
norms mediated general values and environmental values. The and Viale 2000). Since subjective cases yield bias and ima
same study concluded that personal norms are activated by ginary results, the applicability of this theory in a larger
public awareness, since awareness triggers guilt, self-respect, and context has been subject to debate. However, since waste is
self-accomplishment, thus allowing the public to develop pro- generated by individuals, and their behavior counts toward
environmental values. To understand the waste generation ecological preservation, environmental psychologists do
patterns among American students, McCarty and Shrum not consider the subjective focus of RCT as a limitation
(1994) hypothesized that attitude and beliefs mediate values (Yau 2010). RCT assumes that every action is rational in
and recycling behaviors. They found that beliefs about recycling nature; however, we argue against this. For instance, some
were non-significantly associated with recycling behavior; how individuals feel relaxed when they undertake waste com
ever, inconvenience had a significant impact on recycling posting, others when stitching reused, and some may attend
behavior. community meetings as a pastime. Hence, not all actions
Typically, just like TPB, a major limitation associated with stem from logical thinking. Furthermore, this theory fails to
VBN theory is that it performs poorly for repeated behaviors. explain the role of social norms that motivate some indivi
This is because behaviors which demand repetition – influenced duals to act in an altruistic way.
by intention – become weaker and weaker (Klöckner &
Oppedal 2011), whereas the influence of habit – which tends Social cognitive theory (SCT)
to occur subconsciously – can affect individuals’ behavioral SCT is a learning-based theory that states that continuous
patterns (Stern 2000; Verplanken and Aarts 1999). Additional social learning complements real-life experience and that
empirical studies should explore causal variables and their people learn and behave by observing others in society
interaction effects, which may have explanatory powers to (Bandura 1977). Conceptualizing that social interactions
predict SWMB among citizens. can influence a person’s thoughts, feelings, goals, and beha
viors. Social scientists have argued that behavioral change of
a person is possible when a person can be both an agent for
Social behavior theories
change and a responder for change (Phipps et al. 2013).
Social scientists argue that there is a link between society and Haldeman and Turner (2009) conducted a study to inves
IWMB; thus, social influence (Twigger-Ross, Bonaiuto, and tigate the effectiveness of a social marketing program within
Breakwell 2003) has a major role in SWMB. As such, SWMB a community to increase the recycling rate. They applied
is a complex and challenging socio-environmental issue that a mixed-methods approach by distributing recycling
containers to householders; data were collected through unexplored. Nonetheless, research into the interaction
focus-group interviews and telephone surveys. They between social practices and material contexts (emphasized
revealed a 24% increase in the weight of recyclable materials by SPT) has allowed psychologists to explore the role of
and concluded that face-to-face contact and distribution of individual psychological elements in specific social
recycling containers had a positive impact on recycling practices.
rates. Moreover, their results highlighted that observational SWM is often considered an uninteresting routine that
learning impacts public recycling behavior. Another study demands lifetime discipline, which leads some to see SWM
by Lin and Hsu (2015) in Taiwan found that self-concepts, as an irritating and boring affair. For a habitual practice to
personal outcome expectations, and social sanction were develop in an individual, certain internal parameters and
significantly associated with the transition into eco-friendly external infrastructures are required to stimulate and
waste disposal. strengthen safe disposal practices. Furthermore, most prac
SCT states that humans learn and make decisions based tices become habits because of personal experience; e.g.,
on rational thought and there is no room for emotions when an individual makes a habit of disposing of dry and
(Nabi et al. 2008; Rhee and Waldman 2002). According to wet waste separately after having dengue fever, or a parent
this theory, although a learning process may motivate reusing cotton clothes as diapers if their baby has developed
individuals to recycle, antisocial behaviors (e.g., littering rashes in the past. SPT focuses on social structure but fails to
in public places, throwing stones on environmental describe the origin of social practices and their antecedents
hoardings, and damaging public bins and municipal within individuals. Hence, in future research, a holistic
offices) are the result of emotional responses determined approach might be useful to identify the antecedents of
by evolution (Rhee and Waldman 2002). Thus, mere the social practices of an individual.
observation and learning cannot explain a particular beha
vior (Labuhn, Zimmerman, and Hasselhorn 2010; Pinker
Technology behavior theories
2010). Thus, pro-environmental behavior is a complex
interactive process with social, motivational, behavioral, Our time is characterized by scientific innovation and
and emotional components. To learn a new behavior, an technological advancement. Staying updated with the
individual’s self-interest, awareness, and knowledge latest technological advances and keeping a positive atti
become vital to self-control. What we can learn from this tude toward SWM are essential to improve our environ
theory is that observation and learning processes are more ment. According to Tomlinson (2012), citizens should
than the psychological functioning of knowledge and skill. adopt new technologies to attain environmental sustain
ability. Regarding waste reduction, information technol
Social practice theory (SPT) ogies will be a useful tool in the future.
SPT is one of the most popular sociological and anthro
pological theories (Holland and Lave 2009). According to Diffusion of innovation (DOI) theory
SPT, practice is a routinized type of behavior that is the DOI theory is a widely accepted model that describes how,
culmination of several physical and mental activities why, and at what rate new technologies spread within
(Reckwitz 2002). Thus, SPT is an umbrella approach a social system. The focus of DOI theory is to explore the
under which various theories are pursued and in which communication process of spreading information and the
practice itself (rather than individuals within social struc time it takes individuals to adopt new technologies, char
tures) becomes the core unit of analysis. In this view, SWM acterizing innovation as a mediating factor of behavior.
activities are not perceived as the result of psychological Rogers (2002) defines innovation as an idea or practice
factors; rather, they are owing to social practices embedded that is perceived and adopted as new by individuals through
within individuals’ behaviors (Warde 2005). SPT thus several stages. The principal method of innovation diffu
diverts attention from individuals’ rational choice of sion is communication. Few researchers have acknowl
“doing” various social practices to “choices” of individuals, edged the role of technology in WM and applied this
emphasizing why certain practices are produced/repro model to test the diffusion of SWM policies and programs
duced, prevented, or cultivated. Therefore, SPT recognizes among citizens. Chen and Chang (2010) researched the
the role of social practices in accomplishing tasks (Shove effect of DOI theory on recycling methods. They found
2010). According to Reckwitz (2002), SPT provides that environmental policy and diffusion effects had
a plethora of new routes for exploring sustainable behaviors a significant impact on SWM, which led to the accelerating
related to social order and human action. SPT has been process of recycling among Taiwanese people.
applied to general environmental behavioral studies, such DOI theory may have applicability in places with
as climate change, sustainability, and energy conservation; adequate infrastructure to promote and adopt new tech
however, the association between SPT and SWM remains nologies. However, societies deprived of basic needs
cannot access new technologies. Furthermore, many of subjected to empirical investigations. Therefore, the find
the elements of DOI theory are more suitable for ings obtained from these research aid practical applica
Western nations and less relevant to developing coun tions where future researchers can conduct more studies
tries. These economic and socio-cultural differences to explore why some individuals participate in SWM
between societies act as a barrier to apply this model activities and some do not.
globally. DOI theory is more of a business model and The following steps were undertaken during our sys
hence utilized more in management, technology, and tematic research process:
economic innovation (Salhofer et al., 2008). However,
specific behaviors such as waste separation depend on
Defining research questions (RQs)
psychological factors, resources, and social systems,
which are not addressed by DOI theory. Furthermore, To obtain an overview of current research on the ante
when government bodies initiate innovations and pro cedents of SWMB, we formulated the following
grams, diffusion of external elements may not be uni four RQs:
form owing to physical and social factors that may RQ1: What current theories contribute to the predic
influence the flow of innovation among citizens. Since tion of SWMB?
social norms and the rate of acceptance within society We included behavioral theories from several fields
determine innovation, the application of this model in that could aid in investigating SWMB.
developing countries cannot be generalized. RQ2: What theory pertaining to SWMB is the most
examined in the literature?
Technology acceptance model (TAM) This question was defined to investigate the most
TAM, derived from TRA, is one of the most widely accepted examined theory in exploring SWMB.
models in predicting user adoption of information systems. RQ3: What are the focal research themes used in
Davis (1989) and Venkatesh and Davis (2000) considered SWMB studies concerning research type and
perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use to be the two contribution?
primary determinants which determine technology adoption This question explored the themes adopted in SWM
and actual system use. theories to identify possible research gaps.
SWM is a dynamic field that seeks transformation RQ4: What variables that influence SWMB were iden
through technology, tools, and techniques in improving tified by earlier researchers?
recycling rates, automated waste collection, composting This question explored current knowledge of SWMB
methods, and landfill modernization. The success of aspects that might lead to the formation of a hypothesis.
these technologies depends on individuals who accept
or reject them. SWMB studies that apply this model are
Identifying keywords and search strategy
lacking. In the context of SWM, this model is not
applicable to all ages and groups (e.g., elderly people A literature search was conducted to identify the behavioral
in rural areas may not understand how to use new determinants of SWM. We applied a simple search string –
technologies). Furthermore, some might argue that “solid waste management behavior AND theories.” We iden
technology worsens the relationship between humans tified 10 electronic databases with SWMB-specific publica
and the environment. Thus, TAM application among tions, which included peer-reviewed journals. Our search
the general population requires further research. included articles published between January 1, 1968 and
May 30, 2020 from the following sources: American
Psychological Association (APA), Association of Consumer
Research method
Research, Clocks, EBSCO Host, Emerald Insight, Google
We conducted an SLR to map out critical areas where Scholar, JSTOR, Open Access Research Database, SAGE,
further scientific research is required. Since an SLR is SpringerLink, Taylor & Francis, Universiti Kebangsaan
a synthesis of past research to address specific questions, Malaysia, University of Massachusetts Press, University of
it helps researchers summarize ample evidence by Wisconsin Press, and Wiley Online. Databases that did not
explaining differences among studies, which is a critical allow the search items along with Boolean operators or
objective in framing and establishing theories (Bower and databases that denied access to full articles were not included.
Gilbody 2005). The questions subjected to methodical Although we did not limit the publication period to a
and scientific analysis in SLRs can pave the way for specified year/date, it eventually turned into January 1968
further research by investigating the consistency and gen to May 2018. The selected, “Words, deeds, and the percep
eralization of evidence within the field of SWM. It is also tion of consequences and responsibility in action situations”
advantageous in building hypotheses that can be from the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
(Schwartz 1968) was the first article selected from APA. recorded to uphold research quality and for documentation.
Similarly, the last paper, “Food waste behavior at the house After completion of the selection process, articles were placed
hold level: A conceptual framework” was from the Journal of into one of four categories:
Waste Management (Abdelradi 2018).
The search was conducted using standard filters and sensi (1) Descriptive articles: Those that contained the ori
tivity analysis. We accounted for diversified theories and their ginal description of a theory or extension of that
complex bodies of evidence in volume and breadth. The search theory written by authors who conceived said
was restricted to titles and abstracts to retrieve content relevant theory originally (primary theory sources).
to this research. Because our research focused on SWMB and (2) Intervention articles: Those that stated in their
related theories, we conducted a separate search for each theory methods that they used a particular theory to
related to SWM in all databases to retrieve the maximum improve SWM and measured behavior as an
number of published articles. Thus, the search strategy included outcome.
three sets of search items: (1) list of theories (e.g., behavior (3) Evaluative articles: Those in which a theory was
change theories), (2) theories and their relevance in under tested empirically and longitudinally.
standing behavior change in general (e.g., NAT), and (3) dis (4) Review articles: Those that systematically reviewed
cipline-specific terms combined with the name of a theory (e.g., a theory by adopting a clear methodology, describ
SWM and SPT). We identified 10 theories related to individual ing search strategy, inclusion/exclusion criteria,
behavioral theories, three theories related to social behavioral quality assessment criteria, data extraction, data
theories, and two theories related to technology behavioral synthesis, and results.
theories.
We used a wide variety of search strings for each data
Inclusion criteria for theories
base. This is because each database is different and using
Theories were incorporated if they (i) met the definition of
a single search string did not provide the desired results.
theory and behavior; (ii) considered behavior as an outcome
Hence, multiple searches were conducted with different
(e.g., TPB); (iii) referred to individual behavior as the focal point
combinations of words and search strings. A list of search
of a social structure (e.g., SCT); (iv) possessed a distinguished
strings and how these search items were combined is shown
framework that explained how systems (e.g., health, environ
in Table 1. In addition, potentially relevant behavior change
ment, and society) relate to each other in the prediction of
theories were searched through web searches and key infor
behavioral outcomes (e.g., HBM); (v) presented applicability
mation was obtained from web-based resources such as the
in changing behavior; and (vi) referred to implementation
National Institute of Health, USA, and Government Social
values in SWM research, policy, and practice.
Research Unit, UK.
Inclusion criteria for articles

Selection and quality assessment Articles were included if they (i) provided clear research
Search strings were used consecutively for selected theories. constructs of SWMB, using the aforementioned theories;
In the first stage, 1,666 articles were retrieved. We screened (ii) incorporated theories and methods for the evaluation of
for relevant studies by title. If the title was deemed relevant, behavior change interventions and measured behavior as
we analyzed the abstract; at this stage, 1,229 studies were an outcome; (iii) tested a theory through empirical methods
excluded (including conferences, workshops, books, editorial by providing a clear description of sampling, instrument
reviews, dissertations, and book reviews). Thus, articles were development, data collection, data analysis, and reported
narrowed to 418 relevant studies, which were further the results of their studies; (iv) addressed theory compar
reduced to 300. We excluded those 118 studies after checking isons to explore behavioral outcomes regarding research
for repetition and similarity among multiple databases. In constructs; (v) addressed studies through the philosophical
the next step, inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied to aspects of SWMB; (vi) evaluated hypothetical models by
each study by examining their introductions, literature providing linkages to core models and adding variables to
reviews, results, and conclusions. Consequently, 165 studies the core model; (vii) tested a theory by focusing on SWMB
were removed, and we identified 135 studies related to in the context of waste separation, composting, reduce,
SWMB aspects. These studies were subjected to quality reuse, and recycling; (viii) were related to theory and
assessment, and 55 did not meet our specific criteria. Thus, SWMB strategies, practice, and policy; and (ix) criticized
the sample was reduced to 80 studies (Figure 1). Discarded or proposed solutions and presented new models or the
articles at each stage were meticulously assessed and ories to develop contemporary behavioral outcome models.
Table 1. Search strings and Boolean operators.

