Students’ Responses to Improve EnvironmentalSustainability Through Recycling: QuantitativelyImproving Qualitative Model

Muhammad Shakil Ahmad & Aqeel Ahmed Bazmi &Abdul Waheed Bhutto & Kanwal Shahzadi &Nadia Bukhari

Received: 5 August 2014 /Accepted: 29 September 2014# Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht and The International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies(ISQOLS) 2014

Abstract This study attempts to contemplate the respondents’ behaviors regardingrecycling, with the purpose of identifying the factors that influence their behaviors. Thestudy is based on a survey that was conducted with 230 nationwide university studentsand guidelines borrowed from the Theory of Planned Behavior and The Theory ofReasoned action. The data collected was evaluated by applying the Structure EquationModelling technique. The study concluded that peoples’ attitudes are largely subject tothe moral values and general norms of their own society. Additionally, an individual’sresponse towards recycling is greatly determined by the extent of his/her awarenesstowards the environment, as well as his/her personal knowledge. Another conclusionwas that an individual’s past experience towards recycling contributes to his/her attitude(willingness or apprehension about recycling) in the future. Furthermore, although theconvenience and cost of recycling were found to be reasonably significant determinantsabout one’s recycling behavior, it was determined that time commitment is the mostdecisive factor that influences an individual’s willingness to or not to recycle. Thestudy’s findings have not only established the authority of Theory of Planned

Applied Research Quality LifeDOI 10.1007/s11482-014-9366-7

M. S. Ahmad (*)Department of Management Sciences, COMSATS Institute of Information Technology, Kamra Road,43600 Attock, Pakistane-mail: onlyshakil@gmail.com

A. A. BazmiProcess & Energy Systems Engineering Center-PRESTIGE, Department of Chemical Engineering,COMSATS Institute of Information Technology, Lahore, Pakistan

A. W. BhuttoDepartment of Chemical Engineering, Dawood University of Engineering & Technology, Karachi,Pakistan

K. Shahzadi : N. BukhariDepartment of Management Sciences, COMSATS Institute of Information Technology, Kamra Road,43600 Attock, Pakistan

Behaviour and Theory of Reasoned Action, but it has also presented propositions andrecommendations for future research. The inferences were based on the study’s respon-dents, hence, so their validity can be applied to various scenarios involving localeducational institutions or government structures. The goal of the study is to encouragepeople to engage in positive recycling behavior.

Keywords Recycling behavior . Subjective norms .Moral norms . Attitude . Extent ofconcern . Environmental sustainability

Introduction

General public awareness concerning recycling patterns in Pakistan is not particularlyhigh. Overall awareness is very low in comparison to nations like Asia and Euro-Asia.In large cities in Pakistan, an individual generates as much as an average of 2 kg ofsolid waste daily. In the Attock district, an average of 140 t of waste is generated everyday, yet there is not an appropriate waste disposal facility in the area. As per thegeneration rate, a landfill capacity of 35 acres is required to dump and dispose of hugeamounts of waste. The Tehsil Municipal Administration (TMA) is responsible forarranging proper waste management procedures, yet it has failed to do so, resultingin the waste being inappropriately dumped, which poses a potential threat to theenvironment’s sustainability.

At this rate, it is estimated that the TMA’s solid waste would amount to approxi-mately 37,000 t by the year 2020, presenting an alarming situation . If appropriateactions for recycling waste are not taken now, it will pose a great threat to theenvironment. There are already insufficient landfill sites due to inadequate wastemanagement and non-existent recycling activities. If this issue continues to beneglected, the consequences could result in be too great to overcome. This is attributedto the fact that the Municipal Corporation has been ineffective at collaborating with thegeneral public and other related agencies, which has subsequently lead to their poorperformance. More than half of the operating budget allocated to the local governmentis spent on collecting the solid waste. The local government must act quickly toeradicate all the flaws in the TMA management by creating awareness forits citizens.By utilizing the available resources to their full capacity, the TMA could not onlyeliminate duplicated efforts, but it could also save a hefty amount of the overall budgetspent on the TMA. The negligible participation of the individuals and skilled labourswho are involved, along with mismanaged and underutilized resources, unorganizedwaste collection practices and other inadequacies in the legal and the managementsystem, are responsible for having a bleak impact on the country. If these wasterecycling challenges are not answered in a timely manner, the issue will pose evenmore critical future problems to the people of Pakistan. Individuals’ lifestyles inPakistan have changed over time, a trend that is more prominent in urban areas wherethe waste management problem is more severe. Thus, in the interest of the nation, it isproposed by Wang et al. (2011) that the public must change their consumption patterns.It is estimated that people ages 15 to 44, which constitute more than half of thepopulation of the country, can be a catalyst for change and have a significant positiveimpact on the environment if they modify their attitudes and adopt the practices of more

M.S. Ahmad et al.

developed countries This is in compliance with Juárez-Nájera et al. (2010) and Riazet al. (2013), who surmised that as education and businesses have more globalpresence, they have even greater impacts on societal norms, living patterns andconsumption habits, which in turn has a significant impact on environmental issues,particularly as they relate to recycling and sustainability.

For current study, 230 students have been selected from the COMSATS Institute ofIT (CIIT) to investigate the factors that determine individuals’ recycling behaviors inPakistan. The study is influenced by the most prominent theories in the field, namelythe Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) and the Theory of Reasoned Action. As thestudents represent Pakistan’s future consumers, their consumption patterns have greaterramifications on the environment’s sustainability. Participants were provided a detailedquestionnaire to assess their awareness of recycling issues. Their responses wereassessed to determine their understanding and attitudes towards recycling behavior.The study primarily focuses on the investigation of how one’s consciousness aboutenvironmental issues and any previous information, they may have impacts theirrecycling activities. It also focuses on comprehending how recycling behaviors aredetermined by one’s social values, demeanor and perception of recycling behavior.

