IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v17y2020i7p2324-d338855.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Individual Preference Framework or Group Preference Framework? Which Will Regulate the Impact Path of Product Facilities on Residents’ Waste-Sorting Behavior Better

Author

Listed:
  • Feiyu Chen

    (School of Management, China University of Mining and Technology, No.1 Daxue Road, Xuzhou 221116, China)

  • Fang Wang

    (School of Management, China University of Mining and Technology, No.1 Daxue Road, Xuzhou 221116, China)

  • Jing Hou

    (Business School, Jiangsu Normal University, No.101 Shanghai Road, Xuzhou 221116, China)

Abstract

To effectively deal with the waste management problems faced by cities, it is of great significance to promote the sorting and recycling of municipal solid waste. Given the correlation between individual behavior and psychological preferences and external situations, this study explored the mechanism of individual preference framework and group preference framework in the impact path of product facilities on residents’ waste-sorting behavior. Based on a questionnaire survey ( N = 1505), combined with correlation analysis, difference analysis, hierarchical regression analysis, sensitivity analysis, and other methods, the study found that differences in residents’ age, education background, and monthly income lead to differences in residents’ sorting behaviors, and individuals of young age and low monthly income have higher sorting behaviors than others. Interestingly, highly educated individuals did not show high sorting behavior. Both individual preference and group preference frameworks play a regulating role in the influence path of product facilities on waste-sorting behavior, but a group preference framework (including family preference, organizational preference and social preference) plays the more significant regulating role. Additionally, social preference variables are the most prominent regulatory factors and have a greater “amplifier” effect in the impact of product facilities on waste-sorting behavior. Based on these findings, this study identifies the corresponding policy implications.

Suggested Citation

  • Feiyu Chen & Fang Wang & Jing Hou, 2020. "Individual Preference Framework or Group Preference Framework? Which Will Regulate the Impact Path of Product Facilities on Residents’ Waste-Sorting Behavior Better," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(7), pages 1-19, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:7:p:2324-:d:338855
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/7/2324/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/7/2324/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Colin F. Camerer & Ernst Fehr, "undated". "Measuring Social Norms and Preferences using Experimental Games: A Guide for Social Scientists," IEW - Working Papers 097, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    2. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    3. Bindu Gupta, 2011. "Organisational culture and creative behaviour: moderating role of creative style preference," International Journal of Innovation and Learning, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 10(4), pages 429-441.
    4. Zhang, Xian & Wang, Ke & Hao, Yu & Fan, Jing-Li & Wei, Yi-Ming, 2013. "The impact of government policy on preference for NEVs: The evidence from China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 382-393.
    5. Antoine Billot, 2002. "The Deep Side of Preference Theory," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 53(3), pages 243-270, November.
    6. Dai, Y.C. & Gordon, M.P.R. & Ye, J.Y. & Xu, D.Y. & Lin, Z.Y. & Robinson, N.K.L. & Woodard, R. & Harder, M.K., 2015. "Why doorstepping can increase household waste recycling," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 9-19.
    7. Yokoo, Hide-Fumi & Kawai, Kosuke & Higuchi, Yuki, 2018. "Informal recycling and social preferences: Evidence from household survey data in Vietnam," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 109-124.
    8. Shaw, Peter J., 2008. "Nearest neighbour effects in kerbside household waste recycling," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 52(5), pages 775-784.
    9. Zhang, Suopeng & Zhang, Mingli & Yu, Xueying & Ren, Hao, 2016. "What keeps Chinese from recycling: Accessibility of recycling facilities and the behavior," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 176-186.
    10. Anker-Nilssen, Per, 2003. "Household energy use and the environment--a conflicting issue," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 76(1-3), pages 189-196, September.
    11. Halvorsen, Bente, 2012. "Effects of norms and policy incentives on household recycling: An international comparison," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 18-26.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jing Hou & Yujing Jin & Feiyu Chen, 2020. "Should Waste Separation Be Mandatory? A Study on Public’s Response to the Policies in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-17, June.
    2. Wenyan Wu & Lu Li & Hanxin Chen & Minyue Xu & Yalin Yuan, 2022. "Farmers’ Preference for Participating in Rural Solid Waste Management: A Case Study from Shaanxi Province, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(21), pages 1-14, November.