Boolean
Concept Key words and strings operator
Solid waste management behavior Solid Waste Management AND Behavior AND
[Theory OR Theories OR Model OR Models OR System OR Systems OR
Concept OR Concepts]
Behavioral change theories in behavioral sciences, psychology, Solid Waste Management Behavior AND Theories AND
sociology, anthropology and technology [Theory OR Theories OR Model OR Models OR System OR Systems OR
Concept OR Concepts]
3Rs behavioral intervention and behavioral change theories Reduce, Reuse, Recycle AND behavioral change theories [Theory OR Theories AND
OR Model OR Models OR System OR Systems OR Concept OR Concepts]
Exclusion criteria for theories contingency theory), or (iii) they focused on cognition but
Theories were excluded if (i) their application did not were not behavior-specific (e.g., social comparison theory).
provide a clear benefit to research behavioral change
regarding SWM, (ii) they focused on group behaviors in Exclusion criteria for articles
which individual behavior was not referred within units/ Articles were excluded if they (i) mentioned WM beha
corporations (e.g., organizational behavior, and vior in titles and abstracts but focused on other forms of
Figure 1. Selection process – flow chart of review.

waste (e.g., bio-waste, hazardous waste, and animal General characteristics

waste); (ii) discussed general environmental issues
This segment presents the analysis that answers RQ1 and
(e.g., global warming, climate change, and energy con
RQ2. The extracted data contained features such as (i)
servation) along with SWMB; (iii) addressed environ
country where the research was conducted, (ii) database,
mental degradation issues where the primary focus was
(iii) journal that published the study, (iv) article type
other than SWM; (iv) lacked focus in linking the selected
(descriptive, intervention, evaluative, review, etc.), (v)
theories and SWMB; (v) tested theoretical models as
source type (primary or secondary), (vi) theory used
part of comparison studies where pure cognition was
(HBM, MCT, TPB, etc.), (vii) research techniques (quali
the core determinant (e.g., attitude–intention) rather
tative, quantitative, or mixed-methods), (viii) sampling
than actual behavior (e.g., attitude–intention-behavior)
type (probability and non-probability), (ix) sampling
; (vi) proposed program development, cost-effectiveness,
frame (householders, students, university graduates,
and policy incorporation models without any solid evi
employees, parents, and public), (x) measurement of
dence of behavioral theories; (vii) fell into the following
behavior (self-report, objective, or both), (xi) target beha
categories: full books, handbooks, dissertations, confer
vior (waste separation, composting, reduce, reuse, and
ence posters, presentations, technical reports, proposal
recycle), and (xii) target behavior specification (food,
reports, keynotes, tutorial course works, workshop sum
plastic, paper, composting, garden activity, etc.). We also
maries, non-peer-reviewed journal publications, non-
recorded the primary information about selected studies
English publications, and editorial commentaries; or
such as author name, study title, and year of the study. We
(viii) were repeated articles from different sources.
specifically chose this approach to present specific and
clear results to overcome the ambiguity of research in this
Quality assessment field. The detailed analysis of data extraction will be pre
A challenging component in SLRs is the selection of sented in the following sections.
high-quality papers for study (Davis et al. 2015;
Tranfield, Denyer, and Smart 2003). Although there
are no standard definitions for choosing a high-quality Classification scheme
paper, researchers express that high-quality papers We classified the included studies according to three
include context-based research (Verhagen et al., 1998; perspectives: research contribution, research focus, and
Whiting et al. 2003), appropriate research design to research type. Each item will be discussed in the following
minimize bias, theory applicability, relevant RQs, visibi sections.
lity in peer-reviewed journals and key sources, accurate
definitions of key terms, and innovation to the body of Contribution type
knowledge (Oxman 1994; Tranfield, Denyer, and Smart We identified theories related to SWMB from the fields of
2003). Since this study was an evidence-based systematic psychology, anthropology, sociology, and technology; we
review, only the definitions of quality in connection to categorized the selected articles (including descriptive,
this research were considered. Apart from adopting intervention, evaluative, and review articles) into three
a rigorous process of scrutinizing the articles by reading disciplines: (i) individual behavior theories, (ii) social
selected studies back and forth several times, behavior theories, and (iii) technology behavior theories.
a significant part of this process was the consideration
of inclusion criteria from peer-reviewed journals. In
Research focus
addition, we reviewed key literature that emphasized
Based on topic orientation and problems addressed in
the synthesis of scientific and philosophical aspects of
the selected studies, we developed four categories of
theories, which are reproducible for experimentations
research focus areas to answer RQ3:
and contribute to understanding the determinants of
SWMB and behavior change.
(1) Model development: This category included stu
dies that attempted to develop a model to describe
Data extraction the research constructs of a particular theory.
(2) Model testing: These studies made attempts to
Data extraction was undertaken based on the results of test theoretical models to explore the antecedents
previous steps. Since data extraction also aids in data of SWMB.
synthesis, we divided this section into three distinct (3) Model advancement: These studies contributed to
parts: (i) general characteristics of included studies, (ii) introducing new concepts, propose theoretical fra
classification scheme, and (iii) identification of variables. meworks, or report contemporary developments.
(4) Model comparison: These studies compared two we classified the selected studies as high-, middle-, and low-
or more models by testing them empirically. income countries. Results revealed that most SWMB stu
dies were conducted in high-income countries (n = 66,
Research type 83%), in which the USA was the highest contributor
Based on the analysis and the type of included studies, (n = 29; 44%; Figure 4) as compared to other countries.
we identified seven types of research (Table 2).
Theory identification and frequency of use
Identification of variables using cluster analysis Fifteen theories were identified to potentially predict the
This section provides insights on influential factors that determinants of SWMB (RQ1), including 10 theories in the
were developed by earlier researchers to investigate the category of individual behavior theories, three in the social
parameters of SWMB. Thus, we performed cluster analysis behavior theories category, and two in the technology
in multiple steps. First, during data extraction, each article behavior theories category (Table 4). Concerning the fre
was meticulously studied, and variables identified by earlier quency of use of behavioral theories, TPB was the most
authors were captured in Microsoft Excel. Following this, to frequently used (n = 29; 46%; Figure 5; RQ2). Moreover, out
identify distinguishing concepts and code the texts, we of 63 evaluation and intervention articles, four articles
formed single-linkage clusters. Based on the broad spec addressed comparative analysis, in which TRA and TPB
trum of constructs and operational definitions of concept were most common (n = 2; 50%), followed by NAT and
codes, four clusters were developed (Table 3). Once the VBN theory (n = 1, 25%), and TRA and TPB (n = 1, 25%;
clusters were formed, each code was scrutinized thoroughly Figure 6). A description of selected theories has been dis
and placed in their relative cluster after careful examination. cussed in previous sections and a list of lead authors, date of
This exercise was crucial because the organization and publication of papers that originally describes the theory,
consolidation of variables not only illustrates the perception and the number of articles that used said theory is provided
of previous theoretical underpinnings and their research in Table 4.
constructs, but also aids in mapping the intellectual terri
tory and the gaps that require further exploration. Thus, we Research design
deemed it appropriate to capture separately each measured
variable that forms the knowledge stock to build hypotheses Most evaluation and intervention studies used quantitative
for future SWMB studies. techniques (n = 45; 72%), followed by qualitative methods
(n = 14; 22%) and mixed-methods (n = 4; 6%; Figure 7). Of
these, 32 studies used exploratory factor analysis, 39 selected
Results and discussion probability sampling, and 49 used self-report measures.
General characteristics Regarding the target population, householders were
Based on database publication trends, most articles were

Table 2. Research type and description.
published by Elsevier (n = 39; 40%). Furthermore, the num
Research type Description
ber of studies published in Scopus-indexed journals was
1. Analytical Involves critical thinking and evaluation to find out facts
higher (n = 56; 78%), in comparison with ISI Web of Science- and answers about a given subject. Answers obtained
indexed journals (n = 27; 22%; Figure 2). Regarding the from such analysis would be useful in developing
new phenomenon.
distribution of SWMB articles, there was a peak in field- 2. Comparative Item-by-item comparison of two or more comparable
related research and publications between 2010 and 2014, analysis alternatives, sets of data, theories, systems, or the like
study, thus providing convergence and divergence
with seven studies (n = 7; 9%) published in 2014 alone between researches about same topic.
(Figure 3). Eventually, the trend appeared to follow 3. Conceptual Makes use of theoretical frameworks and philosophical
discussions that propose a hypothesis.
a normal distribution during this period, which indicates 4. Empirical Testing a theoretical model or framework using
the growing interest among researchers to conduct more evidence by means of direct or indirect observation
studies in developing countries, owing to the increase in or experience, thus gaining knowledge about
a particular topic.
population and consumerism. Results indicated that devel 5. View-point Involves author’s interpretation of a situation,
oped countries researched this field mostly from 1990 to phenomenon, model, etc.
6. Evaluation Investigates the practical implementation of solution by
2005. aiming at objective and goal of a study topic by using
Regarding the distribution of country classification, a set of research methods.
7. Literature Summarizing of previous scholarly materials about
World Bank classifies all countries based on their gross review a specific topic through step-by-step process of
domestic product – a monetary measure of goods produced analyzing, evaluating, and synthesizing to explain
and understand the current state of the topic.
annually (https://www.worldbank.org). Considering this,
Table 3. Cluster type.

Cluster type Cluster name Description
Cluster 1 Psychological factors Involves with mental phenomenon that influences an individual to consciously or unconsciously involve in SWM
activities and actions.
Cluster 2 Situational factors Comprises of external infrastructure that drives an individual to exhibit SWMB.
Cluster 3 Community factors Accounts to the combination of social, economic, cultural, and political processes identified by individuals, like-
minded people and communities to achieve sustainable SWM system.
Cluster 4 Demographic factors A group of personal characteristics of an individual to study a set of population about SWMB.
considered as the highest sampling frame, with representa a chart detailing the target behavior category (Figure 9) and
tion in 32 studies (mentioned as residents in few studies) that specification (Figure 10) for each category is provided in
included retirees, homemakers, teenagers, and work-from- Table 6.
home officials aged ≥18 years (Figure 8). Researchers may
have focused on this particular sampling frame because this
category often includes people from different groups, which Classification scheme
minimizes bias and provides generalizable results. A detailed The classification scheme of the literature reviewed in
summary of the research design characteristics of the articles this research makes it imperative to focus on their con
selected for this study is provided in Table 5. tribution type, research focus, and research type in con
nection to SWMB. A detailed account of this is
explained in the following paragraphs.
Target behavior
Data extraction yielded nine target behavior categories. Of Model development
these, recycling of all items (e.g., plastic, glass, paper, and This section discusses studies that developed theoretic
metal) among householders has been amply studied, models based on particular phenomena; we identified 10
accounting for 59% (n = 37) of all studies. A primary reason studies that fit this criterion (Table 7). These studies are
for researchers to examine this specific behavior could be exploratory in attempting to link research constructs.
that recycling is a key activity to convert waste into useful Bandura (1977) proposed an integrative model and
material. With the increase in consumerism and urbaniza hypothesized that personal efficacy (their degree of per
tion, people produce considerable waste; however, they can sistence) determines an individual’s behavior.
participate in SWM programs and related activities through Furthermore, Bandura (1991) calls for cultivating prox
source separation. Understanding residents’ perception of imal sub-goals to attain a target behavior. For example, if
recycling allows statutory policymakers to take productive composting is the target behavior, separation, and col
actions in policy framing and market provisions, which lection of kitchen biodegradable waste could be a sub-
could be the chief reason behind the vast amount of studies goal. Cognitive theorists are more interested in estab
on these recycling behaviors. A high-level summary and lishing the determining factors of the target behavior.
Figure 2. Journal-wise publication trend.