The proceeding sections provide a detailed review of relevant literary contentregarding the subject and continues with the data analysis and results. The StructuralEquation Modeling technique (SEM) has been applied to conduct the analysis. Finally,the last section includes the conclusion of the discussions and implications and providesrecommendations for future references.

Literature Review

This study contemplates two social-cognitive frameworks to analyse individuals’behaviour towards recycling: the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) proposed byAjzen and Fishbein (1980), and the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) by Ajzen(1991). TRA infers that it is the intention of any individual that majorly determineswhether to act or not act in a certain manner. This proximate determinant is in turnsubject to an individual’s inclination to assess the favorable or unfavorable conse-quence of that behavior along with the pressure of social norms that the individual faceswhile performing a certain behavior. Additionally,, the TRA establishes that mostindividuals’ behaviors are, to a degree, of volitional control and are determined byspontaneous and conscious decision making. However, Liska (1984) and Wang et al.(2013) debated that other than cognitive factors, most of an individual’s decision toperform behaviors are also influenced by the prospective opportunities and ability andaccessibility to resources. The TPB recognizes that the proposition made and hasextended the TRA by establishing perceived behavioral control as the third variable,which determines an individual’s awareness of their ability and ability to consider theimplication of their actions (based on rational inference) to perform the particularbehavior. The theory of planned behavior is considered a systematic framework toinvestigate the causes and effects that various factors have upon behavioral choices. Ithas been utilized effectively by Begum et al. (2009), Shaw (2008) del Mar Alonso-Almeida (2013) and Vicente-Molina et al. (2013) for measuring recycling behaviors.According to East (1993), both theoretical models have successful implications on a)

Students’ Responses to Improve Environmental Sustainability

scenarios that involve any choice of behaviour; and b) where the choices can bejustified by logical reasoning.

According to Boldero (1995), recycling is an individual’s behaviour, and he em-phasized the need to allocate considerable efforts to sort out, prepare and storehousehold waste. The TBP also emphasises that one’s decision to recycle can becomplicated and complex and pertain to several factors and determinants. Boldero(1995); Chan (1998); Cheung et al. (1999); Davies et al. (2002) and Kelly et al. (2006)have applied the TPB as a useful framework to investigate householders’ attitudestoward waste recycling and to determine the factors that influence recycling. Despitethe significant support that TBP has gained, there are also several arguments opposingit. Many authors have argued about its inadequacy to define recycling behavior andhave proposed that additional variable elements be considered in the framework(Boldero 1995; Davies et al. 2002; Tonglet et al. 2004). Boldero (1995) and Davieset al. (2002) insisted that the perceived behavioral control lacked a significant param-eter of recycling behavior and thus suggested alternative measures.

Ajzen and Fishbein (1980) have also identified various factors not yet included inthe TRA, which may have a greater impact on how an individual perceives andinterprets a given situation. They have recognized that an individual’s personality,cognitive experiences and demographic characteristics may also be responsible fordiverse behavioral preferences, but only indirectly. The TPB, however, has a broaderspectrum and allows for integration of other additional variables, provided that thedeterminants contribute to define the behavioral model. The theory incorporates twovariables: a) the extent of related environmental understanding; and b) consciousness.These two variables determine the approach towards a particular situation and havebeen absorbed into the theory, as they specify the conditions established by Ajzen(1991). Recycling behavior is again largely dependent on the cost of recycling andavailability of recycling resources. The study involves evaluating attitudes and socialnorms as well as the aforementioned perceived behavioral control variables to inves-tigate their impact on an individual’s recycling behavior (Fig. 1)

Subjective Norm

Behavior

Attitude towardbehavior

BehavioralIntention

PerceivedBehavioral Control

Fig. 1 The Theory of Planned Behaviour, adopted from Ajzen (1991)

M.S. Ahmad et al.

Research Structure and Hypotheses Development

It is believed that there is a relationship between environmental awareness and envi-ronmental behavior, based on the empirical and theoretical evidence established byDiekmann and Preisendörfer (2003). Bratt (1999) has also supported this asso-ciation between individuals’ recycling behavior and environmental knowledge.Begum et al. (2009) claimed that contractors display disparate behaviors to-wards waste management depending upon the extent of their awareness andpossessed knowledge. One of the most prominent studies, that of Perron et al.(2006) and Oskamp et al. (1991), indicated a cogent relationship between anindividual’s displayed attitude and the environmental knowledge that he/shepossessed. This led to following hypothesis:

H1 An individual’s attitude is directly related to the extent of his/her environmentalawareness.

Various studies conducted by (Kelly et al. 2006) and others determined that theextent of one’s particular knowledge about recycling has a considerable andpositive impact to define his/her’s attitude. Accordingly, Davies et al. (2002)professed that cognitive (knowledge-based) constituents are useful in measuringthe consequences of recycling. Furthermore (do Valle et al. 2005) and Sardinhaet al. (2013) have indicated in their studies that inculcating consumers’ awarenesscan encourage their recycling participation. If consumers are aware of the impor-tance of recycling and have the knowledge of its process and resources, they aremore likely to show improved public participation behavior. Literature also agreeswith and confirms the significant relationship between the extent of one’srecycling awareness and attitude. Along those lines, the proposed hypothesis is:

H2 An individual’s attitude is directly related to the extent of his/her awarenessregarding recycling.

Liu et al. (2009) studied the environmental impact of electronic wasterecycling and found a positive correlation between an individual’s attitude andthe extent of his/her awareness regarding recycling. Similarly, Rodríguez-Barreiroet al. (2013) and Oskamp et al. (1991) identified awareness as one of the criticalfactors regarding attitude building as it relates to recycling. The same relationshiphas been indicated by Sidique et al. (2010a).