    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. Peng Cheng & Zhe Ouyang & Yang Liu, 0. "The effect of information overload on the intention of consumers to adopt electric vehicles," Transportation, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-20.
    2. Zhang, Wenqing & Liu, Liangliang, 2022. "Exploring non-users' intention to adopt ride-sharing services: Taking into account increased risks due to the COVID-19 pandemic among other factors," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 180-195.
    3. Peng Cheng & Zhe Ouyang & Yang Liu, 2020. "The effect of information overload on the intention of consumers to adopt electric vehicles," Transportation, Springer, vol. 47(5), pages 2067-2086, October.
    4. Hélène Joachain & Frédéric Klopfert, 2011. "Emerging trend of complementary currencies systems as policy instrument for environmental purposes: changes ahead?," Working Papers CEB 11-047, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    5. Zhang, Suopeng & Zhang, Mingli & Yu, Xueying & Ren, Hao, 2016. "What keeps Chinese from recycling: Accessibility of recycling facilities and the behavior," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 176-186.
    6. Lizin, Sebastien & Van Dael, Miet & Van Passel, Steven, 2017. "Battery pack recycling: Behaviour change interventions derived from an integrative theory of planned behaviour study," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 66-82.
    7. Tang, Yanyan & Zhang, Qi & Liu, Boyu & Li, Yan & Ni, Ruiyan & Wang, Yi, 2023. "What influences residents’ intention to participate in the electric vehicle battery recycling? Evidence from China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 276(C).
    8. Fielding, Kelly S. & van Kasteren, Yasmin & Louis, Winnifred & McKenna, Bernard & Russell, Sally & Spinks, Anneliese, 2016. "Using individual householder survey responses to predict household environmental outcomes: The cases of recycling and water conservation," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 90-97.
    9. Francesco Testa & Gaia Pretner & Roberta Iovino & Guia Bianchi & Sara Tessitore & Fabio Iraldo, 2021. "Drivers to green consumption: a systematic review," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 4826-4880, April.
    10. Struk, Michal, 2017. "Distance and incentives matter: The separation of recyclable municipal waste," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 155-162.
    11. Kumar Shalender & Naman Sharma, 2021. "Using extended theory of planned behaviour (TPB) to predict adoption intention of electric vehicles in India," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 665-681, January.
    12. Thanos Ioannou & Katerina Bazigou & Afroditi Katsigianni & Michalis Fotiadis & Christina Chroni & Thrassyvoulos Manios & Ioannis Daliakopoulos & Christos Tsompanidis & Eleni Michalodimitraki & Katia L, 2022. "The “A2UFood Training Kit”: Participatory Workshops to Minimize Food Loss and Waste," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-24, February.
    13. Jing Liu & Khairul Manami Kamarudin & Yuqi Liu & Jinzhi Zou & Jiaqi Zhang, 2022. "Developing a Behavior Change Framework for Pandemic Prevention and Control in Public Spaces in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-24, February.
    14. Wolf, Ingo & Schröder, Tobias & Neumann, Jochen & de Haan, Gerhard, 2015. "Changing minds about electric cars: An empirically grounded agent-based modeling approach," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 269-285.
    15. Ye, Fei & Kang, Wanlin & Li, Lixu & Wang, Zhiqiang, 2021. "Why do consumers choose to buy electric vehicles? A paired data analysis of purchase intention configurations," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 14-27.
    16. Lin Shen & Hongyun Si & Lei Yu & Haolun Si, 2019. "Factors Influencing Young People’s Intention toward Municipal Solid Waste Sorting," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(10), pages 1-19, May.
    17. Shanyong Wang & Jin Fan & Dingtao Zhao & Shu Yang & Yuanguang Fu, 2016. "Predicting consumers’ intention to adopt hybrid electric vehicles: using an extended version of the theory of planned behavior model," Transportation, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 123-143, January.
    18. Ma, Jing & Yin, Zhaoyun & McBean, Edward A., 2023. "Does information intervention influence residential waste-source separation behavior?," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    19. Elena Borasino & Hanna Fuhrmann-Riebel, 2022. "New Kids on the Recycling Block: the Role of Supermarkets and Bodegas for Sustainable Consumer Behaviour in Lima," Circular Economy and Sustainability, Springer, vol. 2(3), pages 857-881, September.
    20. Jaiswal, Deepak & Kaushal, Vikrant & Kant, Rishi & Kumar Singh, Pankaj, 2021. "Consumer adoption intention for electric vehicles: Insights and evidence from Indian sustainable transportation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).

    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:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:7:p:2324-:d:338855. 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.