Figure 3. Distribution of publications by years.
Figure 4. Distribution of studies by country-wise income grouping.
For example, Rosenstock, Strecher, and Becker (1988) on attitude and concluded that TPB is a powerful model
incorporated self-efficacy into the HBM and concluded to predict waste behaviors. In a collaborative study that
that a target behavior can be achieved when an indivi compared waste sorting behavior between Lithuanian and
dual possesses outcome expectations and efficacy expec Swedish people, Miliute-Plepiene et al. (2016) reported
tations, both of which are required to perform that Sweden was a “matured recycler” because their waste
a behavior. However, according to Deci and Ryan collection system was accessible. Similarly, Joung and
(1980) model, the performance of a specific behavior Park-Poaps (2013) examined the factors that motivate
depends on information received externally, from the various clothing disposal behaviors by using the TRA
environment, and internally, from within the individual. model; they found that charity concerns motivate an
Thus, these authors argued that motive plays a pivotal individual to undertake recycling activities. They also
role in deciding a person’s behavior. concluded that donation behaviors and situational factors
motivate disposal behaviors. Hargreaves (2011) con
ducted a qualitative study in the UK using semi-
Model testing
structured interviews and observation. They reported
We identified 53 studies in the model-testing category of
a 29% reduction in waste through the application of social
research contribution. Of these, 39 studies were empirical,
practices and material infrastructure and concluded that
and we categorized 14 papers as evaluation research
these strategies can convert a waste-filled society into
(Table 8). Zhang et al. (2015) tested TPB by ascertaining
a resourceful one. Similarly, Akman and Mishra (2015)
the antecedents of waste separation behavior among resi
explored employees’ behavior toward green information
dents of China. They found that SNs, situational factors,
technology by testing TAM and concluded that perceived
and PBC were positively associated with intention. They
ease of use and perceived usefulness play a critical role in
also found that moral obligations had a positive influence
Table 4. Theories identified along with first author, date of primary theory source, and the number of articles identified for the
individual, social, and technology behavior theory review.
Classification of theory Name of the theory First author theorist (date) Articles included in the review
1. Individual behavior theory 1. Health belief model Rosenstock (1966) 3
2. Learning theory Skinner (1954) 1
3. Motivation crowding theory Frey and Jegen (2001) 1
4. Norm activation theory Schwartz (1977) 11
5. Self-determination theory Deci and Ryan (1980) 6
6. Self-efficacy theory Bandura (1977) 5
7. Self-regulation theory Kanfer and Karoly (1970) 3
8. Theory of reasoned action Ajzen & Fishbein (1975) 6
9. Theory of planned behavior Ajzen (1985) 32
10. Value belief norm theory Stern (1999) 4
2. Social behavior theory 1. Rational choice theory Weber (1958) 1
2. Social cognitive theory Bandura (1986) 2
3. Social practice theory Bourdieu (1977) 1
3.Technology behavior theory 1. Diffusion of innovation theory Rogers (1983) 2
2. Technology acceptance model Davis (1989) 2
Figure 5. Frequency of use of theories.
employees’ workplace attitudes. It is thus evident from proposed the addition of past behavior as the best pre
previous literature that each study has reported different dictor of the future behavior of an individual. Bandura
results that exhibit variance. The dynamics of said studies (1991) proposed an advanced model of SCT and empha
also explain the nature of certain waste behaviors that sized that human behavior cannot be solely regulated by
vary across a range of target populations at different external factors. He theorized that human behavior
scenarios that are likely to change over time. These results operates at three sub-functions at internal levels: self-
need to be verified in other contexts – an aim of the monitoring, judgment, and self-reaction. He also
current review. emphasized self-observation to set achievable goals
through self-evaluation process among individuals.
Model advancement This study is significant because it provides insight into
We included 13 studies in the model advancement cate how self-regulation evolves in the context of cognitive
gory of SWMB. Of these, two studies were analytical, six behavior.
were conceptual, one was a viewpoint, and four were
literature reviews (Table 9). None of these studies were Model comparison
comparative. Studies that proposed new concepts or Although researchers have compared various theoreti
added new variables to the basic models but did not cal models and integrated two or more frameworks
test said models were placed in this category. Ajzen (Kaiser 2005; Oreg and Katz-Gerro 2006), scant studies
(1991) analyzed the status of TPB and argued that have compared two or more basic models (intra-model
a model should contain all important variables to obtain comparison) or made comparisons within a single
non-error variance results for target behavior. Hence, he model (inter-model comparison) to predict SWMB.
Figure 6. Frequency of comparative studies.
Figure 7. Distribution of studies based on research methods.
Figure 8. Distribution of studies based on target population.
We found only four such studies: one was of TPB to explore the role of self-identity in one model,
a comparative analysis, one was empirical, one was and to explore the role of self-identity and social iden
an evaluation, and one was a literature review tity within the attitude–intention relationship in
(Table 10). We identified no studies addressing social another model. TPB was used in both models and self-
and technology behavior theories. Terry, Hogg, and identity appeared as the main predictor of intention.
White (1999) conducted an inter-model comparison This research was significant as the study revealed the
Table 5. Research design characteristics of studies included in the systematic review.

Research design characteristics for evaluative and intervention articles Number of articles reporting in the
(n=63) Specification review
1. Research methods 1. Quantitative 45
2. Qualitative 14
3. Mixed Methods 4
2. Factor analysis 1. Exploratory factor analysis 32
2. Confirmatory factor analysis 18
3. Not mentioned 13
3. Sampling techniques 1. Probability sampling 39
2. Nonprobability sampling 18
3. Not mentioned 6
4. Method of measurement 1. Self-report 49
2. Objective 8
3. Both 6
5. Target population 1. Householders aged >18 yrs 32
2. General public 11
3. University students >18 yrs 10
4. University faculties & nonteaching 3
staffs
5. Office workers 2
6. School students aged b/n 10– 12 yrs 2
7. School students aged b/n 14 −16 yrs 2
8. Parents who use diapers 1
Figure 9. Distribution of studies based on target behavior.
relationship between self-identity and behavior, indir behavioral outcome. The difficulty of its measurabil
ectly through intention. Thøgersen et al. (1996) under ity has kindled interest among researchers to add and
took a review by comparing TRA and VBN theory and assess more variables. Although few researchers have
concluded that Schwartz’s model of altruistic behavior conducted comparative analyses using different pos
offers realistic results in targeting recycling behavior. tulations, model testing is the main method to
The analysis of the contribution type of each study explore the cognitive and altruistic facets of SWMB.
revealed that individual behavior theories were In distribution of research type, empirical studies
widely used to determine the antecedents of SWMB were the most common (n = 41; 51%). This evi
(n = 72; 90%). In the distribution of research focus, denced a dearth in evaluation studies (Figure 11).
researchers targeted model testing in maximum arti Based on the classification scheme discussed above,
cles (n = 53; 66%). The main reason for the predilec we developed a manual research focus map to avail for
tion toward model testing and empirical research an overall view of seven research types and four research
may be to bring waste behavioral changes among contribution types (Figure 12). This map was primarily
citizens through evaluations and interventions using developed to gain insight into the nature of studies in the
multiple approaches. Moreover, SWMB is entangled field to date and to identify unexplored research areas
within the layers of antecedents that influence its that need to be researched in the future.
Figure 10. Distribution of studies based on target behavior specification.
Table 6. Target behavior category, target behavior specification, and number of articles included in the review.
Target behavior category Target behavior specification Number of articles reporting in the review
1. Recycling (N = 38; 58%) 1. All items (glass, paper, aluminum cans, clothes, etc.) 26
2. Paper 5
3. Clothes 3
4. Glass 3
5. Cardboard 1
2. Source separation (N = 7; 11%) 1. All items 4
2. Food 2
3. Clothes 1
3. Reduce, reuse & recycle (N = 4; 7%) 1. All items 3
2. Clothes 1
4. Composting (N = 3; 6%) 1. All items (kitchen wastes, garden wastes, etc.) 3
5. Reduce & recycle (N = 3; 5%) 1. All items 3
2. Paper 1
6. Reduce (N = 3; 4%) 1. Food 2
2. Diaper 1
7. Reuse & recycle (N = 2, 3%) 1. All items 2
8. Waste minimization (N = 1; 2%) 1. All items 1
9. Reuse (N = 1; 2%) 1. All items 1
Table 7. Contribution and research types presented in 10 papers on model development.

Contribution type
Research type Individual behavioral theories Social behavioral theories Technology behavioral theories
Analytical Higgins (1996), Bandura (1977), Miafodzyeva and Brandt (2013), Bandura (1986) - -
Conceptual Rosenstock (1974) - Chau (1996)
Empirical Skinner and Chi (2012) - -
View-point Rosenstock, Strecher, and Becker (1988); Deci and Ryan (1980); Stern (1999) - -
Identification of variables using cluster analysis (demographic factors; RQ4; Figure 13). In addition, attitude
The central part of this systematic process was to summarize was measured most often (n = 43) for cluster 1, opportunities
the variables utilized from diverse disciplines that may aid in were measured most often (n = 5) for cluster 2, each com
theoretical and methodological SWMB predictions. Thus, munity variable was measured (n = 1 each) for cluster 3, and
we identified 52 variables: 34 belonged to cluster 1 (psycho age was measured most often (n = 41) for cluster 4 (RQ4).
logical factors), eight to cluster 2 (situational factors), five to The rationale behind applying psychological factors in most
cluster 3 (community factors), and five to cluster 4 of the studies could be that waste production is closely
Table 8. Contribution and research types presented in 53 papers on model testing.

Contribution type
Research Social behavioral Technology beha
type Individual behavioral theories theories vioral theories
Empirical Vining and Ebreo (1992), Huffman et al. (2014), Bagozzi and Dabholkar (1994), Miliute-Plepiene Best et al. (2011), Feiock and West
et al. (2016), Cecere, Mancinelli, and Mazzanti (2014), Green-Demers, Pelletier, and Sophie Hargreaves (2011) (1993)
(1997), Kelly et al. (2006), Bortoleto, Kurisu, and Hanaki (2012), Cheung, Chan, and Wong (1999),
Chu and Chiu (2003), Jekria and Daud (2016), Joung and Park-Poaps (2013), Knussen et al.
(2004), Chan (1998), Mahmud, Diyana, and Osman (2010), Oztekin et al. (2017), Pakpour et al.
(2014), Ramayah, Wai Chow Lee, and Mohamad (2010), Ramayah, Wai Chow Lee, and Lim
(2012), Rise et al. (2003), Tonglet, Phillips, and Read (2004), Wan et al. (2012), Xu et al. (2017),
Zhang et al. (2015), McCarty and Shrum (1994), Lindsay and Strathman (1997), Klöckner &
Oppedal (2011), Lee, De Young, and Marans (1995), Gould et al. (2016), Thøgersen, & Ölander
(2003), Izagirre-Olaizola, Fernández-Sainz, and Vicente-Molina (2015), Barr (2004); Mannetti,
Pierro, and Livi (2004), Schultz et al. (1995), Wang and Katzev (1990), Abdelradi (2018), Jimenez
et al. (2016)
Evaluation Davis et al. (2006), Brekke, Kipperberg, and Nyborg (2010), Hopper and McCarl Nielsen (1991), Akman and Mishra
Matthies, Selge, and Klöckner (2012), Åberg et al. (1996), Goldenhar and Connell (1993), Jones (2015)
(1989), Tonglet, Phillips, and Read (2004), Schultz (1999), Vining and Ebreo (2002), Blamey
(1998), Rowe (2015)
Table 9. Contribution and research types presented in 13 papers on model advancement.

Research type Contribution type
Social behavioral Technology behavioral
Individual behavioral theories theories theories
Analytical Ajzen (1991, 2000) - -
Conceptual Ryan and Deci (2000), Ajzen (2001), Stern (2000) Bandura (1991, 1999) Rogers (2002)
View-point Bandura (1999) - -
Literature Zimmerman (1989), Werner and Makela (1998), Schultz, Oskamp, and Mainieri (1995), - –
review Bandura (1989)
Table 10. Contribution and research types presented in four papers on model comparison.
Research Type Contribution type
Individual behavioral theories Social behavioral theories Technology behavioral theories
Comparative analysis Terry, Hogg, and White (1999) - -
Empirical Daneshvary, Daneshvary, and Keith Schwer (1998) - -
Evaluation Taylor and Todd (1997) - -
Literature review Thogersen (1996) - -
associated with an individual’s psychological functioning, Study implications