H3 The extent of an individual’s feeling of responsibility towards the community isdirectly related to his/her attitude.

Ajzen (1991) maintains that cognitive behaviors define the pattern of anindividual’s attitude, social norms and perceived behavioral control; however, itis not included as an additional variable of the model. Bentler and Speckart (1979)have debated the limitations of the model for not including past experiences intoit. Similarly, Fredericks and Dossett (1983) also illustrated the direct impact thatpast experiences have on an individual’s intentions and behaviors. Knussen et al.(2004) also advocated that any conservation behavior is best anticipated after apast experience. Boldero (1995) attested that previous recycling experienceshould be incorporated while predicting an individual’s recycling behavior.Accordingly, various studies conducted by Cheung et al. (1999) and Terry et al.(1999) have indicated the same relation.

Students’ Responses to Improve Environmental Sustainability

H4 An individual’s past recycling behavior is directly related to his/her attitude.When analysing literature, an individual’s theoretical orientations have signif-

icant manifestations for applied behaviour towards recycling . Taking an individ-ual’s beliefs and attitude into consideration, Mannetti et al. (2004) supported the(TRA) and the (TPB) to explain behaviour.

Barr et al. (2001) believes that recycling behavior is determined by a numberof factors. His idea was surveyed by Oskamp (1995), who abstracted the earlierworks for their respective significant contributions. The manner in which the pro-environmental beliefs connect with behavior has been a subject of interest formany socio-psychology literature studies. It is also worth noting that evidencemay been collected for diverse subjects and attitudes which may have transformedover time. An individual’s approach towards certain behavior is determined byhow he/she perceives things; this makes up the foundation of his/her personalattitudes. According to his perception, an activity can be acceptable or unaccept-able, pleasant or unpleasant, wanted or unwanted, right or wrong, useful orworthless, desirable or undesirable or motivating or unmotivating. An individual’sattitude has been undoubtedly stated as the most important attribute of behavior.Chan (1998) has been a strong proponent of this idea, that the stronger anindividual’s self-belief, the more positive his/her attitude will be towards thebehavior in question. Positivity in an individual’s attitude in the context ofrecycling behavior will be exemplified with faith to decrease pollution andconserve natural resources. Darby and Obara (2005) observed consumers’ atti-tudes towards waste disposal and concluded that consumers’ lacked integratedattitudes and thinking about waste disposal, which could eventually lead to manyissues.

This assumption was researched to establish the link between recycling andattitudes. Attitudes are associated with perceived behavioral control and subjectivenorms and affirm the direct impact of a behavioral intention. A study by Nigburet al. (2010) again recognized that attitude is an element that determines anindividual’s inclination to recycle and predicts his/her recycling behavior.Therefore, our proposed hypothesis is:

H5 An individual’s attitude is directly related to recycling behavior.(do Valle et al. 2005) and Shaw (2008) reflected in their studies that an

individual’s recycling behavior is considerably affected greatly by the patternsthat people or social groups are attached to. They have confidently related socialnorms to an individual’s recycling behavior, and according to Tucker (1999), itsvisibility has to be high. The subjective norm, according to Ajzen and Fishbein(1977), is a set of beliefs that an individual either follows or rejects when carryingout a behavior. Normative beliefs refer to the beliefs that underlie subjectivenorms. When an individual identifies the importance of what others think he orshe should be doing, he or she is more apt to perform a definite behavior. Thesefindings led to the formulation of the following hypothesis.

H6 Social norms are directly proportional to recycling behavior.An individual’s behaviour is strongly influence by his/her moral values. These

personal beliefs determine whether it is right or wrong for that individual toperform a certain behavior. It has been debated to include recycling behavior as asuitable variable that must be incorporated within the model. For its relation to

M.S. Ahmad et al.

personal morality and social responsibility, recycling behavior qualifies to predictthe intention of behavior towards managing household waste. Moral values play apivotal role in identifying activities that are permissible in a society or whichlargely influence moral dimension. Studies on cannabis use (Conner andMcMillan (1999)), dishonest actions (Beck and Ajzen 1991), executing drivingviolations (Parker et al. (1992)) and shoplifting (Tonglet (2000)) propose toinclude this variable within the framework.

H7 Morals norms are directly proportional to recycling behaviour.Effective recycling can be limited by a) the amount of effort that one needs to

invest into recycling; and b) the costs incurred. Those two factors add a newdimension to perceived behavior control. Individuals’ recycling behaviors arepositively influenced by the convenience of accessible recycling infrastructure.As reported by respondents in a study byMcDonald and Ball (1998), lack of localfacilities to recycle waste was identified as the major reason for someone to notrecycle. (Sidique et al. 2010b) augmented the findings of McDonald and Ball(1998) by establishing that easily reachable recycling centres play an importantrole for determining recycling behavior. Consequently, an individual will be morewilling to participate in recycling behavior if he/she has convenient access torecycling infrastructure. Thus, the next hypothesis is based upon the abovesuppositions.

H8 Convenient access to recycling infrastructure is directly related to the recyclingbehavior.

Recycling can be hypothesized depending on the cost variable of the recyclingactivity. Recycling can be referred to as a high-cost or low-cost activity dependingon the incurred cost. Diekmann and Preisendörfer (2003) in context to their low-cost hypothesis identified that psychological elements influence behaviors differ-entially, with low-cost behaviors being relatively less expensive to execute thanhigh-cost behaviors that may be more expensive to perform. How individualsperceive situations determines the cost of recycling and these individual assess-ments are dependent both on intrinsic morality and extrinsic determinants likedistance. An individual’s behavior is strongly influenced by the cost of recycling.If recycling is voluntary, then an individual’s decision-making process weighs thecost of recycling with the benefits of doing so. Bagozzi et al. (1990) examined thisrelationship between cost and effort as the moderator of the relationship betweenattitude, intention and behavior in the model of reasoned action. Their findingshighlighted that when behavior requires considerable effort and/or cost, the indi-vidual’s intention mediates the relationship between attitude and behavior.

