IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jagris/v13y2023i10p1931-d1252511.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economic Incentives, Reputation Incentives, and Rural Residents’ Participation in Household Waste Classification: Evidence from Jiangsu, China

Author

Listed:
  • Guang Han

    (Department of Rural Development, College of Humanities & Social Development, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing 210095, China
    China Resources & Environment and Development Academy, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing 210095, China)

  • Ping Zhai

    (Department of Agricultural Economics, College of Economics & Management, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing 210095, China)

  • Liqun Zhu

    (Department of Rural Development, College of Humanities & Social Development, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing 210095, China)

  • Kongqing Li

    (Department of Rural Development, College of Humanities & Social Development, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing 210095, China)

Abstract

With the economic development and rising living standards in rural China, the amount of household waste generated continues to increase, causing serious pollution to the environment and risks to public health. Promoting the classification of rural household waste is a critical way to improve the dwelling environment and control disease transmission in rural areas. Using the 2021 China Land Economic Survey (CLES) conducted in rural areas of Jiangsu province, China, this research explores how economic incentives and reputational incentives impact rural residents’ participation in household waste classification intention and behavior. The results show that most surveyed rural residents have the intention to classify their household waste, but only half of them perform the waste classification behavior. Furthermore, both economic incentives and reputation incentives have significant positive effects on rural residents’ intention and behavior regarding household waste classification, and there exists a complementary effect between them, which indicates that a combination of economic incentives and reputation incentives will increase the participation rate of rural residents in household waste classification. Finally, based on the findings, we put forward recommendations for rural waste management policies, including synergizing both economic incentives and reputation incentives, improving the mobilization system, and strengthening publicity and education on household waste classification.

Suggested Citation

  • Guang Han & Ping Zhai & Liqun Zhu & Kongqing Li, 2023. "Economic Incentives, Reputation Incentives, and Rural Residents’ Participation in Household Waste Classification: Evidence from Jiangsu, China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-15, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:13:y:2023:i:10:p:1931-:d:1252511
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/13/10/1931/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/13/10/1931/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Babaei, Ali Akbar & Alavi, Nadali & Goudarzi, Gholamreza & Teymouri, Pari & Ahmadi, Kambiz & Rafiee, Mohammad, 2015. "Household recycling knowledge, attitudes and practices towards solid waste management," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 94-100.
    2. William A. Brock & Steven N. Durlauf, 2001. "Discrete Choice with Social Interactions," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 68(2), pages 235-260.
    3. Aiqin Wang & Linxiu Zhang & Yaojiang Shi & Scott Rozelle & Annie Osborn & Meredith Yang, 2017. "Rural Solid Waste Management in China: Status, Problems and Challenges," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-18, March.
    4. Martin, M. & Williams, I.D. & Clark, M., 2006. "Social, cultural and structural influences on household waste recycling: A case study," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 357-395.
    5. Hang Yin & Yixiong Huang & Kuiming Wang, 2021. "How Do Environmental Concerns and Governance Performance Affect Public Environmental Participation: A Case Study of Waste Sorting in Urban China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(19), pages 1-16, September.
    6. Zang, Yuzhu & Liu, Yansui & Yang, Yuanyuan & Woods, Michael & Fois, Francesca, 2020. "Rural decline or restructuring? Implications for sustainability transitions in rural China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    7. Rege, Mari & Telle, Kjetil, 2004. "The impact of social approval and framing on cooperation in public good situations," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(7-8), pages 1625-1644, July.
    8. Martin A. Nowak & Karl Sigmund, 2005. "Evolution of indirect reciprocity," Nature, Nature, vol. 437(7063), pages 1291-1298, October.
    9. Vatn, Arild, 2005. "Rationality, institutions and environmental policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 203-217, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. de Melo, Gioia & Piaggio, Matías, 2015. "The perils of peer punishment: Evidence from a common pool resource framed field experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 376-393.
    2. Baihui Jin & Wei Li, 2023. "External Factors Impacting Residents’ Participation in Waste Sorting Using NCA and fsQCA Methods on Pilot Cities in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(5), pages 1-21, February.
    3. Bolton, Gary & Dimant, Eugen & Schmidt, Ulrich, 2021. "Observability and social image: On the robustness and fragility of reciprocity," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 946-964.
    4. Brekke, Kjell Arne & Kipperberg, Gorm & Nyborg, Karine, 2009. "Reluctant Recyclers: Social Interaction in Responsibility Ascription," Memorandum 16/2007, Oslo University, Department of Economics.
    5. Mari Rege & Kjetil Telle, 2003. "Indirect Social Sanctions from Monetarily Unaffected Strangers in a Public Good Game," Discussion Papers 359, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    6. Simon Gaechter & Benedikt Herrmann, 2008. "Reciprocity, culture, and human cooperation: Previous insights and a new cross-cultural experiment," Discussion Papers 2008-14, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    7. Elisabeth Gsottbauer & Jeroen Bergh, 2011. "Environmental Policy Theory Given Bounded Rationality and Other-regarding Preferences," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 49(2), pages 263-304, June.
    8. Simon Gaechter & Benedikt Herrmann, 2008. "Reciprocity, culture, and human cooperation: Previous insights and a new cross-cultural experiment," Discussion Papers 2008-14, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    9. Caroline M. Y. Law & Ernest K. S. Lee & K. L. Au, 2022. "Hong Kong Citizens’ Socio-Demographic Dynamics of Urban Yard Waste Facilities Siting and Legislation Preferences," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-13, May.
    10. Petrick, Martin, 2008. "Theoretical and methodological topics in the institutional economics of European agriculture. With applications to farm organisation and rural credit arrangements," Studies on the Agricultural and Food Sector in Transition Economies, Leibniz Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies (IAMO), volume 45, number 92318, September.
    11. Elisabeth Gsottbauer & Jeroen den Bergh, 2013. "Bounded rationality and social interaction in negotiating a climate agreement," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 225-249, September.
    12. Mengyuan Zhou, 2022. "Does the Source of Inheritance Matter in Bequest Attitudes? Evidence from Japan," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 43(4), pages 867-887, December.
    13. Wendelin Schnedler & Nina Lucia Stephan, 2020. "Revisiting a Remedy Against Chains of Unkindness," Schmalenbach Business Review, Springer;Schmalenbach-Gesellschaft, vol. 72(3), pages 347-364, July.
    14. Federico Guglielmo Morelli & Michael Benzaquen & Marco Tarzia & Jean-Philippe Bouchaud, 2020. "Confidence collapse in a multihousehold, self-reflexive DSGE model," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 117(17), pages 9244-9249, April.
    15. H Peyton Young, 2014. "The Evolution of Social Norms," Economics Series Working Papers 726, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    16. Bobulescu, Roxana & Fritscheova, Aneta, 2021. "Convivial innovation in sustainable communities: Four cases in France," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    17. Chavez, Daniel E. & Palma, Marco A. & Nayga, Rodolfo M. & Mjelde, James W., 2020. "Product availability in discrete choice experiments with private goods," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 36(C).
    18. Keith Head & Thierry Mayer, 2008. "Detection Of Local Interactions From The Spatial Pattern Of Names In France," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(1), pages 67-95, February.
    19. Wang, Yutao & Sun, Mingxing & Song, Baimin, 2017. "Public perceptions of and willingness to pay for sponge city initiatives in China," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 11-20.
    20. Julien Jacob & Eve-Angéline Lambert & Mathieu Lefebvre & Sarah Driessche, 2023. "Information disclosure under liability: an experiment on public bads," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 61(1), pages 155-197, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:13:y:2023:i:10:p:1931-:d:1252511. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.