since it involves the constant conflict of environmental con
This endeavor to explore the principles of core the
struction and environmental destruction traits in a person.
oretical constructs and the applicability and limita
Moreover, unless individuals develop a strong affinity for
tions of the frameworks revealed an array of 15
environmental causes, achieving the eradication of landfills is
theories potentially relevant to mitigating SWM
highly unlikely (Lauren et al. 2016). According to some issues. This study sheds light on the methods of
scholars, waste handling demands a high-level of selflessness evaluating the complex and diverse issues of SWM
and commitment to overcome barriers. Although extrinsic from both theoretical and practical perspectives.
motivation such as recycling markets, community education, First, from a theoretical angle, the findings imply
and incentives may favor SWM actions, most studies high that the constructs of social and technological the
lighted that those activities may not translate into long- ories are under-explored. Since behavioral tendencies
established behaviors since SWM is purely altruistic. Table develop in a social context, utilization of social ele
11 presents the identified variables for each cluster. ments is key in assessing individual behavior. Second,
Though each study offers its own scholarship, con the existing works on theoretical frameworks for
sidering the space restriction, we present a summarized SWMB issues have produced a large pool of publica
analysis that highlights salient features that contributed tions from different geographical regions of the
to SWM research and solutions in the past few years world – covering a range of research methods,
(Table 12). research design, conceptualization of models, dataset
Figure 11. Distribution of studies based on classification scheme.
formats, application of theories, and addition of extra social, ecological, and political processes to derive ben
variables to the core constructs, and so on. Although efits at three important levels: individual, social, and
the researchers have a common objective; i.e., to community (e.g., recycling activity is influenced by
increase the predictive validity and measurability of self-efficacy at the individual-level; social support
proposed SWMB models, this study revealed that from family, friends, and colleagues at the society
such attempts have led to saturation in which com level; and interactions with likeminded people at the
mon variables are frequently used within the frame of community level).
attitude–intention linkages. As it is possible to chal Table 13 shows possible reasons for our results; we
lenge the reasons for pro-social and pro- present research gaps in the literature and possible
environmental behavioral adoption, expansion of reg directions for future research.
ular intention–based linkages may elucidate value-
action, social practice-action, and other links promot
ing SWMB that may be formed owing to different Study limitations
contexts including community, situational, and socio-
The current findings have to be viewed in light of some
demographic.
limitations. First, theories selected in this research were
From a practical perspective, first, this study may
based on cognitive frameworks that focused on explor
aid practitioners in developing more SWM models by
ing internal and external factors of an individual in the
incorporating multiple theories to increase the predic
social and environmental context, within which waste
tive validity and measurability of SWMB models. Some
problems occur (Baud et al. 2001; Monavari et al. 2012;
theories such as TPB have a strong evidence base;
Sembiring and Nitivattananon 2010). They are therefore
however, simply conducting research based on “pre
subject to biases and may have influenced our analysis.
viously used” or “recently used” theories in familiarity
Some past studies utilized theories other than psycholo
and feasibility is insufficient. Instead, it is necessary to
gical theories to evaluate multiple waste recycling pro
consider integrated frameworks (e.g., traditional values
grams. For instance, governance theory emphasizes
of RCT may be a relevant variable for VBN theory
a recycling mechanism design such as operationalization
because individuals inculcate their beliefs from family
of collection centers via interactions between govern
values and traditions) to enhance the predictive powers
ment, market, and society and promotes environmen
of SWMB models. Therefore, this study has high
tally friendly public behaviors (Xu et al. 2017). Similarly,
lighted the need to incorporate multi-level modeling
institutional theory focuses on political processes such as
within the scope of environmental protection. Second,
administration, incentives, schemes, norms, and rou
this study revealed the need to develop more holistic
tines, and their role in repetitive behaviors of an indivi
models within the hierarchical levels of individual,
dual within society (Rothenberg 2007). These theories
Figure 12. Research focus map.

Note: adenotes social behavior theories that was identified in our review
b
denotes technology behavior theories that was identified in our review
Figure 13. Schematic representation of identified variables for each cluster.
are based on organization and institution roles and are limited to individual-level psychological factors, we did
suitable for macro-level analysis. Since our study was not consider them. However, future researchers could
Table 11. Number of variables cited in the review.

Cluster type Cluster name Variables from review articles that is added to the cluster No of instances cited in the review articles
Cluster 1 Psychological factors (1) Attitude 43
(2) Intention 34
(3) Perceived behavioral control 28
(4) Subjective norms 24
(5) Social norms 18
(6) Environmental knowledge 13
(7) Moral norms 12
(8) Beliefs 11
(9) Consequences 11
(10) Environmental concern 11
(11) Awareness 8
(12) Motivation 8
(13) Values 5
(14) Habits 5
(15) Past experience 5
(16) Will 5
(17) Self-identity 5
(18) Responsibility 5
(19) Descriptive norms 4
(20) Group norms 3
(21) Self-efficacy 3
(22) Environmental need 3
(23) Commitment 2
(24) Environmental education 2
(25) Self-regulation 1
(26) Competence 1
(27) Interest in garden engagement 1
(28) Cleanliness 1
(29) Fun and enjoyment 1
(30) Excitement 1
(31) Sense of accomplishment 1
(32) Relatedness 1
(33) Legal norms 1
(34) Sense of belonging 1
Cluster 2 Situational factors (1) Opportunities 5
(2) Convenience 4
(3) Recycling bins 4
(4) Market facilitators 2
(5) Financial cost 1
(6) Market incentive 1
(7) Government incentive 1
(8) Government facilitators 1
Cluster 3 Community factors (1) Community groups 1
(2) Community concern 1
(3) Community support 1
(4) Community need 1
(5) Community communication 1
Cluster 4 Demographic factors (1) Age 41
(2) Gender 39
(3) Marital status 32
(4) Education 30
(5) Occupation 22
consider these frameworks to evaluate the role of possi were utilized to comprehend the political processes and its
ble parameters that could promote sustainable waste inter-relationships at multi-levels, such as administrative
behaviors among individuals. bodies, units (industries, organization, companies, office
Further, our research was limited to theoretical models set-ups, etc.), community groups (non-governmental orga
from behavioral sciences, psychology, anthropology, sociol nizations, religious groups, voluntary groups, etc.), and
ogy, and technology domains. Thus, contribution type may societal and individual (Golden et al. 2015). Although
have produced a bias. Some past studies utilized theories these models may be useful in assessing individual waste
from management science and ecological economics dis behavior, we did not consider them for our research
ciplines to comprehend green behaviors (Gordon-Wilson because our research primarily focused on studying the
and Modi 2015), sustainability behaviors (Chen and Chang psychological aspects of individuals at household waste
2000), and conservation behaviors (Rosa, Profice, and management levels. Hence, this study was restricted to
Collado 2018). Some models (e.g., social ecological theory) those domains that promote IWMB in the view of
24
Table 12. Summarized analysis and salient features of few studies selected for this review.
Author (year) Focus Purpose Research methodology Key findings Review remarks
Vining and Predicting To investigate environmental Quantitative study conducted during Schwartz’s model was tested and it was found that This study pioneered the research which
Ebreo recycling concern, recycling attitude, 1986, 1987, & 1988 at USA, Ontology environmental concern among residents undertook an intervention study of voluntary
(1992) behavior and recycling behavior paradigm, used NAT, random sampling increased over a period of 3years and recyclers curbside recycling. Though the study claims to
under curbside recycling of 500, 1000, & 1500 for 3 years, used exhibited stronger pro-environmental attitudes be successful by increasing recycling behavior
programs questionnaires of residents, the study adopted longitudinal
assessment for 3 years. During these years, the
attitude and behavior of residents would have
changed. Government would have
J.R. SUMANA AND L.L. R. RODRIGUES
implemented SWM programs and hence other

mediating factors may have played in
predicting behavior. It would have been fair if
qualitative methods were also included to
explore other predicting factors.
Bagozzi and Goals on To test TRA model and to Quantitative analysis at USA, used TRA, Fifteen key goals of a recycler were discovered The study has discussed 15 goals that can play
Dabholkar recycling explore the antecedents of random telephone dialing, 133 significant role in recycling behavior. However,
(1994) decision recycling behavior respondents, used questionnaires it is not clear how these goals are linked to TRA
behavior and which of them can play mediating, central
and causal roles in its hierarchy. Though the
study elaborately highlights the importance of
goals, its practical implications lack
explanations on goal setting.
Lee, De Home and office To examine recycle behavior at Quantitative and qualitative study using Significant relationship was found between home This research conducted in USA emphasized on
Young, and recycling home and office settings NAT model, informal interviews and site and office recycling behaviors. It was concluded paper recycling since the frequency of use of
Marans behavior and investigate relationship visits to develop questionnaires at that those who actively participate at household papers at office is high, which makes this
1995 between them Taiwan recycling are likely to recycle due to research unique and logical. However, the study
organizational and individual commitment of was conducted at metropolitan city and the
recycling behavior results cannot be generalized. Also, the study
chose 32 organizations of which 15
organizations were following recycling
programs. A bias is noticed and considering
sampling from general offices which are not
environmentally related would be feasible.
Cheung, Paper recycling To explore wastepaper Quantitative analysis at Hong Kong using PBC had no significant link with intention, however This was the first study conducted at Hong Kong
Chan, and recycling behavior among TPB, 137 respondents, used openended environmental knowledge had positive link to investigate wastepaper recycling behavior.
Wong college students and close-ended questions toward behavior in comparison with past Though the study included various possible
(1999) behavior. variables to TPB framework, the study cannot
be generalized as target population was
specific. Also, students who studied were all
Chinese and heterogeneity of selected
population is questionable.
(Continued)
Table 12. (Continued).
Thogersen Recycling and To explore recycling activities Quantitative analysis at Netherlands, used Pay-by-weight scheme resulted in use more Although the study is considered as a path
(2003) composting and home composting SDT, pragmatic paradigm, control recyclables materials and garden composting and breaking in European market-based
behavior under pay-by-weight group study structure, used less wastes to dustbin. instruments in the sense of large sample, field
scheme questionnaires setting and expert consultation to choose
municipalities, the study cannot be generalized
as it accounts for only 5 municipalities. Also, the
study discussed external motivation in terms of
monetary incentives, and it did not consider
internal motivation which is a key factor in
SWM. More studies with larger samples need to
be replicated from different municipalities to
gain an overview of success of market-based
instruments.
Tonglet, Pro - To examine the role of waste Mixed methods analysis at UK, used TPB, Concluded that waste minimization may contain This study is considered unique and mature as the
Phillips, environmental minimization behavior in pragmatic paradigm, collected data a social element in those who engage in pro- recycling behavior was not self-reporting, rather
and Read behavior comparison to recycling from observation in stage 1, conducted environmental behavior, as a correlation was observed independently. It highlighted that
(2004) interviews in stage 2, collected observed between moral and social elements of recycling and waste minimization are two
questionnaires in stage 3. extended TPB model. different dimensions and hence reduce, reuse,
and recycle methods of SWM has to be targeted
separately. However, the study was conducted
at Brixworth, UK with small population where
females have responded more as compared to
males. Since the model did not measure beliefs,
intentions and attitude specifically factors
predicting behavior is not clear.
Brekke, Household glass To understand the role of Quantitative study at Norway, used NAT, Strong relationship between social interaction and This research was a continuation work of previous
Kipperberg, recycling ascription responsibility 1104 respondents from Norwegian glass recycling behavior was found out. It was project conducted by Brekke and Nyborg, 2007.
and Nyborg within social interactions householders, ontology paradigm concluded that duty-based motivation of a person The study revealed an important link between
2010 which is decent self- image of an individual within social and individual behavior by introducing
social structure is vital in recycling activity duty-based motivation concept. The study
incorporated parsimonious approach, i.e.,
factors predicting behavior are those which are
simplest and almost correct for most situations.
This method of fitting assumptions from
evidence cannot hold good since behavioral
study is multilayered and explanation of
cognitive process demands empirical
explanation. Furthermore, the survey comprised
very few questions related to recycling behavior
and was included in life style behaviors of
citizens. Hence, a bias is noted in data
collection.
(Continued)
25
26