Sidique et al. (2010a) conceived that several factors affect the cost of recycling,which he identified as time constraint, space availability, the time it requires to sortrecycling material and the convenience of executing any recycling tasks. As aresult, we suggest the following.

H9 The cost of recycling is positively related to recycling behavior.Saphores et al. (2006) and (Sidique et al. 2010b) study households’willingness

to recycle electronic waste at drop-off centers and found that convenience factors,such as proximity to the drop-off centre, increased recycling. Based on a meta-analysis, Hornik et al. (1995) concluded that the frequency of recyclables beingcollected was a strong predictor of recycling behavior. González-Torre et al.

Students’ Responses to Improve Environmental Sustainability

(2003) examined selective waste collection systems that are frequently used inEurope and America and concluded that a system that requires less time and effortto dispose and separate waste will result in a higher recycling rate.

H10 The time that it takes to sort recycling material (disposable and non-disposable)is positively related to recycling behavior.

The above-mentioned hypotheses were derived from relevant literature andare integrated in the research model in Fig. 2.

Methodology

Data Collection

Data was collected from the students of COMSATS Institute of InformationTechnology, one of the leading higher education institutions in Pakistan. This researchpaper is a correlation study and data was collected using questionnaires. Since it wasnot viable for researchers to get a list of students from all of the departments, a non-probability sampling approach using an interceptive survey method was utilized togather data from 230 respondents, which consisted of students of different disciplines inCOMSATS who were in their first, second and third year of studies. In order to assesshow different independent variables affected different respondents’ recycling behavior,

Recycling Behaviour

- Previous recycling

experience

- Knowledge regarding recycling

- Concerns for community

- Environmental Awareness

Attitude

Moral Norms

Subjective Norms

Perceived Control

Recycling infrastructure availability

Recycling cost

Time to sort recycle items

Fig. 2 The research model

M.S. Ahmad et al.

the questionnaire was divided into various sections. Using recycling behavior as thedependent variable, the first section gathered data on the target sample’s demographics.

Measures

As recommended by Ajzen (1991), all of the responses were measured on a seven-pointLikert scale. Ajzen (1991) suggested measuring the responses on a seven-point Likert scale,where 1 represents a positive view about recycling behavior, and 7 indicates a negative viewof recycling behavior. In order to assign the missing values in the data, the FIML (FullInformation Maximum Likelihood) algorithm was used in Statistical Package for SocialSciences (SPSS). Under most conditions, the Expectation Maximization (EM) and FIMLalgorithms usually produce similar results. Computation through the EM and FIML algo-rithms was much more consistent and specific in estimating parameter approximations thanother ordinary methods, which time and again miscalculate values (e.g. list-wise deletionand substitution of mean values). According to Hoyle (1995), the proposed framework wasput to empirical testing against the Structured EquationModelling (SEM) (AMOS), version18). Hair et al. (2010) thus proposed a two-stage model building procedure for applyingSEM. The choice of SEM varies with the analysis nature. For theory testing, the suggestedapproach is variance-based SEM (also called Partial Least Square, or PLS). For moreexplanatory research purposes, covariance-based SEM is suggested. The present paperemploys variance-based SEM analysis, as it focuses on testing the theory of TPB and theTheory of Reasoned Action (TRA).

Sample Profile

Approximately 27 % of the respondents were female and 73 % were male. Most of therespondents were between 15 and 35 years of age. Of the 230 respondents, 46 % ofthem were from engineering, 33 % were from computer sciences and 21 % were frombusiness management. The majority of students were living in campus hostels (Table 1).

Table 1 Demographic ofrespondents

Demographics Frequency Percent

Gender

Male 170 73

Female 60 27

Age

15–25 160 70

26–35 70 30

Stream

Engineering 105 46

Computer Science 75 33

Business Management 50 21

Residence

In campus 165 72

Outside Campus 65 28

Students’ Responses to Improve Environmental Sustainability

Data Analysis

AMOS version 18.0 was employed to analyze the generated results.. The two-stepanalytical procedure suggested by Hair et al. (2010) was adopted i.e. the initialmeasurement model was estimated and then the structural model was applied andcalculated.

Measurement Model

The next section examines the validity and reliability of constructs, followed byhypothesis testing Table 2 and 3.

Structural Model

Table 4 and 5 presents the results for fit indices and hypothesis testing.

Conclusion

The fitness of the SEM model indicates that TPB for this study is a good model fit. Thepresent study is supported by the results of a study by (Kelly et al. 2006; Liu et al. 2009;Ng et al. 2013; Wang et al. 2013) that affirmed that TPB appreciably envisagedbehavioral patterns based on the intentions and consequent behavior towardswastepaper recycling. However, a similar study on recycling behavioral intentions inScotland communicated that the components included in the TPBs were insufficient todefine behavior alone. It is essential to include prior recycling experience along withhow they perceived the moral value of that action to effectively explain suchbehaviors. The findings of Tonglet et al. (2004) are in consonance withprevious studies, acknowledging the TPB’s adequacy to learn recycling behav-ior in developing countries. The findings then by Wang et al. (2013), Kellyet al. (2006) and Zsóka et al. (2013) could be generalized to study otherdeveloping countries for their respective recycling behaviors.

To study the recycling attitudes of the respondents, it is important to correlate theextent of their knowledge as well as their awareness regarding the benefits thatrecycling will bring to the environment. Consequently, Environmental-related knowl-edge and awareness play an important part in recycling behavior. The effectiveness ofencouraging recycling behavior by improving awareness of recycling attitudes throughincreased communication and education efforts was ascertained by Sidique et al.(2010a). Many studies have supported that educating the public through campaignsand awareness programs have been found to enhance recycling knowledge, which hasultimately led to improved recycling behavior.

Earlier studies by do Valle et al. (2005) and Shaw (2008) communicated that socialstandards greatly influence recycling behavior. This same behavior is very likely to befound in economic settings like south-east Asia. It has been observed that behaviorpatterns in such developing countries are more impacted by social demands. This wasconfirmed by Hofstede and Bond (1988), who studied the same pattern in Pakistan andidentified that socialism is the most significant factor that defines individuals’ daily

M.S. Ahmad et al.

Table 2 Results of CFA for measurement model

Constructs Items Inter-ItemReliability (α)

Convergent validity

Factor loadings CR AVE

Recycling behaviour RB1 0.817 0.65 0.77 0.53

RB2 0.79

RB3 0.74

RB4 0.77

Attitude ATT1 0.894 0.73 0.74 0.52

ATT2 0.67

ATT3 0.76

Subjective norm SN1 0.772 0.75 0.76 0.51

SN2 0.63

SN3 0.73

Moral Norms MN1 0.739 0.68 0.76 0.75

MN2 0.79

MN3 0.72

MN4 0.71

MN5 0.68

MN6 0.74

Convenience of availablerecycling infrastructure

C1 0.840 0.72 0.76 0.69

C2 0.74

C3 0.70

Cost of recycling CR1 0.810 0.654 0.64 0.79

CR2 0.941

CR3 0.760

Time to sort recycle items TR1 0.910 0.971 0.732 0.840

TR2 0.720

TR3 0.710

Environment awareness EA1 0.871 0.870 0.703 0.857

EA2 0.901

EA3 0.791

Knowledge regarding recycling EOK1 0.901 0.761 0.642 0.772

EOK2 0.794

EOK3 0.662

EOK4 0.742

EOK5 0.791

Concerns for community EOC1 0.873 0.874 0.723 0.804

EOC2 0.663

EOC3 0.673

Previous recycling experience PRB1 0.842 0.687 0.635 0.774

PRB2 0.771

PRB3 0.719

CR, Composite reliability; AVE, Average Variance Extracted; Scale used was a 7 point Likert scale

Due to low factor loadings, 2 items were deleted from attitude (ATT), 1 from Moral Norms (MN) and 1 fromconvenience

Students’ Responses to Improve Environmental Sustainability

behaviors. Individuals’ responses are dominated by collectivism and social pressuresthat prevail in society.

Ng et al. (2013) conducted a comparative study to determine household wasterecycling behavior in Singapore. The study contemplated TPB to observe the possiblecauses of such behavior. When moved to Sweden, people from developed countriesfaced more apparent social pressure to recycle household waste, which subsequentlyresulted in more willingness to adopt recycling intentions. While social standards areimportant in influencing recycling behavior, the impact can be temporary. People mayengage in recycling behavior, but their recycling behavior may alter over time, depend-ing on their exposure to other social and demographic changes. These variables mayarise from changing global scenarios pertaining to business, education and livingstandards. Neo (2007) proposed to introduce an approach that offers regulations andeconomic incentives to curtail this surge.

Studies in developing countries found little variance pattern in recycling behavior. Itwas recognized that attitude had an important but somewhat lesser impact on recyclingbehavior in Pakistan. According to Ajzen and Fishbein (1977), in the context ofrecycling, perceived attitudes are much better predictors of behaviour than any othergeneral environmental attitudes, which forms the basis of this study. It has been debatedthat PBC’s two variables, in particular recycling costs and prevalence and convenienceof recycling facilities have no significant impact on recycling behavior even though thecost of recycling demonstrated an inverse correlation. The study has emphasized that ina collectivist society, social standards have astounding power on determining recyclingattitudes, while individual behaviors are less likely to be affected by incurred costs andease of access to recycling infrastructure.

The findings would prove to be helpful in bringing change in Pakistani socialinstitution, such as schools and government organizations. The acquired knowledgeand understanding of the various determinants act as a strong driving force for change.Similar to what has been practiced in Taiwan, these social agencies could educate localcitizens to adopt recycling habits in cultures. According to Chen and Tung (2010), thischange can be achieved through more resolute awareness campaigns and appropriateresource channelling towards recycling. Persuasion and creating awareness througheducation are the main derivatives that determine peoples’ approach towardsrecycling in Pakistan. There have been little to no regulations to inculcate

Table 3 Discriminant validity of constructs

Constructs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Attitude (1) 0.743

Moral norms (2) 0.328 0.784

Subjective norms (3) 0.507 0.504 0.843

Convenience (4) 0.614 0.374 0.445 0.721

Recycling Cost (5) 0.489 0.398 0.310 0.539 0.789

Time (6) 0.104 0.232 0.608 0.510 0.619 0.853

Recycling behaviour (7) 0.332 0.310 0.534 0.592 0.465 0.453 0.873

Table 3 represents the Discriminant validity i.e. square root of the average variance extracted. Each entry intable represents the squared correlation

M.S. Ahmad et al.

recycling behaviors in this country, except a few provinces that have introducedbeneficial practices for environment sustainability, yet they are inadequate andnot very prevalent. It is worth noting that steps have been taken to discourageshopping malls’ use of plastic bags by charging customers for the bags.Conversely, developing countries like Malaysia and Singapore have effectivenational recycling policies which ensure public participation through variousmeasures. The policy provides regulations and economic incentives along witheffective environmental messages to encourage such behavior. The collectiveimpact of these arrangements could have resulted in much higher recyclingrates in these countries as compared to Pakistan.