Best and Household waste To examine the role of Field study analysis of pre-post recycling Relationship between recycling and environmental This study was the first to test RCT in Germany in
Kneip 2011 recycling incentives and opportunity implementation with control and concern in the first wave was medium. Recycling the context of SWM. The study was considered
structures on attitude and experimental groups, survey research rates increased from 76.5% to 80.5% during 2006 to be salient as it experimented its hypothesis
recycling behavior from 3 districts of Germany using RCT, to 2007. and found the interaction effect of attitude and
1882 respondents, behavior, Apart from this, the research
undertook studies at 3 waves within an
intermission of 3 months. That way the period
of testing was short without much of external
influence on individual’s behavior. However, the
study had limitations that single hypothesis was
derived from 3 theories and hence the test is
J.R. SUMANA AND L.L. R. RODRIGUES
valued as incomplete.
Ghani et al., Food waste To explore the influencing Quantitative study at Malaysia, used TPB, Determinant of food separation behavior was found Though the research dealt with relevant and
2013 separation factors of waste separation 204 academic and non-academic staffs to be intention and the relationship between interesting topic, it was unclear of selecting
behavior behavior from selected departments using intention and behavior was significant samples about specific faculty departments.
questionnaires This sample bias is questionable. Though the
study mentions stratified random sampling, the
reason for choosing this is also is not justified.
Also, the discussion and practical implications
about the relationship between various
components of TPB and its added variables are
insufficient.
Pakpour et al. Waste separation To find the factors influencing Quantitative study at 2 waves with 1-year Along with core constructs of TPB, moral obligation, Although the study had positive points such as
2014 behavior waste separation behavior intermission at Iran, used TPB, 1782 past behavior, and self-identity predicted waste a large sample, community-based unit in
residents, self-reported questionnaires separation behavior. After 1 year along with developing country and elaborate description
above predictors, sociodemographic factors also about action planning, the study lacked
played significant and explained 47% variance. explanation about the motivation to choose 2
wave studies in 1-year intermission. Though the
study mentions to measure past behavior, it is
unclear that whether the same questionnaire
was used both times. Also, self-reported
questionnaire cannot be replaced for actual
behavior and there was scope for adding
qualitative techniques for 1 year. The study took
place at an urban area and hence the results
cannot be generalized.
Huffman et al. Investigation of To predict recycling attitudes Mixed methods approach of two phases at Self-reported behavior over estimated observed The research was the first lab-based study to
2014 self-report and recycling behavior USA, used SDT, 118 students behavior with variance of 8%. Interaction effect compare self-reported and observed behavior
versus considering effect of social predicted that social influence had positive in the context of SWM. Although it studied
observed influence and relationship with self-reported behavior but not a rare topic by revealing useful insights, the
behavior anthropocentrism on an with observed recycling behavior. study cannot be generalized due to artificial
individual setting of experiment. Also, sample size was less
with undistributed gender who were selected
from one department, which counts as bias.
(Continued)
Izagirre- Recycling To examine crosscountry Quantitative analysis at Spain and US, The level of motivation was found similar in each This study was first to incorporate environmental
Olaizola, behavior comparative analysis of compared NAT & VBN, 1237 group, but the attitude toward environment was knowledge into VBN to explore SWM behavior.
Fernández- recycling behavior respondents of which 640 from Spain considered more favorable amongst Spanish The study considered sample from two
Sainz, and and 597 from USA, used questionnaires students. However, recycling behavior of Spanish countries but did not mention the mode of
Vicente- students was 75% as compared to USA students sampling. Also, age group of students not
Molina who possessed only 33.5%. specified which can have greater impact on
2015 research. The sample is homogeneous in nature
and structural differences such as SWM
programs, awareness campaigns, and provision
of recycling bins between two countries are
different and hence this parameter has to be
accounted. Thus, the results obtained cannot
hold good for general population.
Oztekin et al. Recycling To predict recycling behavior Quantitative study at Turkey, used TPB, Attitude, PBC, and SN were positively influenced by Though the study is exclusive in understanding
2017 behavior on the basis of gender 863 respondents (included students belief for both genders. PBC played significant gender perspective by developing separate
perspective and teaching and non-teaching staffs), role to predict female intentions. Also, past models for males and females, the study lacked
questionnaires posted on university behavior was found to influence intention for in logical explanation to collect data from
websites both genders and study concluded that TPB university community. It is also unclear why
framework was satisfactory in explaining SWMB of responses were collected through websites by
an individual self-reported questionnaire for 1 year. Chances
of anyone who visits website page may fill the
questionnaire and therefore authenticity of
response is questionable. The study was
undertaken in two universities where recycling
facilities were already available and hence the
results cannot be generalized.
27
Table 13. Research gaps and future directions.