Table 4 Fit indices Fit Measures Study estimates Recommended values

df 1

χ2 2.795

χ2/df 2.795 ≤ 3.00

GFI 0.995 ≥0.90AGFI 0.987 ≥0.80CFI 0.994 ≥0.90RMSEA 0.084 ≥0.08TLI 0.986 ≥0.90

Table 5 Hypotheses Testing

Hypothesis Path CriticalRatio (CR)

p-value Decision

H1: The extent of environmental awareness (EA)is positively related to attitude (ATT).

EA→ATT 3.536 0.001 Supported

H2: The extent of knowledge (EOK) regardingrecycling is positively related to attitude.

EO→ATT 5.939 0.000 Supported

H3: The extent of concerns (EOC) for communityis positively related to attitude.

EOC→ATT 2.984 0.001 Supported

H4: Previous recycling behaviour (PRB) is positivelyrelated to attitude.

PRB→ATT 2.419 0.000 Supported

H5: Attitude (ATT) is positively related to recyclingbehaviour (RB).

ATT→RB 5.016 0.001 Supported

H6: Social norms (SN) are positively related torecycling behaviour.

SN→RB 2.973 0.000 Supported

H7: Morals norms (MN) are positively related torecycling behaviour.

MN→RB 4.917 0.002 Supported

H8. Convenience (C) of available recyclinginfrastructure is positively related to recyclingbehaviour.

C→RB 3.114 0.061 Not Supported

H9: Cost of recycling (CR) is positively relatedto recycling behaviour.

CR→RB 5.173 0.056 Not Supported

H10: Time (T) to sort recycling material(disposable/non disposable) is positivelyrelated to recycling behaviour.

T→RB 3.256 0.000 Supported

Students’ Responses to Improve Environmental Sustainability

Pakistan can commence measures to reduce waste through its Waste ManagementCommittee (WMC), which will persuade reusing items. The committee must enforceregulations to enhance the quality of objects that can be recycled.

The present study asserted that the degree of information and understanding ofenvironmental-related aspects notably affected attitude, concern for one’s community,knowledge regarding recycling activities and previous experience about recycling.WMC must channel the activities to create public awareness, and steps should be takento motivate people to engage in environmental sustainability and public waste man-agement. People are more motivated to perform certain actions when they can expectan economic incentive in return. Public contribution to report any illegal and inappro-priate dumping of solid waste can be improved if properly rewarded. Authorities indeveloping countries like Singapore have granted various incentives, which has directlypromoted awareness and sense of responsibility towards environmental preservation.Moreover, the government of Pakistan could have emphasized the need to invest ingreen technology and encouraged the use of more sustainable solutions for energyconsumption. It could have also highlighted more eco-friendly energy resource uses.

Future Research

The aforementioned literature and studies confirmed that social norms influenceindividuals’ recycling behaviors. The findings of these studies have provided a precur-sor for future studies. It has been identified that the standards set by society affectindividuals’ intentions of whether or not to perform certain behavior; henceforth, theyindirectly influence how one perceives recycling behavior. The elements of socialsnorms, which have been left untested against these studies, have the potential to beincluded in further studies. Examining college students’ attitudes towards recycling inthe state of Punjab Pakistan inferred differentially. The study by Hassan et al. (2010) onenvironmental awareness concluded that governmental regulations have a plausibleimpact of on said behavior. This identified government legislation as a significantvariable to be included in future study models.

Therefore, the research can be furthered by broadening it to other states in Pakistan.By studying a larger sample, more précised recycling behaviour among Pakistaniscould be deduced. Individual patterns of consumption and their ability as potentialrecyclers perhaps calls for an extension of the TPB. It is also suggested to include thesevariables in further studies to incorporate the limitations of behavioral perspectivetowards waste management and the reuse of objects and to depict a holistic connectionbetween consumption, waste management and recycling activities.

Limitation

The limitation in generalizing the results of this study was that only college students ata CIIT were surveyed. The non-probability sampling approach added an inherentlimitation factor. By including only college students as the subject, this approachmay not yield the same results if the study is extended in the future to non-collegestudents to evaluate their responses.

M.S. Ahmad et al.

Appendix

Table 6 Details of instruments adopted

Constructs Items Adopted from (Authornames)

Recycling behaviour I usually separate and dispose all recyclable materials.I have high involvement in recycling activities.I have high adherence level to separation and

disposable of recyclable materials.I have high adherence level to separation and

disposable of recyclable materials

(do Valle et al. 2005)

Attitude I believe that my recycling behaviour will help reducewasteful use of landfills.

I believe that my recycling behaviour will helpconserve natural resources.

I feel good about myself when I recycle

Sidique et al. (2010b) (doValle et al. 2005)

Subjective norm My friends expect me to engage in recycling behaviour.My family expects me to engage in recycling

behaviour.My colleagues expect me to engage in recycling

behaviour to improve workplace environment

Sidique et al. (2010b) (doValle et al. 2005)

Moral Norms I feel I should not waste anything if it could be usedagain.

It would be wrong of me not to recycle my usedmaterial waste.

I would feel guilty if I did not recycle my used materialwaste Not recycling goes against my principles.Everybody should share the responsibility to recycleused material waste.

I am concerned with maintaining a good place to live. Ihave a strong interest in the health and well-being ofthe community in which I live.

(McDonald and Ball1998) Sidique et al.(2010b)

Convenience ofavailable recyclinginfrastructure

I am familiar with the recycling facilities in my area.I am familiar with the materials accepted for recycling

in the recycling facilities in my area.I believe that my recycling activities will help improve

environmental quality.