Identified
No Deficiencies research gap Future directions
RG1 ● The earlier behavior models include composite structures Evaluation void ● Acknowledging the role of social psychology in explaining the
with complex relationships between various identified fac behavioral patterns of WM among residents.
tors. To some extent, they are limited to operational ● Utilizing the elements from inter-disciplinary areas such as
mechanisms and their testing abilities stand questionable. socio-psychology, community psychology, developmental
● Several models have been postulated, but review indicates psychology, etc.
a dearth in assessment of validity and merits of frameworks, ● Introducing new concepts/variables to core research con
particularly in terms of the interdependencies at dimensional structs of a particular theory framed by primary authors.
levels. ● Subjecting to more empirical investigations by combining
● Misses empirical evidences. different techniques.
RG2 ● It is realized that society is encountering serious threats due Knowledge void ● Rigor of models need to be strengthened by stressing on
to SW disposal issues, particularly in developing countries. performance implications by adopting alternative methods
Recent period has witnessed public consciousness and gov to measure SWMB.
ernment participation, but results are still in evolving stage. ● New concept – refuse of SWM strategies needs special atten
● Many countries have adopted innovative strategies & modern tion which has not been measured till now.
technologies to achieve zero waste to landfills. Not many ● Focusing on combination factors such as political processes &
studies have been conducted to provide a holistic solution. psychological factors, anthropological & technology factors,
● Eco-friendly methods of SWM are the need of the hour and social sciences & management, etc.
identifying the underlying factors of behavior from anthro ● Exploring collective behaviors of urbanization such as money-
pological lens is quintessential. power, attitude-behavior, caste-class, and individual–com
munity relationships is imperative owing to consumerism
culture.
RG3 ● Lack of encompassing SWMB framework to highlight the Theory ● Applying multilevel analysis such as individual – social –
Government initiatives, social hygiene, public health, and application community; culture – tradition, heritage - culture – tradition,
conservation issue is evident. void etc.
● Theoretical inconsistencies exist ● Focus on model advancement and model comparison.
● Earlier researchers have not shown interests in cognitive ● Addressing public awareness and communication issues
theories such as LT, SPT, etc. through principal method of innovation diffusion.
● Absence of theory application in the context of social and ● Developing a holistic model to examine the SWM motives
technology perspectives. between individuals, communities, and NGOs using
● Lack of integrated model testing by applying theory/theories a combination of individual/social/technology behavioral
theories.
RG4 ● Many quantitative studies, some qualitative studies and very Methodological ● Performing sequential explanatory and sequential exploratory
few mixed methods studies, implying the lack of relative void methods to benefit the advantages of both qualitative and
neglect of mixed methods approach. quantitative methods.
● Most of the studies share similar views in terms of environ ● Methodological process by incorporating triangulation
mental issues, but no studies have reported similar results approach of qualitative methodology that provides rich data.
even when similar constructs were tested in quantitative ● Utilization of tools and techniques of qualitative and
studies. quantitative.
● Lack of utilization of two or more research techniques to ● Conducting intervention studies.
tackle SWM issue which requires multi-dimensional approach. ● Extending general waste studies to specific wastes such as
clothing, kitchen wastes, plastic, kitchen vessels, etc.
addressing social, environmental, and public health issues brainstorming and downloading sample articles
caused by domestically produced waste. However, future (Pittaway and Cope 2007). Some researchers in health
studies could consider relevant domains and integrate them psychology have conducted SLRs by forming an advi
to assess citizens’ SWMB. sory group consisting of a panel of experts from var
Third, our manual method of cluster development, ious fields (Davis et al. 2015). This method of utilizing
used to identify key psychological variables present in expert consultation in web searching, hand searching
past studies, may have generated some biases. Although of data from various journals, forward and backward
the procedure was advantageous in analyzing a vast searching of reference lists, discussing scope, metho
amount of data and present our review article in dology, and conducting a review with minimal biases
a comprehensive and holistic way, errors in coding, ana should be employed in research on waste management
lyzing citation data, or overlapping variables were possi as well. Overall, any methodology has weaknesses
ble (Belotto 2018). Further studies could employ thematic (Pittaway et al. 2009); but the strength of our study
analyses using software programs such as NVivo to deter lies in its transparency, repeatability, testability, and
mine whether this problem can be rectified. that it is open to scrutiny.
Finally, irrespective of our extensive efforts to
retrieve data, the literature search may have failed to
capture all potential articles for this research. The uti Conclusion
lized search strings and keywords may have resulted in Recognizing the importance of handling waste at its
the omission of other relevant data. Future researchers point of origin and understanding the lack of guidance
may consider different approaches such as on actions required to achieve zero-waste landfills, we
selected a broad set of theories from ecological, health, answer context-specific RQs. Irrespective of our exten
and societal perspectives. To obtain useful insights into sive efforts, our literature search may have insuffi
the behavioral aspects of SWM, we defined various RQs, ciently recorded all relevant papers owing to the large
identified gaps in existing literature, and systematically volume of articles and research limitations.
provided the path for future researchers. Our review Nevertheless, this systematic review is an original con
highlights that previous studies have not covered all tribution to the body of knowledge on the aforemen
elements of the complexity of reducing waste. In addi tioned research constructs. The constructs, limitations,
tion, the results suggest that there is a need to examine and gaps discussed in this review allow researchers,
social and technology behavioral theories that can teachers, and students to undertake more studies and
improve our current understanding of SWMBs. We implement pro-environmental models to create
believe our paper provides useful insight into the status a cleaner environment. Furthermore, this article may
of existing SWM literature, which is vital because waste facilitate the formulation of pro-SWM laws, regula
is expected to increase exponentially in the coming tions, and policies in developing countries – where
years. there is an urgent need for strict environmental reg
This paper makes a methodological contribution by ulations with a focus on sustainability.
presenting descriptive, frequency, and cluster analyses of
existing literature to generate knowledge in the field of
SWMB. Our approach corroborates that the combina Acknowledgment
tion of structured and specific approaches to biblio The authors thank the China Section of the Air & Waste
metric techniques can contribute promising results, Management Association for the generous scholarship they
particularly when there are vast data. Thus, the recom received to cover the cost of page charges and make the
mendations presented here should spur the materializa publication of this paper possible.
tion of more studies that can assist executives at
administrative levels to build a sustainable SWM system.
Disclosure statement
This review makes a theoretical contribution by stres
sing that SWMB is not restricted to barriers related to No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
attitudes and intentions, since behavior is entangled
within social structures. It highlights that SWMB is
a combination of the mental processes of an individual About the authors
and the societal-related social processes. Only consistent Sumana Jagadeshi Raghu is a research scholar from the
social practice can transform a nation; thus, environ Humanities and Management Department at Manipal
mental and social aspects are inseparable. We insist on Institute of Technology – an institution of Manipal Academy
exploring social elements to obtain a broader picture of of Higher Education – Manipal, 576104 India. Email: sumana.
[email protected].
SWMB.
Our study touched upon SW issues, such as environ Lewlyn L.R. Rodrigues is a professor from the Humanities
and Management Department at Manipal Institute of
mental awareness, threats to adequate SWMB, and
Technology – an institution of Manipal Academy of Higher
SWM solutions. It highlighted the need for waste reduc Education—Manipal, 576104 India. Email: l.rodrigues@mani
tion and treating waste as a renewable source of energy. pal.edu.
Since this concept is still in its infancy, especially in
developing countries, it is imperative to acknowledge
References
the benefits of handling waste in an eco-friendly man
ner. These benefits include resource conservation, clea Åberg, H., S. Dahlman, H. Shanahan, and S. Roger. 1996.
ner environments, preparation against adverse urban Towards sound environmental behaviour: Exploring
conditions, free access to emergency services, an household participation in waste management. J. Consum.
Policy 19 (1):45–67. doi:10.1007/BF00411470.
increase in eco-tourism revenue, environmental restora
Abdelradi, F. 2018. Food waste behaviour at the household
tion, lessening of epidemiological diseases, and improve level: A conceptual framework. Was. Manag. 71:485–493.
ment in the quality of life and food supply. Thus, this Afroz, R., R. Tudin, K. Hanaki, and M. M. Masud. 2011. Selected
study calls for researchers in developing countries to socio-economic factors affecting the willingness to minimise
recognize that the field of psychology has much to con solid waste in Dhaka city, Bangladesh. J. Environ. Plan.
tribute to mitigating environmental problems. Manage. 54 (6):711–31. doi:10.1080/09640568.2010.527472.
Ajzen, I. 1985. From intentions to actions: A theory of planned
This research primarily selected theories within the behavior. In Action control, ed. J. Kuhl and J. Beckmann,
scope of environmental, social, and health issues to 11–39. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.
Ajzen, I. 1991. The theory of planned behavior. Organ. Behav. Belotto, M. J. 2018. Data analysis methods for qualitative
Hum. Decis. Process 50 (2):179–211. doi:10.1016/0749- research: Managing the challenges of coding, interrater relia
5978(91)90020-T. bility, and thematic analysis. Qual. Rep. 23 (11):2622–33.
Ajzen, I. 2005. Attitudes, personality, and behavior. McGraw- Best, H., and T. Kneip. 2011. The impact of attitudes and
Hill Education (UK). behavioral costs on environmental behavior: A natural
Ajzen I. & M. Fishbein. 1975. Belief, Attitude, Intention, and experiment on household waste recycling. Soc. Sci. Res. 40
Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Reading, (3):917–30. doi:10.1016/j.ssresearch.2010.12.001.
MA: Addison-Wesley. Best, H., and T. Kneip. 2011. The impact of attitudes and
Ajzen, I. 2000. Perceived behavioral control, self-efficacy, locus behavioral costs on environmental behavior: A natural
of control, and the theory of planned behavior 1. J. Applied experiment on household waste recycling. Social Science
Soc. Psych. 32 (4):665–683. Research 40 (3) :917–930.
Ajzen, I. Nature and operation of attitudes. Annual Review of Blamey, R. 1998. The activation of environmental norms:
Psyc. 52 (1):27–58. Extending Schwartz’s model. Environ. Behav. 30 (5):676–708.
Akman, I., and A. Mishra. 2015. Sector diversity in green doi:10.1177/001391659803000505.
information technology practices: Technology acceptance Bortoleto, A. P., K. H. Kurisu, and K. Hanaki. 2012. Model
model perspective. Comput. Human Behav. 49:477–86. development for household waste prevention behaviour.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.03.009. Waste Manage. 32 (12):2195–207. doi:10.1016/j.wasman.
Alwaeli, M. O. H. A. M. E. D. 2015. An overview of municipal 2012.05.037.
solid waste management in Poland. The current situation, Boudon, R., and R. Viale. 2000. Reasons, cognition and
problems and challenges. Environ. Protect. Eng. 41 (4). society. Mind. Soc. 1 (1):41. doi:10.1007/BF02512228.
doi:10.37190/epe150414. Bourdieu, P. Outline of a Theory of Practice. Vol. 16.
Arı, E., and V. Yılmaz. 2016. A proposed structural model for Cambridge university press.
housewives’ recycling behavior: A case study from Turkey. Bower, P., and S. Gilbody. 2005. Stepped care in psychological
Ecol. Econ. 129:132–42. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.06.002. therapies: access, effectiveness and efficiency: Narrative lit
Arena, U. 2012. Process and technological aspects of munici erature review. Brit. J Psych. 186 (1):11–17.
pal solid waste gasification. A review. Waste Manage. 32 Bowles, S. 2008. Policies designed for self-interested citizens
(4):625–39. doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2011.09.025. may undermine” the moral sentiments”: Evidence from
Arıkan, E., Z. T. Şimşit-Kalender, and Ö. Vayvay. 2017. Solid economic experiments. Science 320 (5883):1605–09.
waste disposal methodology selection using multi-criteria doi:10.1126/science.1152110.
decision making methods and an application in Turkey. Brekke, K. A., G. Kipperberg, and K. Nyborg. 2010. Social inter
J. Clean. Prod. 142:403–12. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.10.054. action in responsibility ascription: The case of household
Bagozzi, R. P., and P. A. Dabholkar. 1994. Consumer recycling recycling. Land Econ. 86 (4):766–84. doi:10.3368/le.86.4.766.
goals and their effect on decisions to recycle: A means-end Cecere, G., S. Mancinelli, and M. Mazzanti. 2014. Waste pre
chain analysis. Psychol. Market. 11 (4):313–40. doi:10.1002/ vention and social preferences: The role of intrinsic and
mar.4220110403. extrinsic motivations. Ecol. Econ. 107:163–76. doi:10.1016/j.
Bagozzi, R. P., U. M. Dholakia, and A. Mookerjee. 2006. ecolecon.2014.07.007.
Individual and group bases of social influence in online Chaiken, S., and Y. Trope, eds. 1999. Dual-process theories in
environments. Media Psychol. 8 (2):95–126. doi:10.1207/ social psychology. Guilford Publishers, A unit of Guilford
s1532785xmep0802_3. Publications.
Bandura, A. 1977. Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of Chan, K. 1998. Mass communication and pro-environmental
behavioral change. Psychol. Rev. 84 (2):191. doi:10.1037/ behaviour: Waste recycling in Hong Kong. J. Environ.
0033-295X.84.2.191. Manage. 52 (4):317–25. doi:10.1006/jema.1998.0189.
Bandura, A. 1991. Social cognitive theory of self-regulation. Chau, P. Y. K. 1996. An empirical assessment of a modified
Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process 50 (2):248–87. technology acceptance model. J. Manage. Inform. Syst. 13
doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90022-L. (2):185–204. doi:10.1080/07421222.1996.11518128.
Bandura, A., and D. H. Schunk. 1981. Cultivating competence, Chen, H.-W., and N.-B. Chang. 2000. Prediction analysis of
self-efficacy, and intrinsic interest through proximal solid waste generation based on grey fuzzy dynamic
self-motivation. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 41 (3):586. doi:10.1037/ modeling. Res. Conserv. Recy. 29 (1–2):1–18. doi:10.1016/
0022-3514.41.3.586. S0921-3449(99)00052-X.
Bandura, A. 1986. Social foundations of thought and action. Chen, Y.-T., and D.-S. Chang. 2010. Diffusion effect and learn
Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 23–28. ing effect: An examination on MSW recycling. J. Clean. Prod.
Bandura, A. 1999. Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspec 18 (5):496–503. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2009.12.013.
tive. Asian J Soc Psyc . 2(1):21–41. Cheung, S. F., D. K.-S. Chan, and Z. S.-Y. Wong. 1999.
Bandura, A. 1989. Regulation of cognitive processes through Reexamining the theory of planned behavior in understand
perceived self-efficacy. Devellop Psyc. 25, (5):729. ing wastepaper recycling. Environ. Behav. 31 (5):587–612.
Barr, S. 2004. Are we all environmentalists now? Rhetoric and Chu, P., and J. Chiu. 2003. Factors influencing household
reality in environmental action. Geoforum 35 (2):231–49. waste recycling behavior: Test of an integrated model 1.
doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2003.08.009. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 33 (3):604–26. doi:10.1111/j.1559-
Baud, I. S. A., S. Grafakos, M. Hordijk, and J. Post. 2001. Quality 1816.2003.tb01915.x.
of life and alliances in solid waste management: Contributions Cockerham, W. C., T. Abel, and L. Günther. 1993. Max
to urban sustainable development. Cities 18 (1):3–12. Weber, formal rationality, and health lifestyles. Sociol. Q.
doi:10.1016/S0264-2751(00)00049-4. 34 (3):413–25. doi:10.1111/j.1533-8525.1993.tb00119.x.
Comber, R., and A. Thieme. 2013. Designing beyond habit: Geller, E. S. 1995. Actively caring for the environment: An
Opening space for improved recycling and food waste integration of behaviorism and humanism. Environ. Behav.
behaviors through processes of persuasion, social influence 27 (2):184–95. doi:10.1177/0013916595272004.
and aversive affect. Pers. Ubiquit. Comput. 17 (6):1197–210. Ghani, W. A. W. A. K., I. Farizan Rusli, D. R. Awang Biak, and
doi:10.1007/s00779-012-0587-1. A. Idris. 2013. An application of the theory of planned
Cook, D. J., C. D. Mulrow, and R. Brian Haynes. 1997. behaviour to study the influencing factors of participation
Systematic reviews: synthesis of best evidence for clinical in source separation of food waste. Wast. Manage. 33
decisions. Annals of Internal Medicine 126 (5):376–380. d. (5):1276–1281.
Couraeya, K. S., and M. Edward. 1993. Predicting physical Golden, S. D., K. R. McLeroy, L. W. Green, J. A. L. Earp, and
activity from intention: Conceptual and methodological L. D. Lieberman. 2015. Upending the social ecological model
issues. J. Sport Exerc. Psychol. 15 (1):50–62. doi:10.1123/ to guide health promotion efforts toward policy and environ
jsep.15.1.50. mental change, 8S–14S. SAGE.
Daneshvary, N., R. Daneshvary, and R. Keith Schwer. 1998. Goldenhar, L. M., and C. M. Connell. 1993. Understanding
Solid-waste recycling behavior and support for curbside tex and predicting recycling behavior: An application of the
tile recycling. Environ. Behav. 30 (2):144–61. doi:10.1177/ theory of reasoned action. J. Environ. Syst. 22 (1):91–91.
0013916598302002. Gordon-Wilson, S., and P. Modi. 2015. Personality and older
Darley, J. M., and B. Latane. 1970. Norms and normative consumers’ green behaviour in the UK. Futures 71:1–10.
behavior: Field studies of social interdependence. Altruism doi:10.1016/j.futures.2015.05.002.
Help. Behav. 83–102. Gould, R. K., N. M. Ardoin, M. Biggar, A. E. Cravens, and
Darley, J. M., and D. T. Gilbert. 1985. Social psychological D. Wojcik. 2016. Environmental behavior’s dirty secret: The
aspects of environmental psychology. Handbook Soc. prevalence of waste management in discussions of environ
Psychol. 2:949–92. mental concern and action. Environ. Manage. 58 (2):268–82.
Davis, F. D. 1989. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, doi:10.1007/s00267-016-0710-6.
and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q. 13 Graham-Rowe, E., D. C. Jessop, and P. Sparks. 2015.
(3):319–40. doi:10.2307/249008. Predicting household food waste reduction using an
Davis, G., P. S. Phillips, A. D. Read, and Y. Iida. 2006. extended theory of planned behaviour. Resources,
Demonstrating the need for the development of internal Conservation and Recycling 101 (2015): 194–202.
research capacity: Understanding recycling participation Green-Demers, I., L. G. Pelletier, and M. Sophie. 1997. The
using the Theory of Planned Behaviour in West impact of behavioural difficulty on the saliency of the asso
Oxfordshire, UK. Resour. Conserv. Recy. 46 (2):115–27. ciation between self-determined motivation and environ
doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2005.07.001. mental behaviours. Can. J. Behav. Sci./Revue Canadienne
Davis, R., R. Campbell, Z. Hildon, L. Hobbs, and S. Michie. Des Sciences Du Comportement 29 (3):157. doi:10.1037/
2015. Theories of behaviour and behaviour change 0008-400X.29.3.157.
across the social and behavioural sciences: A scoping Guerrero, L. A., G. Maas, and W. Hogland. 2013. Solid
review. Health Psychol. Rev. 9 (3):323–44. doi:10.1080/ waste management challenges for cities in developing
17437199.2014.941722. countries. Waste Manage. 33 (1):220–32. doi:10.1016/j.
De Young, R. 1986. Some psychological aspects of recycling: wasman.2012.09.008.
The structure of conservation-satisfactions. Environ. Behav. Haldeman, T., and J. W. Turner. 2009. Implementing a
18 (4):435–49. doi:10.1177/0013916586184001. community-based social marketing program to increase
Deci, E. L., and R. M. Ryan. 1985. The general causality recycling. Soc. Mar. Q. 15 (3):114–27. doi:10.1080/
orientations scale: Self-determination in personality. J. Res. 15245000903154618.
Pers. 19 (2):109–34. doi:10.1016/0092-6566(85)90023-6. Halvorsen, B. 2012. Effects of norms and policy incentives on
Deci, E. L., and R. M. Ryan. 1980. Self-determination theory: household recycling: An international comparison. Resour.
When mind mediates behavior. JMind and Behavior:33–43. Conserv. Recy. 67:18–26. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2012.06.008.
Diamond, W. D., and B. Z. Loewy. 1991. Effects of probabil Hargreaves, T. 2011. Practice-ing behaviour change: Applying
istic rewards on recycling attitudes and behavior 1. J. Appl. social practice theory to pro-environmental behaviour
Soc. Psychol. 21 (19):1590–607. doi:10.1111/j.1559- change. J. Consum. Cult. 11 (1):79–99. doi:10.1177/
1816.1991.tb00489.x. 1469540510390500.
Eastman, C., and J. S. Marzillier. 1984. Theoretical and meth Harland, P., H. Staats, and H. A. M. Wilke. 1999. Explaining
odological difficulties in Bandura’s self-efficacy theory. proenvironmental intention and behavior by personal norms
Cognit. Ther. Res. 8 (3):213–29. doi:10.1007/BF01172994. and the Theory of Planned Behavior 1. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol.
Feiock, R. C., and J. P. West. 1993. Testing competing expla 29 (12):2505–28. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1999.tb00123.x.
nations for policy adoption: Municipal solid waste recycling Higgins, E. T. 1996. The” self digest”: Self-knowledge serving
programs. Polit. Res. Q. 46 (2):399–419. doi:10.1177/ self-regulatory functions. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 71 (6):1062.
106591299304600211. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.71.6.1062.
Frey, B. S., and R. Jegen. 2001. Motivation crowding theory. Holland, D., and J. Lave. 2009. Social practice theory and the
J. Econ. Surv. 15 (5):589–611. doi:10.1111/1467- historical production of persons. Japan: Kansai University
6419.00150. Repository.
Geller, E. S. 1989. Applied behavior analysis and social market Hoornweg, D., and P. Bhada-Tata. 2012. What a waste:
ing: An integration for environmental preservation. J. Soc. A global review of solid waste management, Vol. 15.
Issue 45 (1):17–36. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.1989.tb01531.x. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Hopper, J. R., and J. McCarl Nielsen. 1991. Recycling as Katzev, R. D., and T. R. Johnson. 1987. Promoting energy
altruistic behavior: Normative and behavioral strategies to conservation: An analysis of behavioral research. Gland,
expand participation in a community recycling program. Switzerland, and Cambridge, UK: IUCN.