Sidique et al. (2010b)

Cost of recycling Household recycling is an easy task for me.I have enough space to store the materials for recycling.I have enough time to sort the materials for recycling.

Sidique et al. (2010b)

Time to sort recycleitems

I have enough time to sort disposable and nondisposable material.

It’s easy for me to distinguish between reusable items.I always spare time to sort disposable and non

disposable material.

(Sidique et al. 2010b)

Environment awareness Recycling is a major way to reduce pollution.Recycling is a major way to reduce wasteful use of

landfills.Recycling is a major way to conserve natural resources.

Sidique et al. (2010b)

Knowledge regardingrecycling

Recycling good/bad Recycling is useful/a waste of timeRecycling is rewarding/unrewarding Recycling is

sensible/not sensibleRecycling is hygienic/unhygienic

(Oskamp et al. 1991)

Concerns for community I am concerned with maintaining a good place to liveI have a strong interest in the health of the community

in which I live.

(Vining and Ebreo 1990)

Students’ Responses to Improve Environmental Sustainability

References

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behaviour. Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes,50, 179–211.

Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1977). Attitude-behaviour relations: a theoretical analysis and review of empiricalresearch. Psychological Bulletin, 84, 888–918.

Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behaviour. Englewood Cliffs,NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Bagozzi, R. P., Youjae, Y., & Baumgartner, J. (1990). The level of effort required for behaviour as a moderatorof the attitude-behaviour relationship. European Journal of Social Psychology, 20, 45–59.

Barr, S., Gilg, A. W., & Ford, N. J. (2001). A conceptual framework for understanding and analyzing attitudestowards household-waste management. Environment and Planning, 33, 2025–2048.

Beck, L., & Ajzen, I. (1991). Predicting dishonest actions using the theory of planned behaviour. Journal ofResearch in Personality, 25, 285–301.

Begum, R. A., Siwar, C., Pereira, J. J., & Jaafar, A. H. (2009). Attitude and behavioural factors in wastemanagement in the construction industry of Malaysia. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 53, 321–328.

Bentler, P. M., & Speckart, G. (1979). Models of attitude-behavior relations. Psychological Review, 86, 452–464.

Boldero, J. (1995). The prediction of household recycling of newspaper: the role of attitudes, intentions andsituational factors. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 25, 440–462.

Bratt, C. (1999). The impact of norms and assumed consequences on recycling behaviour. Environment andBehaviour, 31, 630–656.

Chan, K. (1998). Mass communication and pro-environmental behaviour: waste recycling in Hong Kong.Journal of Environmental Management, 52, 317–325.

Chen, M. F., Tung, P. J. (2010). The moderating effect of perceived lack of facilities on consumers’ recyclingintentions. Environment and Behaviour 42.

Cheung, S. F., Chan, D. K., & Wong, Z. S. (1999). Reexamining the theory of planned behaviour inunderstanding waste paper recycling. Environment and Behavior, 31, 587–617.

Conner, M., & McMillan, B. (1999). Interaction effects in the theory of planned behaviour: studying cannabisuse. The British Journal Social Psychology, 38, 195–222.

Darby, L., & Obara, L. (2005). Household recycling behaviour and attitudes towards the disposal of smallelectrical and electronic equipment. Resources, Conservation, and Recycling, 44, 17–35.

Davies, J., Foxall, G. R., & Pallister, J. (2002). Beyond the intention-behaviour mythology: an integratedmodel of recycling. Market Theory, 1, 29–113.

del Mar Alonso-Almeida, M. (2013). Environmental management in tourism: students’ perceptionsand managerial practice in restaurants from a gender perspective. Journal of CleanerProduction.

Diekmann, A., & Preisendörfer, P. (2003). Green and greenback: the behavioural effects of environmentalattitudes in low-cost and high-cost situations. Rationality and Society, 15, 441–472.

Do Valle, P. O., Rebelo, E., Reis, E., & Menezes, J. (2005). Combining behavioural theories to predictrecycling involvement. Environment and Behaviour, 37, 364–396.

Fredericks, A. J., & Dossett, D. L. (1983). Attitude–behaviour relations: a comparison of the Fishbein–Ajzenand Bentler–Speckart models. Journal of Personal Social Psychology, 45, 501–512.

Table 6 (continued)

Constructs Items Adopted from (Authornames)

I have a strong interest in the well being of thecommunity in which I live.

Previous recyclingexperience

I mostly like to recycle my waste materialI use to recycle waste material daily/weeklyI am frequent in recycling most of the room waste

(Tonglet et al. 2004)

M.S. Ahmad et al.

González-Torre, P. L., Adenso-Díaz, B., & Ruiz-Torres, A. (2003). Some comparative factors regardingrecycling collection systems in regions of the USA and Europe. Journal of EnvironmentalManagement, 69, 129–138.

Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis. Upper SaddleRiver, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Hassan A., Noordin T. A., Sulaiman S. (2010). The status on the level of environmental awareness in theconcept of sustainable development amongst secondary school students, Procedia-Social andBehavioural Sciences, pp. 1276–1280.

Hofstede, G., & Bond, M. H. (1988). The Confucian connection: from cultural roots to economic growth.Organizational Dynamics, 16, 4–21.

Hornik, J., Cherian, J., Madansky, M., & Narayana, C. (1995). Determinants of recycling behaviour: asynthesis of research results. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 24, 105–127.

Hoyle, R. (1995). Structural equation modeling: concepts, issues, and applications. CA: Sage.Juárez-Nájera, M., Rivera-Martínez, J. G., & Hafkamp, W. A. (2010). An explorative socio-psychological

model for determining sustainable behavior: pilot study in German and Mexican universities. Journal ofCleaner Production, 18, 686–694.

Kelly, T. C., Mason, I. G., Leiss, M. W., & Ganesh, S. (2006). University community responses to on-campusresource recycling. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 47, 42–55.

Knussen, C., Yule, F., MacKenzie, J., & Wells, M. (2004). An analysis of intentions to recycle householdwaste: the roles of past behaviour, perceived habit, and perceived lack of facilities. Journal ofEnvironmental Psychology, 24, 237–246.

Liska, A. E. (1984). A critical examination of the causal structure of the Fishbein/Ajzen attitude-behaviourmodel. Social Psychology, 47, 61–74.

Liu, X., Tanaka, M., & Matsui, Y. (2009). Economic evaluation of optional recycling processes for wasteelectronic home appliances. Journal of Cleaner Production, 17, 53–60.

Mannetti, L., Pierro, A., & Livi, S. (2004). Recycling: planned and self-expressive behaviour. Journal ofEnvironmental Psychology, 24, 227–236.

McDonald, S., & Ball, R. (1998). Public participation in plastics recycling schemes. Resources, Conservationand Recycling, 22, 123–141.

Neo, H. (2007). Challenging the developmental state: nature conservation in Singapore. Asia PacificViewpoint, 48, 186–199.

Ng R., Shi C. W. P., Tan H. X., Song B. (2013). Avoided impact quantification from recycling of wood wastein Singapore: an assessment of pallet made from technical wood versus virgin softwood. Journal ofCleaner Production.

Nigbur, D., Lyons, E., & Uzzell, D. (2010). Attitudes, norms, identity and environmental behaviour: using anexpanded theory of planned behaviour to predict participation in a kerbside recycling programme. BritishJournal of Social Psychology, 49, 259–284.

Oskamp, S. (1995). Resource conservation and recycling: behaviour and policy. Journal of Social Issues, 51,157–173.

Oskamp, S., Harrington, M. J., Edwards, T. C., Sherwood, D. L., Okuda, S. M., & Swanson, D. C.(1991). Factors influencing household recycling behavior. Environment and Behavior, 23, 494–519.

Parker, D., Manstead, A. S. R., Strading, S. G., Reason, J. T., & Baxter, J. S. (1992). Intentions to commitdriving violations: an application of the theory of planned behaviour. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77,94–101.

Perron, G. M., Côté, R. P., & Duffy, J. F. (2006). Improving environmental awareness training in business.Journal of Cleaner Production, 14, 551–562.

Riaz, A., Zahedi, G., & Klemeš, J. J. (2013). A review of cleaner production methods for the manufacture ofmethanol. Journal of Cleaner Production, 57, 19–37.

Rodríguez-Barreiro, L. M., Fernández-Manzanal, R., Serra, L. M., Carrasquer, J., Murillo, M. B., Morales, M.J., Calvo, J. M., & Valle, J. (2013). Approach to a causal model between attitudes and environmentalbehaviour. A graduate case study. Journal of Cleaner Production, 48, 116–125.

Saphores, J. M., Nixon, H., Ogunseitan, O. A., & Shapiro, A. A. (2006). Household willingness to recycleelectronic waste: an application to California. Environment and Behaviour, 38, 183–208.

Sardinha, I. D., Craveiro, D., & Milheiras, S. (2013). A sustainability framework for redevelopment of ruralbrownfields: stakeholder participation at SÃO DOMINGOS mine, Portugal. Journal of CleanerProduction, 57, 200–208.

Shaw, P. J. (2008). Nearest neighbour effects in kerbside household waste recycling. Resources, Conservationand Recycling, 52, 775–784.

Students’ Responses to Improve Environmental Sustainability

Sidique, S. F., Joshi, S. V., & Lupi, F. (2010a). Factors influencing the rate of recycling: an analysis ofMinnesota counties. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 54, 242–249.

Sidique, S. F., Lupi, F., & Joshi, S. V. (2010b). The effects of behavior and attitudes on drop-off recyclingactivities. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 54, 163–170.

Terry, D. J., Hogg, M. A., & White, K. M. (1999). The theory of planned behaviour: self-identity, socialidentity and group norms. British Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 225–244.

Tonglet, M. (2000). Consumer misbehaviour: consumers’ perceptions of shoplifting and retail security.Security Journal, 13, 19–33.

Tonglet, M., Phillips, P. S., & Read, A. D. (2004). Using the theory of planned behaviour to investigate thedeterminants of recycling behaviour: a case study from brixworth, UK. Resources, Conservation andRecycling, 41, 191–214.

Tucker, P. (1999). Normative influences in household waste recycling. Journal of Environmental Planningand Management, 42, 63–82.

Vicente-Molina M. A., Fernández-Sáinz A., Izagirre-Olaizola J. (2013). Environmental knowledge and othervariables affecting pro-environmental behaviour: comparison of university students from emerging andadvanced countries. Journal of Cleaner Production.

Vining, J., & Ebreo, A. (1990). What makes a recycler? A comparison of recyclers and nonrecyclers.Environment and behavior, 22, 55–73.

Wang, Z., Zhang, B., Yin, J., & Zhang, X. (2011). Willingness and behavior towards e-waste recycling forresidents in Beijing city, China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 19, 977–984.

Wang P., Liu Q., Qi Y. (2013). Factors influencing sustainable consumption behaviors: a survey of the ruralresidents in China. Journal of Cleaner Production.

Zsóka, Á., Szerényi, Z. M., Széchy, A., & Kocsis, T. (2013). Greening due to environmental education?Environmental knowledge, attitudes, consumer behavior and everyday pro-environmental activities ofHungarian high school and university students. Journal of Cleaner Production, 48, 126–138.

M.S. Ahmad et al.