Environ. Behav. 23 (2):195–220. Accessed August 1, 2020. Kelly, T. C., I. G. Mason, M. W. Leiss, and S. Ganesh. 2006.
https://datahelpdesk.worldbank.org/knowledgebase/arti University community responses to on-campus resource
cles/906519 recycling. Resour. Conserv. Recy. 47 (1):42–55. doi:10.1016/j.
Huffman, A. H., B. R. Van Der Werff, J. B. Henning, and resconrec.2005.10.002.
K. Watrous-Rodriguez. 2014. When do recycling attitudes Klöckner, C. A., and I. O. Oppedal. 2011. General vs. domain
predict recycling? An investigation of self-reported versus specific recycling behaviour— Applying a multilevel com
observed behavior. J. Environ. Psychol. 38:262–70. prehensive action determination model to recycling in
doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2014.03.006. Norwegian student homes. Resour. Conserv. Recy. 55
Izagirre-Olaizola, J., A. Fernández-Sainz, and M. A. Vicente- (4):463–71. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2010.12.009.
Molina. 2015. Internal determinants of recycling beha Knussen, C., F. Yule, J. MacKenzie, and M. Wells. 2004. An
viour by university students: A cross-country comparative analysis of intentions to recycle household waste: The roles
analysis. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 39 (1):25–34. doi:10.1111/ of past behaviour, perceived habit, and perceived lack of
ijcs.12147. facilities. J. Environ. Psychol. 24 (2):237–46. doi:10.1016/j.
Jackson, N., and E. Waters. 2005. Criteria for the systematic jenvp.2003.12.001.
review of health promotion and public health interventions. Labuhn, A. S., B. J. Zimmerman, and M. Hasselhorn. 2010.
Health Promot. Int. 20 (4):367–74. doi:10.1093/heapro/ Enhancing students’ self-regulation and mathematics per
dai022. formance: The influence of feedback and self-evaluative
Janz, N. K., and M. H. Becker. 1984. The health belief model: standards. Metacogn. Learn. 5 (2):173–94. doi:10.1007/
A decade later. Health Educ. Q. 11 (1):1–47. s11409-010-9056-2.
Jekria, N., and S. Daud. 2016. Environmental concern and Lauren, N., K. S. Fielding, L. Smith, and W. R. Louis. 2016.
recycling behaviour. Procedia Econ. Finance 35:667–73. You did, so you can and you will: Self-efficacy as a mediator
doi:10.1016/S2212-5671(16)00082-4. of spillover from easy to more difficult pro-environmental
Jones, N., K. Evangelinos, C. P. Halvadakis, T. Iosifides, and behaviour. J. Environ. Psychol. 48:191–99. doi:10.1016/j.
C. M. Sophoulis. 2010. Social factors influencing perceptions jenvp.2016.10.004.
and willingness to pay for a market-based policy aiming on Lee, Y.-J., R. De Young, and R. W. Marans. 1995. Factors
solid waste management. Resour. Conserv. Recy. 54 (9):533–40. influencing individual recycling behavior in office settings:
doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2009.10.010. A study of office workers in Taiwan. Environ. Behav. 27
Jones, R. E. 1989. Understanding paper recycling in an (3):380–403. doi:10.1177/0013916595273006.
institutionally supportive setting: An application of the Lin, H., and M. Hsu. 2015. Using social cognitive theory to
theory of reasoned action. J. Environ. Syst. 19 investigate green consumer behavior. Bus. Strategy Environ.
(4):307–21. doi:10.2190/8KX2-9XQM-RP38-CLPP. 24 (5):326–43. doi:10.1002/bse.1820.
Joung, H., and H. Park-Poaps. 2013. Factors motivating and Lindsay, J. J., and A. Strathman. 1997. Predictors of recycling
influencing clothing disposal behaviours. Int. J. Consum. behavior: An application of a modified health belief model
Stud. 37 (1):105–111.? 2011. doi:10.1111/j.1470-6431.2011. 1. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 27 (20):1799–823. doi:10.1111/
01048.x. j.1559-1816.1997.tb01626.x.
Kaiser, F. G., G. Hübner, and F. X. Bogner. 2005. Contrasting Mahmud, S., N. Diyana, and K. Osman. 2010. The determi
the theory of planned behavior with the value-belief-norm nants of recycling intention behavior among the Malaysian
model in explaining conservation behavior 1. J. Appl. Soc. school students: An application of theory of planned
Psychol. 35 (10):2150–70. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2005. behaviour. Procedia Soc Behav Sci 9:119–24. doi:10.1016/j.
tb02213.x. sbspro.2010.12.123.
Kamaruddin, M. A., M. S. Yusoff, L. M. Rui, A. M. Isa, Mannetti, L., A. Pierro, and S. Livi. 2004. Recycling: Planned
M. H. Zawawi, and R. Alrozi. 2017. An overview of muni and self-expressive behaviour. J. Environ. Psychol. 24
cipal solid waste management and landfill leachate treat (2):227–36. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2004.01.002.
ment: Malaysia and Asian perspectives. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Manstead, A. S. R. 1999. The role of moral norm in the
Res. 24 (35):26988–7020. doi:10.1007/s11356-017-0303-9. attitude-behaviour relationship. In Attitudes, behaviour
Kanfer, F. H., and P. Karoly. 1970. Self-regulation and its clinical and social context: The role of norms and group membership,
application: Some additional conceptualizations. Socialization: D. J. Terry and M. A. Hogg ed. Lawrence Erlbaum
Development of character and conscience 428–437 Associates Publishers.
Karak, T., R. M. Bhagat, and P. Bhattacharyya. 2012. Marteau, T., P. Dieppe, R. Foy, A.-L. Kinmonth, and
Municipal solid waste generation, composition, and man N. Schneiderman. 2006. Behavioural medicine: Changing
agement: The world scenario. Crit. Rev. Environ. Sci. our behaviour. BMJ, 332:437–38.
Technol. 42 (15):1509–630. Marx, M. H., and W. A. Cronan-Hillix. 1987. McGraw-Hill
Karbalaei, S., M. Abbas Abdollahi, A. S. Nor, and Z. Ismail. series in psychology. In Systems and theories in psychology,
2013. Locus of control, problem-solving skills appraisal as 4th ed., 461. New York, NY: Mcgraw-Hill Book Company.
predictors of waste prevention behaviors. Rom. J. Appl. Matthies, E., S. Selge, and C. A. Klöckner. 2012. The role of
Psychol. 15 (2):51–58. parental behaviour for the development of behaviour spe
Katzev, R., and A. Pardini. 1988. The comparative effective cific environmental norms – The example of recycling and
ness of token reinforcers and personal commitment in re-use behaviour. J. Environ. Psychol. 32 (3):277–84.
promoting recycling. J. Environ. Syst. 17:93–113. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2012.04.003.
McCarty, J. A., and L. J. Shrum. 1994. The recycling of solid Osbaldiston, R., and J. P. Schott. 2012. Environmental sustain
wastes: Personal values, value orientations, and attitudes ability and behavioral science: Meta-analysis of proenviron
about recycling as antecedents of recycling behavior. J. Bus. mental behavior experiments. Environ. Behav. 44
Res. 30 (1):53–62. doi:10.1016/0148-2963(94)90068-X. (2):257–99. doi:10.1177/0013916511402673.
McDevitt, T. M., and J. E. Ormrod. 2008. Fostering conceptual Oxman, A. D. 1994. Systematic reviews: Checklists for review
change about child development in prospective teachers articles. BMJ 309 (6955):648–51. doi:10.1136/bmj.309.6955.
and other college students. Child Development Perspectives 648.
2 (2): 85–91. Oztekin, C., G. Teksöz, S. Pamuk, E. Sahin, and D. S. Kilic. 2017.
Medical Research Council. 2000. Accessed March 28, 2019. Gender perspective on the factors predicting recycling beha
https://mrc.ukri.org/successes/evaluating-research-outcomes/ vior: Implications from the theory of planned behavior. Waste
methodology-for-evaluation/ Manage. 62:290–302. doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2016.12.036.
Menikpura, S. N. M., S. H. Gheewala, S. Bonnet, and Pakpour, A. H., I. M. Zeidi, M. M. Emamjomeh, S. Asefzadeh,
C. Chiemchaisri. 2013. Evaluation of the effect of recy and H. Pearson. 2014. Household waste behaviours among
cling on sustainability of municipal solid waste manage a community sample in Iran: An application of the theory
ment in Thailand. Waste Biomass Valorization 4 of planned behaviour. Waste Manage. 34 (6):980–86.
(2):237–57. doi:10.1007/s12649-012-9119-5. doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2013.10.028.
Miafodzyeva, S., and N. Brandt. 2013. Recycling behaviour Pappu, A., M. Saxena, and S. R. Asolekar. 2007. Solid wastes
among householders: Synthesizing determinants via a generation in India and their recycling potential in building
meta-analysis. Waste Biomass Valorization 4 (2):221–35. materials. Build. Environ. 42 (6):2311–20. doi:10.1016/j.
doi:10.1007/s12649-012-9144-4. buildenv.2006.04.015.
Michie, S., and C. Abraham. 2004. Interventions to change health Phipps, M., L. K. Ozanne, M. G. Luchs, S. Subrahmanyan,
behaviours: Evidence-based or evidence-inspired ? Psychol. S. Kapitan, J. R. Catlin, R. Gau, R. W. Naylor, R. L. Rose,
Health 19 (1):29–49. doi:10.1080/0887044031000141199. B. Simpson, et al. 2013. Understanding the inherent com
Miliute-Plepiene, J., O. Hage, A. Plepys, and A. Reipas. 2016. plexity of sustainable consumption: A social cognitive
What motivates households recycling behaviour in recy framework. J. Bus. Res. 66 (8):1227–34. doi:10.1016/j.
cling schemes of different maturity? Lessons from jbusres.2012.08.016.
Lithuania and Sweden. Resour. Conserv. Recy. 113:40–52. Pinker, S. 2010. The cognitive niche: Coevolution of intelli
doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2016.05.008. gence, sociality, and language. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 107
Mitchell, T. R., and A. Biglan. 1971. Instrumentality theories: (Supplement 2):8993–99. doi:10.1073/pnas.0914630107.
Current uses in psychology. Psychol. Bull. 76 (6):432. Pittaway, L., and J. Cope. 2007. Entrepreneurship education:
doi:10.1037/h0031831. A systematic review of the evidence. Int. Small Bus. J. 25
Moh, Y. C., and L. A. Manaf. 2014. Overview of household (5):479–510. doi:10.1177/0266242607080656.
solid waste recycling policy status and challenges in Pittaway, L., P. Hannon, A. Gibb, and J. Thompson. 2009.
Malaysia. Resour. Conserv. Recy. 82:50–61. doi:10.1016/j. Assessment practice in enterprise education. Inter.
resconrec.2013.11.004. J. Entrepreneurial Behav. Res. 15 (1):71–93. doi:10.1108/
Monavari, S. M., G. A. Omrani, A. Karbassi, and F. F. Raof. 13552550910934468.
2012. The effects of socioeconomic parameters on house Radwan, H. R. I., E. Jones, and D. Minoli. 2012. Solid waste
hold solid-waste generation and composition in developing management in small hotels: A comparison of green and
countries (a case study: Ahvaz, Iran). Environ. Monit. non-green small hotels in Wales. J. Sustain. Tour. 20
Assess. 184 (4):1841–46. doi:10.1007/s10661-011-2082-y. (4):533–50. doi:10.1080/09669582.2011.621539.
Mondéjar-Jiménez, J.-A., G. Ferrari, L. Secondi, and L. Principato. Ramayah, T., J. Wai Chow Lee, and O. Mohamad. 2010. Green
2016. From the table to waste: An exploratory study on beha product purchase intention: Some insights from
viour towards food waste of Spanish and Italian youths. a developing country. Res. Conserv. Recy. 54 (12):1419–27.
J. Clean. Prod. 138:8–18. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.06.018. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2010.06.007.
Mondéjar-Jiménez, J., G. Ferrari, L. Secondi, and L. Ramayah, T., J. Wai Chow Lee, and S. Lim. 2012. Sustaining the
Principato. 2016. From the table to waste: An exploratory environment through recycling: An empirical study. J. Environ.
study on behaviour towards food waste of Spanish and Manage. 102:141–47. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.02.025.
Italian youths. J Cleaner Production 138:8–18. Reckwitz, A. 2002. Toward a theory of social practices:
Nabi, R. L., and S. Clark. 2008. Exploring the limits of social A development in culturalist theorizing. Eur. J. Soc.
cognitive theory: Why negatively reinforced behaviors on Theory 5 (2):243–63. doi:10.1177/13684310222225432.
TV may be modeled anyway.JComm. 58 (3): 407–427. Rhee, S. H., and I. D. Waldman. 2002. Genetic and environ
Needleman, L. D., and E. Scott Geller. 1992. Comparing inter mental influences on antisocial behavior: A meta-analysis of
ventions to motivate work-site collection of home-generated twin and adoption studies. Psychol. Bull. 128 (3):490.
recyclables. Am. J. Community Psychol. 20 (6):775–85. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.128.3.490.
doi:10.1007/BF01312607. Rise, J., M. Thompson, and B. Verplanken. 2003. Measuring
Nordlund, A. M., and J. Garvill. 2002. Value structures behind implementation intentions in the context of the theory of
proenvironmental behavior. Environ. Behav. 34 (6):740–56. planned behavior. Scandinavian J Psyc. 44 (2): 87–95.
doi:10.1177/001391602237244. Rogers, E. M. 2002. Diffusion of preventive innovations.
Oreg, S., and T. Katz-Gerro. 2006. Predicting proenvironmen Addict. Behav. 27 (6):989–93. doi:10.1016/S0306-4603(02)
tal behavior cross-nationally: Values, the theory of planned 00300-3.
behavior, and value-belief-norm theory. Environ. Behav. 38 Rogers, E. M. 1983. The Diffusion of Innovations. 3rd ed. New
(4):462–83. doi:10.1177/0013916505286012. York, NY: The Free Press. [Google Scholar]
Rosa, C. D., C. C. Profice, and S. Collado. 2018. Nature Skinner, B. F. 1954. The science of learning and the art of
experiences and adults’ self-reported pro-environmental teaching. Cambridge, MA: 99:113.
behaviors: The role of connectedness to nature and Skinner, E. A., and U. Chi. 2012. The Learning-Gardens
childhood nature experiences. Front. Psychol. 9:1055. Educational Assessment Group (2012). Intrinsic motivation
doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01055. and engagement as “active ingredients” in garden-based
Rosenstock, I. M. 1996. Why People use health services. The education: Examining models and measures derived from
Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly, 44:94–124.doi:10.2307/ self-determination theory. J. Environ. Educ. 43 (1):16–36.
3348967 doi:10.1080/00958964.2011.596856.
Rosenstock, I. M. 1974. The health belief model and preventive Soltani, A., K. Hewage, B. Reza, and R. Sadiq. 2015. Multiple
health behavior. Health Educ. Monogr. 2 (4):354–86. stakeholders in multi-criteria decision-making in the con
doi:10.1177/109019817400200405. text of municipal solid waste management: A review.
Rosenstock, I. M., V. J. Strecher, and M. H. Becker. 1988. Waste Manage. 35:318–28. doi:10.1016/j.wasman.20
Social learning theory and the health belief model. Health 14.09.010.
Educ. Q. 15 (2):175–83. doi:10.1177/109019818801500203. Sommer, L. 2011. The theory of planned behaviour and the
Roth, G., and M. Weber. 1976. History and sociology in the impact of past behaviour. Inter. Bus. Econ. Res. J. 10
work of Max Weber. Br. J. Sociol. 27 (3):306–18. (1):91–110.
doi:10.2307/589618. Stancu, V., P. Haugaard, and L. Liisa. 2016. Determinants of
Rothenberg, S. 2007. Environmental managers as institu consumer food waste behaviour: Two routes to food waste.
tional entrepreneurs: The influence of institutional and Appetite 96:7–17. doi:10.1016/j.appet.2015.08.025.
technical pressures on waste management. J Busin Res. Stern, P. C. 1999. Information, incentives, and proenviron
60 (7):749–757. mental consumer behavior. J. Consum. Policy 22 (4):461–78.
Ryan, R. M., and E. L. Deci. 2000. Intrinsic and extrinsic motiva doi:10.1023/A:1006211709570.
tions: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemp. Educ. Stern, P. C. 2000. New environmental theories: Toward
Psychol. 25 (1):54–67. doi:10.1006/ceps.1999.1020. a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior.
Salhofer, S., G. Obersteiner, F. Schneider, and S. Lebersorger. J. Soc. Issue 56 (3):407–24. doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00175.
2008. Potentials for the prevention of municipal solid Sutton, S. 1998. Predicting and explaining intentions and
waste. Waste Manage. 28 (2):245–59. doi:10.1016/j. behavior: How well are we doing? J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 28
wasman.2007.02.026. (15):1317–38. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1998.tb01679.x.
Schultz, P. W., S. Oskamp, and T. Mainieri. 1995. Who Sutton, S. 1998. Predicting and explaining intentions and
recycles and when? A review of personal and situational behavior: How well are we doing?. J Applied Soc. Psycho.
factors. J. Environ. Psychol. 15 (2):105–21. doi:10.1016/ 28 (15):1317–1338.
0272-4944(95)90019-5. Swaim, J. A., M. J. Maloni, S. A. Napshin, and A. B. Henley.
Schultz, P. W. (1999). Changing Behavior With Normative 2014. Influences on student intention and behavior toward
Feedback Interventions: A Field Experiment on Curbside environmental sustainability. J. Bus. Ethics 124 (3):465–84.
Recycling. Basic and Appl. Soc. Psyc. 21 (1):25–36. Swami, V., T. Chamorro-Premuzic, R. Snelgar, and
doi:10.1207/s15324834basp2101_3 A. Furnham. 2011. Personality, individual differences, and
Schwartz, S. H. 1968. Words, deeds and the perception of demographic antecedents of self-reported household waste
consequences and responsibility in action situations. management behaviours. J. Environ. Psychol. 31 (1):21–26.
J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 10 (3):232. doi:10.1037/h0026569. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2010.08.001.
Schwartz, S. H. 1977. Normative influences on altruism. In Taylor, S., and P. Todd. 1995. Understanding household gar
Advances in experimental social psychology, Vol. 10, ed. L. bage reduction behavior: A test of an integrated model.
Berkowitz, 221–79. Academic Press. J. Public Policy Market. 14 (2):192–204. doi:10.1177/
Seacat, J. D., and D. Northrup. 2010. An information–motiva 074391569501400202.
tion–behavioral skills assessment of curbside recycling Taylor, S., and P. Todd. 1997. Understanding the determinants of
behavior. J. Environ. Psychol. 30 (4):393–401. doi:10.1016/ consumer composting behavior 1. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 27
j.jenvp.2010.02.002. (7):602–28. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1997.tb00651.x.
Sembiring, E., and V. Nitivattananon. 2010. Sustainable solid Teasdale, J. D. 1978. Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of
waste management toward an inclusive society: Integration behavioural change? Adv. Behav. Res. Ther. 1 (4):211–15.
of the informal sector. Resour. Conserv. Recy. 54 doi:10.1016/0146-6402(78)90009-7.
(11):802–09. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2009.12.010. Terry, D. J., M. A. Hogg, and K. M. White. 1999. The theory of
Sharholy, M., K. Ahmad, G. Mahmood, and R. C. Trivedi. planned behaviour: Self-identity, social identity and group
2008. Municipal solid waste management in Indian cities – norms. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 38 (3):225–44. doi:10.1348/
A review. Waste Manage. 28 (2):459–67. doi:10.1016/j. 014466699164149.
wasman.2007.02.008. Terry, D. J., and M.A. Hogg. 1996. Group norms and the
Sheeran, P. 2002. Intention—behavior relations: A conceptual attitude-behavior relationship: A role for group identifica
and empirical review. Eur. Rev. Soc. Psychol. 12 (1):1–36. tion. Personality Soc. Pycho.Bulle. 22 (8):776–793.
doi:10.1080/14792772143000003. Thøgersen, J. 1994. A model of recycling behaviour, with evi
Shove, E. 2010. Beyond the ABC: Climate change policy and dence from Danish source separation programmes. Int.
theories of social change. Environ. Plan A 42 (6):1273–85. J. Res. Market. 11 (2):145–63. doi:10.1016/0167-8116(94)
doi:10.1068/a42282. 90025-6.
Thøgersen, J., and Ö. Folke. 2003. Spillover of Vining, J., and A. Ebreo. 2002. Emerging theoretical and
environment-friendly consumer behaviour. J. Environ. methodological perspectives on conservation behavior.
Psychol. 23 (3):225–36. doi:10.1016/S0272-4944(03)00018-5. Handbook Environ. Psychol. 2:541–58.
Thøgersen, J., & F. Ölander. 2003. Spillover of environment- Wang, F., Z. Cheng, A. Reisner, and Y. Liu. 2018. Compliance
friendly consumer behaviour. J Envir. Psyc. 23 (3):225–236. with household solid waste management in rural villages in
doi:10.1016/S0272-4944(03)00018-5 developing countries. J. Clean. Prod. 202:293–98. doi:10.1016/j.
Thøgersen, J. 1996. Recycling and morality: A critical review of jclepro.2018.08.135.
the literature. Envir. Behav. 28 (4):536–558. Wang, T. H., and R. D. Katzev. 1990. Group commitment and
Tih, S., and Z. Zainol. 2012. Minimizing waste and encoura resource conservation: Two field experiments on promoting
ging green practices. J. Ekonomi Malaysia 46 (1):157–64. recycling 1. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 20 (4):265–75. doi:10.1111/
Tomlinson, B. 2012. Greening through IT: Information tech j.1559-1816.1990.tb00411.x.
nology for environmental sustainability. MIT Press. Warde, A. 2005. Consumption and theories of practice.
Tomlinson, B. 2012. Greening through IT: Information tech J. Consum. Cult. 5 (2):131–53. doi:10.1177/1469540505053090.
nology for environmental sustainability. MIT Press. Weber, M. 1958. The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of
Tonglet, M., P. S. Phillips, and A. D. Read. 2004. Using the Capitalism. 191.
Theory of Planned Behaviour to investigate the determi Werner, C. M., and E. Makela. 1998. Motivations and beha
nants of recycling behaviour: A case study from Brixworth, viors that support recycling. J. Environ. Psychol. 18
UK. Res. Conserv. Recy. 41 (3):191–214. doi:10.1016/j. (4):373–86. doi:10.1006/jevp.1998.0114.
resconrec.2003.11.001. Whiting, P., A. W. S. Rutjes, J. B. Reitsma, P. M. M. Bossuyt,
Tranfield, D., D. Denyer, and P. Smart. 2003. Towards and J. Kleijnen. 2003. The development of QUADAS: A tool
a methodology for developing evidence-informed manage for the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy
ment knowledge by means of systematic review. Br. included in systematic reviews. BMC Med. Res. Methodol. 3
J. Manage. 14 (3):207–22. doi:10.1111/1467-8551.00375. (1):25. doi:10.1186/1471-2288-3-25.
Twigger-Ross, C., M. Bonaiuto, and G. Breakwell. 2003.
Xu, L., M. Ling, L. Yujie, and M. Shen. 2017. External influ
Identity theories and environmental psychology. New York:
ences on forming residents’ waste separation behaviour:
Routledge.
Evidence from households in Hangzhou, China. Habitat.
Ureña, C., J. M. Azañón, J. M. Caro, C. Irigaray, F. Corpas, A.
Int. 63:21–33. doi:10.1016/j.habitatint.2017.03.009.
Ramírez, F. Rivas, L. M. Salazar, and I. Mochón. 2012. Use
of Biomass Ash as a stabilization agent for expansive marly Yau, Y. 2010. Domestic waste recycling, collective action and
soils (SE Spain). EGU General Assembly 2012. economic incentive: The case in Hong Kong. Waste Manage.
Venkatesh, V., and F. D. Davis. 2000. A theoretical extension of the 30 (12):2440–47. doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2010.06.009.
technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Young, W., S. V. Russell, C. A. Robinson, and R. Barkemeyer.
Manage. Sci. 46 (2):186–204. doi:10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926. 2017. Can social media be a tool for reducing consumers’
Verhagen, A. P., H. C. de Vet, R. A. de Bie, A. G. Kessels, M. Boers, food waste? A behaviour change experiment by a UK retai
L. M. Bouter, and P. G. Knipschild. 1998. The Delphi list: ler. Resour. Conserv. Recy. 117:195–203. doi:10.1016/j.
A criteria list for quality assessment of randomized clinical resconrec.2016.10.016.
trials for conducting systematic reviews developed by Delphi Zhang, D., G. Huang, X. Yin, and Q. Gong. 2015. Residents’
consensus. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 51 (12):1235–41. doi:10.1016/ waste separation behaviors at the source: Using SEM with the
S0895-4356(98)00131-0. theory of planned behavior in Guangzhou, China. Int.
Verplanken, B., and H. Aarts. 1999. Habit, attitude, and J. Environ. Res. Public Health 12 (8):9475–91. doi:10.3390/
planned behaviour: is habit an empty construct or an inter ijerph120809475.
esting case of goal-directed automaticity?.“ European Rev. Zhang, X., C. Wan, R. Cheung, and G. Qiping Shen. 2012.
Soc. Psyc. 10, (1):101–134. Recycling attitude and behaviour in university campus: a
Vining, J., and A. Ebreo. 1992. Predicting recycling behavior case study in Hong Kong. Facilities.
from global and specific environmental attitudes and Zimmerman, B. J. 1989. A social cognitive view of
changes in recycling opportunities 1. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. self-regulated academic learning. J. Educ. Psychol. 81
22 (20):1580–607. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1992.tb01758.x. (3):329. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.81.3.329.

Behavioral Aspects of Solid Waste Management A Systematic Review

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Behavioral Aspects of Solid Waste Management A Systematic Review

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Behavioral Aspects of Solid Waste Management A Systematic Review

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uawm20

Behavioral aspects of solid waste management: A

Sumana Jagadeshi Raghu & Lewlyn L.R. Rodrigues

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/10962247.2020.1823524

Published online: 29 Oct 2020.

Submit your article to this journal

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

Behavioral aspects of solid waste management: A systematic review

ABSTRACT PAPER HISTORY

Health belief model (HBM)

Inclusion criteria for articles

Table 1. Search strings and Boolean operators.

Figure 1. Selection process – flow chart of review.

waste (e.g., bio-waste, hazardous waste, and animal General characteristics

Based on database publication trends, most articles were

Table 3. Cluster type.

Figure 2. Journal-wise publication trend.

Figure 3. Distribution of publications by years.

Figure 4. Distribution of studies by country-wise income grouping.

Figure 5. Frequency of use of theories.

Figure 6. Frequency of comparative studies.

Figure 7. Distribution of studies based on research methods.

Figure 8. Distribution of studies based on target population.

Table 5. Research design characteristics of studies included in the systematic review.

Figure 9. Distribution of studies based on target behavior.

Figure 10. Distribution of studies based on target behavior specification.

Table 7. Contribution and research types presented in 10 papers on model development.

Table 8. Contribution and research types presented in 53 papers on model testing.

Table 9. Contribution and research types presented in 13 papers on model advancement.

associated with an individual’s psychological functioning, Study implications

Figure 11. Distribution of studies based on classification scheme.

Figure 12. Research focus map.

Figure 13. Schematic representation of identified variables for each cluster.

Table 11. Number of variables cited in the review.

implemented SWM programs and hence other

Table 12. (Continued).

Table 13. Research gaps and future directions.

You might also like